essay about paying college athletes

Choose Your Test

• Search Blogs By Category
• College Admissions
• AP and IB Exams
• GPA and Coursework

Should College Athletes Be Paid? An Expert Debate Analysis

Extracurriculars

The argumentative essay is one of the most frequently assigned types of essays in both high school and college writing-based courses. Instructors often ask students to write argumentative essays over topics that have “real-world relevance.” The question, “Should college athletes be paid?” is one of these real-world relevant topics that can make a great essay subject! 

In this article, we’ll give you all the tools you need to write a solid essay arguing why college athletes should be paid and why college athletes should not be paid. We'll provide:

• An explanation of the NCAA and what role it plays in the lives of student athletes
• A summary of the pro side of the argument that's in favor of college athletes being paid
• A summary of the con side of the argument that believes college athletes shouldn't be paid
• Five tips that will help you write an argumentative essay that answers the question "Should college athletes be paid?" 

The NCAA is the organization that oversees and regulates collegiate athletics. 

What Is the NCAA? 

In order to understand the context surrounding the question, “Should student athletes be paid?”, you have to understand what the NCAA is and how it relates to student-athletes. 

NCAA stands for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (but people usually just call it the “N-C-double-A”). The NCAA is a nonprofit organization that serves as the national governing body for collegiate athletics. 

The NCAA specifically regulates collegiate student athletes at the organization’s 1,098 “member schools.” Student-athletes at these member schools are required to follow the rules set by the NCAA for their academic performance and progress while in college and playing sports. Additionally, the NCAA sets the rules for each of their recognized sports to ensure everyone is playing by the same rules. ( They also change these rules occasionally, which can be pretty controversial! ) 

The NCAA website states that the organization is “dedicated to the well-being and lifelong success of college athletes” and prioritizes their well-being in academics, on the field, and in life beyond college sports. That means the NCAA sets some pretty strict guidelines about what their athletes can and can't do. And of course, right now, college athletes can't be paid for playing their sport. 

As it stands, NCAA athletes are allowed to receive scholarships that cover their college tuition and related school expenses. But historically, they haven't been allowed to receive additional compensation. That meant athletes couldn't receive direct payment for their participation in sports in any form, including endorsement deals, product sponsorships, or gifts.  

Athletes who violated the NCAA’s rules about compensation could be suspended from participating in college sports or kicked out of their athletic program altogether. 

The Problem: Should College Athletes Be Paid? 

You know now that one of the most well-known functions of the NCAA is regulating and limiting the compensation that student-athletes are able to receive. While many people might not question this policy, the question of why college athletes should be paid or shouldn't be paid has actually been a hot-button topic for several years.

The fact that people keep asking the question, “Should student athletes be paid?” indicates that there’s some heat out there surrounding this topic. The issue is frequently debated on sports talk shows , in the news media , and on social media . Most recently, the topic re-emerged in public discourse in the U.S. because of legislation that was passed by the state of California in 2019.

In September 2019, California governor Gavin Newsom signed a law that allowed college athletes in California to strike endorsement deals. An endorsement deal allows athletes to be paid for endorsing a product, like wearing a specific brand of shoes or appearing in an advertisement for a product.

In other words, endorsement deals allow athletes to receive compensation from companies and organizations because of their athletic talent. That means Governor Newsom’s bill explicitly contradicts the NCAA’s rules and regulations for financial compensation for student-athletes at member schools.

But why would Governor Newsom go against the NCAA? Here’s why: the California governor believes that it's unethical for the NCAA to make money based on the unpaid labor of its athletes . And the NCAA definitely makes money: each year, the NCAA upwards of a billion dollars in revenue as a result of its student-athlete talent, but the organization bans those same athletes from earning any money for their talent themselves. With the new California law, athletes would be able to book sponsorships and use agents to earn money, if they choose to do so. 

The NCAA’s initial response to California’s new law was to push back hard. But after more states introduced similar legislation , the NCAA changed its tune. In October 2019, the NCAA pledged to pass new regulations when the board voted unanimously to allow student athletes to receive compensation for use of their name, image, and likeness. 

Simply put: student athletes can now get paid through endorsement deals. 

In the midst of new state legislation and the NCAA’s response, the ongoing debate about paying college athletes has returned to the spotlight. Everyone from politicians, to sports analysts, to college students are arguing about it. There are strong opinions on both sides of the issue, so we’ll look at how some of those opinions can serve as key points in an argumentative essay.

Let's take a look at the arguments in favor of paying student athletes!

The Pros: Why College Athletes Should B e Paid

Since the argument about whether college athletes should be paid has gotten a lot of public attention, there are some lines of reasoning that are frequently called upon to support the claim that college athletes should be paid. 

In this section, we'll look at the three biggest arguments in favor of why college athletes should be paid. We'll also give you some ideas on how you can support these arguments in an argumentative essay.

Argument 1: The Talent Should Receive Some of the Profits

This argument on why college athletes should be paid is probably the one people cite the most. It’s also the easiest one to support with facts and evidence. 

Essentially, this argument states that the NCAA makes millions of dollars because people pay to watch college athletes compete, and it isn’t fair that the athletes don't get a share of the profits

Without the student athletes, the NCAA wouldn’t earn over a billion dollars in annual revenue , and college and university athletic programs wouldn’t receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from the NCAA each year. In fact, without student athletes, the NCAA wouldn’t exist at all. 

Because student athletes are the ones who generate all this revenue, people in favor of paying college athletes argue they deserve to receive some of it back. Otherwise, t he NCAA and other organizations (like media companies, colleges, and universities) are exploiting a bunch of talented young people for their own financial gain.

To support this argument in favor of paying college athletes, you should include specific data and revenue numbers that show how much money the NCAA makes (and what portion of that actually goes to student athletes). For example, they might point out the fact that the schools that make the most money in college sports only spend around 10% of their tens of millions in athletics revenue on scholarships for student-athletes. Analyzing the spending practices of the NCAA and its member institutions could serve as strong evidence to support this argument in a “why college athletes should be paid” essay. 

I've you've ever been a college athlete, then you know how hard you have to train in order to compete. It can feel like a part-time job...which is why some people believe athletes should be paid for their work!

Argument 2: College Athletes Don’t Have Time to Work Other Jobs

People sometimes casually refer to being a student-athlete as a “full-time job.” For many student athletes, this is literally true. The demands on a student-athlete’s time are intense. Their days are often scheduled down to the minute, from early in the morning until late at night. 

One thing there typically isn’t time for in a student-athlete’s schedule? Working an actual job. 

Sports programs can imply that student-athletes should treat their sport like a full-time job as well. This can be problematic for many student-athletes, who may not have any financial resources to cover their education. (Not all NCAA athletes receive full, or even partial, scholarships!) While it may not be expressly forbidden for student-athletes to get a part-time job, the pressure to go all-in for your team while still maintaining your eligibility can be tremendous. 

In addition to being a financial burden, the inability to work a real job as a student-athlete can have consequences for their professional future. Other college students get internships or other career-specific experience during college—opportunities that student-athletes rarely have time for. When they graduate, proponents of this stance argue, student-athletes are under-experienced and may face challenges with starting a career outside of the sports world.

Because of these factors, some argue that if people are going to refer to being a student-athlete as a “full-time job,” then student-athletes should be paid for doing that job.  

To support an argument of this nature, you can offer real-life examples of a student-athlete’s daily or weekly schedule to show that student-athletes have to treat their sport as a full-time job. For instance, this Twitter thread includes a range of responses from real student-athletes to an NCAA video portraying a rose-colored interpretation of a day in the life of a student-athlete. 

Presenting the Twitter thread as one form of evidence in an essay would provide effective support for the claim that college athletes should be paid as if their sport is a “full-time job.” You might also take this stance in order to claim that if student-athletes aren’t getting paid, we must adjust our demands on their time and behavior.

Argument 3: Only Some Student Athletes Should Be Paid

This take on the question, “Should student athletes be paid?” sits in the middle ground between the more extreme stances on the issue. There are those who argue that only the student athletes who are big money-makers for their university and the NCAA should be paid.  

The reasoning behind this argument? That’s just how capitalism works. There are always going to be student-athletes who are more talented and who have more media-magnetizing personalities. They’re the ones who are going to be the face of athletic programs, who lead their teams to playoffs and conference victories, and who are approached for endorsement opportunities. 

Additionally, some sports don't make money for their schools. Many of these sports fall under Title IX, which states that no one can be excluded from participation in a federally-funded program (including sports) because of their gender or sex. Unfortunately, many of these programs aren't popular with the public , which means they don't make the same revenue as high-dollar sports like football or basketball . 

In this line of thinking, since there isn’t realistically enough revenue to pay every single college athlete in every single sport, the ones who generate the most revenue are the only ones who should get a piece of the pie. 

To prove this point, you can look at revenue numbers as well. For instance, the womens' basketball team at the University of Louisville lost $3.8 million dollars in revenue during the 2017-2018 season. In fact, the team generated less money than they pay for their coaching staff. In instances like these, you might argue that it makes less sense to pay athletes than it might in other situations (like for University of Alabama football, which rakes in over $110 million dollars a year .) 

There are many people who think it's a bad idea to pay college athletes, too. Let's take a look at the opposing arguments. 

The Cons: Why College Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid

People also have some pretty strong opinions about why college athletes shouldn't be paid. These arguments can make for a pretty compelling essay, too! 

In this section, we'll look at the three biggest arguments against paying college athletes. We'll also talk about how you can support each of these claims in an essay. 

Argument 1: College Athletes Already Get Paid

On this side of the fence, the most common reason given for why college athletes should not be paid is that they already get paid: they receive free tuition and, in some cases, additional funding to cover their room, board, and miscellaneous educational expenses. 

Proponents of this argument state that free tuition and covered educational expenses is compensation enough for student-athletes. While this money may not go straight into a college athlete's pocket, it's still a valuable resource . Considering most students graduate with nearly $30,000 in student loan debt , an athletic scholarship can have a huge impact when it comes to making college affordable . 

Evidence for this argument might look at the financial support that student-athletes receive for their education, and compare those numbers to the financial support that non-athlete students receive for their schooling. You can also cite data that shows the real value of a college tuition at certain schools. For example, student athletes on scholarship at Duke may be "earning" over $200,000 over the course of their collegiate careers. 

This argument works to highlight the ways in which student-athletes are compensated in financial and in non-financial ways during college , essentially arguing that the special treatment they often receive during college combined with their tuition-free ride is all the compensation they have earned.

Some people who are against paying athletes believe that compensating athletes will lead to amateur athletes being treated like professionals. Many believe this is unfair and will lead to more exploitation, not less. 

Argument 2: Paying College Athletes Would Side-Step the Real Problem

Another argument against paying student athletes is that college sports are not professional sports , and treating student athletes like professionals exploits them and takes away the spirit of amateurism from college sports . 

This stance may sound idealistic, but those who take this line of reasoning typically do so with the goal of protecting both student-athletes and the tradition of “amateurism” in college sports. This argument is built on the idea that the current system of college sports is problematic and needs to change, but that paying student-athletes is not the right solution. 

Instead, this argument would claim that there is an even better way to fix the corrupt system of NCAA sports than just giving student-athletes a paycheck. To support such an argument, you might turn to the same evidence that’s cited in this NPR interview : the European model of supporting a true minor league system for most sports is effective, so the U.S. should implement a similar model. 

In short: creating a minor league can ensure athletes who want a career in their sport get paid, while not putting the burden of paying all collegiate athletes on a university. 

Creating and supporting a true professional minor league would allow the students who want to make money playing sports to do so. Universities could then confidently put earned revenue from sports back into the university, and student-athletes wouldn’t view their college sports as the best and only path to a career as a professional athlete. Those interested in playing professionally would be able to pursue this dream through the minor leagues instead, and student athletes could just be student athletes. 

The goal of this argument is to sort of achieve a “best of both worlds” solution: with the development and support of a true minor league system, student-athletes would be able to focus on the foremost goal of getting an education, and those who want to get paid for their sport can do so through the minor league. Through this model, student-athletes’ pursuit of their education is protected, and college sports aren’t bogged down in ethical issues and logistical hang-ups. 

Argument 3: It Would Be a Logistical Nightmare

This argument against paying student athletes takes a stance on the basis of logistics. Essentially, this argument states that while the current system is flawed, paying student athletes is just going to make the system worse. So until someone can prove that paying collegiate athletes will fix the system, it's better to maintain the status quo. 

Formulating an argument around this perspective basically involves presenting the different proposals for how to go about paying college athletes, then poking holes in each proposed approach. Such an argument would probably culminate in stating that the challenges to implementing pay for college athletes are reason enough to abandon the idea altogether. 

Here's what we mean. One popular proposed approach to paying college athletes is the notion of “pay-for-play.” In this scenario, all college athletes would receive the same weekly stipend to play their sport . 

In this type of argument, you might explain the pay-for-play solution, then pose some questions toward the approach that expose its weaknesses, such as: Where would the money to pay athletes come from? How could you pay athletes who play certain sports, but not others? How would you avoid Title IX violations? Because there are no easy answers to these questions, you could argue that paying college athletes would just create more problems for the world of college sports to deal with.

Posing these difficult questions may persuade a reader that attempting to pay college athletes would cause too many issues and lead them to agree with the stance that college athletes should not be paid. 

5 Tips for Writing About Paying College Athletes

If you’re assigned the prompt “Should college athletes be paid," don't panic. There are several steps you can take to write an amazing argumentative essay about the topic! We've broken our advice into five helpful tips that you can use to persuade your readers (and ace your assignment).

Tip 1: Plan Out a Logical Structure for Your Essay

In order to write a logical, well-organized argumentative essay, one of the first things you need to do is plan out a structure for your argument. Using a bare-bones argumentative outline for a “why college athletes should be paid” essay is a good place to start. 

Check out our example of an argumentative essay outline for this topic below: 

• The thesis statement must communicate the topic of the essay: Whether college athletes should be paid, and 
• Convey a position on that topic: That college athletes should/ should not be paid, and 
• State a couple of defendable, supportable reasons why college athletes should be paid (or vice versa).
• Support Point #1 with evidence
• Explain/interpret the evidence with your own, original commentary 
• Support Point #2 with evidence
• Explain/interpret the evidence with your own, original commentary
• Support Point #3 with evidence
• New body paragraph addressing opposing viewpoints
• Concluding paragraph

This outline does a few things right. First, it makes sure you have a strong thesis statement. Second, it helps you break your argument down into main points (that support your thesis, of course). Lastly, it reminds you that you need to both include evidence and explain your evidence for each of your argumentative points. 

While you can go off-book once you start drafting if you feel like you need to, having an outline to start with can help you visualize how many argumentative points you have, how much evidence you need, and where you should insert your own commentary throughout your essay. 

Remember: the best argumentative essays are organized ones! 

Tip 2: Create a Strong Thesis 

T he most important part of the introduction to an argumentative essay claiming that college athletes should/should not be paid is the thesis statement. You can think of a thesis like a backbone: your thesis ties all of your essay parts together so your paper can stand on its own two feet! 

So what does a good thesis look like? A solid thesis statement in this type of argumentative essay will convey your stance on the topic (“Should college athletes be paid?”) and present one or more supportable reasons why you’re making this argument. 

With these goals in mind, here’s an example of a thesis statement that includes clear reasons that support the stance that college athletes should be paid: 

Because the names, image, and talents of college athletes are used for massive financial gain, college athletes should be able to benefit from their athletic career in the same way that their universities do by getting endorsements. 

Here's a thesis statement that takes the opposite stance--that college athletes shouldn’t be paid --and includes a reason supporting that stance: 

In order to keep college athletics from becoming over-professionalized, compensation for college athletes should be restricted to covering college tuition and related educational expenses.

Both of these sample thesis statements make it clear that your essay is going to be dedicated to making an argument: either that college athletes should be paid, or that college athletes shouldn’t be paid. They both convey some reasons why you’re making this argument that can also be supported with evidence. 

Your thesis statement gives your argumentative essay direction . Instead of ranting about why college athletes should/shouldn’t be paid in the remainder of your essay, you’ll find sources that help you explain the specific claim you made in your thesis statement. And a well-organized, adequately supported argument is the kind that readers will find persuasive!

Tip 3: Find Credible Sources That Support Your Thesis

In an argumentative essay, your commentary on the issue you’re arguing about is obviously going to be the most fun part to write. But great essays will cite outside sources and other facts to help substantiate their argumentative points. That's going to involve—you guessed it!—research. 

For this particular topic, the issue of whether student athletes should be paid has been widely discussed in the news media (think The New York Times , NPR , or ESPN ). 

For example, this data reported by the NCAA shows a breakdown of the gender and racial demographics of member-school administration, coaching staff, and student athletes. These are hard numbers that you could interpret and pair with the well-reasoned arguments of news media writers to support a particular point you’re making in your argument. 

Though this may seem like a topic that wouldn’t generate much scholarly research, it’s worth a shot to check your library database for peer-reviewed studies of student athletes’ experiences in college to see if anything related to paying student athletes pops up. Scholarly research is the holy grail of evidence, so try to find relevant articles if you can. 

Ultimately, if you can incorporate a mix of mainstream sources, quantitative or statistical evidence, and scholarly, peer-reviewed sources, you’ll be on-track to building an excellent argument in response to the question, “Should student athletes be paid?”

Having multiple argumentative points in your essay helps you support your thesis.

Tip 4: Develop and Support Multiple Points

We’ve reviewed how to write an intro and thesis statement addressing the issue of paying college athletes, so let’s talk next about the meat and potatoes of your argumentative essay: the body paragraphs. 

The body paragraphs that are sandwiched between your intro paragraph and concluding paragraph are where you build and explain your argument. Generally speaking, each body paragraph should do the following: 

• Start with a topic sentence that presents a point that supports your stance and that can be debated, 
• Present summaries, paraphrases, or quotes from credible sources--evidence, in other words--that supports the point stated in the topic sentence, and
• Explain and interpret the evidence presented with your own, original commentary. 

In an argumentative essay on why college athletes should be paid, for example, a body paragraph might look like this: 

Thesis Statement : College athletes should not be paid because it would be a logistical nightmare for colleges and universities and ultimately cause negative consequences for college sports. 

Body Paragraph #1: While the notion of paying college athletes is nice in theory, a major consequence of doing so would be the financial burden this decision would place on individual college sports programs. A recent study cited by the NCAA showed that only about 20 college athletic programs consistently operate in the black at the present time. If the NCAA allows student-athletes at all colleges and universities to be paid, the majority of athletic programs would not even have the funds to afford salaries for their players anyway. This would mean that the select few athletic programs that can afford to pay their athletes’ salaries would easily recruit the most talented players and, thus, have the tools to put together teams that destroy their competition. Though individual athletes would benefit from the NCAA allowing compensation for student-athletes, most athletic programs would suffer, and so would the spirit of healthy competition that college sports are known for. 

If you read the example body paragraph above closely, you’ll notice that there’s a topic sentence that supports the claim made in the thesis statement. There’s also evidence given to support the claim made in the topic sentence--a recent study by the NCAA. Following the evidence, the writer interprets the evidence for the reader to show how it supports their opinion. 

Following this topic sentence/evidence/explanation structure will help you construct a well-supported and developed argument that shows your readers that you’ve done your research and given your stance a lot of thought. And that's a key step in making sure you get an excellent grade on your essay! 

Tip 5: Keep the Reader Thinking

The best argumentative essay conclusions reinterpret your thesis statement based on the evidence and explanations you provided throughout your essay. You would also make it clear why the argument about paying college athletes even matters in the first place. 

There are several different approaches you can take to recap your argument and get your reader thinking in your conclusion paragraph. In addition to restating your topic and why it’s important, other effective ways to approach an argumentative essay conclusion could include one or more of the following: 

While you don’t want to get too wordy in your conclusion or present new claims that you didn’t bring up in the body of your essay, you can write an effective conclusion and make all of the moves suggested in the bulleted list above. 

Here’s an example conclusion for an argumentative essay on paying college athletes using approaches we just talked about:

Though it’s true that scholarships and financial aid are a form of compensation for college athletes, it’s also true that the current system of college sports places a lot of pressure on college athletes to behave like professional athletes in every way except getting paid. Future research should turn its attention to the various inequities within college sports and look at the long-term economic outcomes of these athletes. While college athletes aren't paid right now, that doesn’t necessarily mean that a paycheck is the best solution to the problem. To avoid the possibility of making the college athletics system even worse, people must consider the ramifications of paying college students and ensure that paying athletes doesn't create more harm than good.

This conclusion restates the argument of the essay (that college athletes shouldn't be paid and why), then uses the "Future Research" tactic to make the reader think more deeply about the topic. 

If your conclusion sums up your thesis and keeps the reader thinking, you’ll make sure that your essay sticks in your readers' minds.

Should College Athletes Be Paid: Next Steps 

Writing an argumentative essay can seem tough, but with a little expert guidance, you'll be well on your way to turning in a great paper . Our complete, expert guide to argumentative essays can give you the extra boost you need to ace your assignment!

Perhaps college athletics isn't your cup of tea. That's okay: there are tons of topics you can write about in an argumentative paper. We've compiled 113 amazing argumentative essay topics so that you're practically guaranteed to find an idea that resonates with you.

If you're not a super confident essay writer, it can be helpful to look at examples of what others have written. Our experts have broken down three real-life argumentative essays to show you what you should and shouldn't do in your own writing.

Trending Now

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

ACT vs. SAT: Which Test Should You Take?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Get Your Free

Find Your Target SAT Score

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

How to Get a Perfect SAT Score, by an Expert Full Scorer

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading and Writing

How to Improve Your Low SAT Score

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading and Writing

Find Your Target ACT Score

Complete Official Free ACT Practice Tests

How to Get a Perfect ACT Score, by a 36 Full Scorer

Get a 36 on ACT English

Get a 36 on ACT Math

Get a 36 on ACT Reading

Get a 36 on ACT Science

How to Improve Your Low ACT Score

Get a 24 on ACT English

Get a 24 on ACT Math

Get a 24 on ACT Reading

Get a 24 on ACT Science

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Ashley Sufflé Robinson has a Ph.D. in 19th Century English Literature. As a content writer for PrepScholar, Ashley is passionate about giving college-bound students the in-depth information they need to get into the school of their dreams.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Pros and Cons

Do you know how to improve your profile for college applications.

See how your profile ranks among thousands of other students using CollegeVine. Calculate your chances at your dream schools and learn what areas you need to improve right now — it only takes 3 minutes and it's 100% free.

Show me what areas I need to improve

What’s Covered:

History of the debate: should college athletes be paid, why college athletes should be paid.

• Why College Athletes Shouldn’t Be Paid
• Where To Get Your Essay Edited For Free

College athletics provide big benefits for many schools: they increase their profile, generate millions of dollars in revenue, and have led to one of the most contentious questions in sports— should college athletes be paid? Like other difficult questions, there are good arguments on both sides of the issue of paying college athletes. 

Historically, the debates over paying college athletes have only led to more questions, which is why it’s raged on for more than a century. Perhaps the earliest group to examine the quandary was Andrew Carnegie’s Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, which produced a mammoth study in 1929 of amateur athletes and the profits they generate for their universities. You don’t have to get past the preface to find questions that feel at home in today’s world:

• “What relation has this astonishing athletic display to the work of an intelligence agency like a university?”
• “How do students, devoted to study, find either the time or the money to stage so costly a performance?” 

Many of the questions asked way back in 1929 continue to resurface today, and many of them have eventually ended up seeking answers in court. The first case of note came in the 1950s, when the widow of Fort Lewis football player Ray Dennison took the college all the way to the Colorado Supreme Court in an effort to collect a death benefit after he was killed playing football. She lost the case, but future generations would have more success and have slowly whittled away at arguments against paying athletes. 

The most noticeable victory for athletes occurred in 2019, when California Governor, Gavin Newsom, signed legislation effectively allowing college athletes in the state to earn compensation for the use of their likeness, sign endorsement deals, and hire agents to represent them.

The court fights between college athletes and the NCAA continue today—while not exactly about payment, a case regarding whether or not schools can offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education benefits such as computers, graduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad, and internships was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2021. A decision is expected in June 2021. 

There are a number of great reasons to pay college athletes, many of which will not only improve the lives of student-athletes, but also improve the product on the field and in the arena. 

College Athletes Deserve to Get Paid

In 2019, the NCAA reported $18.9 billion in total athletics revenue. This money is used to finance a variety of paid positions that support athletics at colleges and universities, including administrators, directors, coaches, and staff, along with other employment less directly tied to sports, such as those in marketing and media. The only people not receiving a paycheck are the stars of the show: the athletes. 

A testament to the disparate allocation of funds generated by college sports, of the $18.9 billion in athletics revenue in 2019, $3.6 billion went toward financial aid for student-athletes, and $3.7 billion was used for coaches’ compensation. A February 2020 USA Today article found that the average total pay for Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) college football head coaches in 2020-21 was $2.7 million. The highest-paid college football coach—the University of Alabama’s Nick Saban—earns $9.3 million a year and is the highest-paid public employee in the country. He is not alone, college coaches dominate the list of public employees with the largest salaries. 

If there’s money to provide college coaches with lavish seven-figure salaries (especially at public institutions), why shouldn’t there be funds to pay college athletes? 

Vital Support for Athletes 

A 2011 study published by the National College Players Association (NCPA) found that an overwhelming number of students on full athletics scholarships live below the federal poverty line—85% of athletes who live on campus and 86% athletes who live off-campus. “Full scholarship” itself is a misnomer; the same study found that the average annual scholarship for FBS athletes on “full” scholarships was actually $3,222. Find out more information about athletic scholarships . 

Paying student-athletes would help eliminate the need for these student-athletes to take out loans, burden their families for monetary support, or add employment to their already busy schedules. The NCAA limits in-season practice time to 20 hours a week, but a 2008 NCAA report shows that in-season student-athletes commonly spent upward of 30 and 40 hours a week engaged in “athletic activities.” 

Encouraged to Stay in College Longer

A report produced by the NCPA and Drexel University estimated the average annual fair market value of big-time college football and men’s basketball players between 2011 and 2015 was $137,357 and $289,031, respectively, and concluded that football players only receive about 17% of their fair market value, while men’s basketball players receive approximately 8% of theirs.

If colleges paid athletes even close to their worth, they would provide an incentive for the athletes to stay in college and earn degrees, rather than leaving college for a paycheck. This would also help keep top talents playing for college teams, improve the level of competition, and potentially lead to even higher revenue. On a side note, this would incentivize athletes to complete their degree, making them more employable after the end of their athletic career. 

Limit Corruption 

Just because there are rules prohibiting the compensation of college athletes doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, and over the years there have been numerous scandals. For example, in 2009, six ex-University of Toledo players were indicted in a point-shaving scheme , and in 2010, Reggie Bush returned his Heisman Trophy after allegations that he was given hundreds of thousands of dollars from sports agents while he played for USC.  

Paying college athletes will likely not totally eliminate corruption from college sports, but putting athletes in a less-precarious financial position would be a good step toward avoiding external influence, especially when you consider some of the players involved in the University of Toledo point-shaving scandal were paid as little as $500. 

It’s a Job (and a Dangerous One) 

As mentioned before, college athletes can put in upward of 40 hours a week practicing, training, and competing—being a “student-athlete” is a challenge when you’re devoting full-time hours to athletics. A New York Times study found a 0.20-point difference in average GPA between recruited male athletes and non-athletes. The difference is less pronounced among females, with non-athletes averaging a 3.24 GPA and recruited women athletes at 3.18.

It’s not just the time commitment that playing college athletics puts on student-athletes, it’s the risk to their health. A 2009-2010 CDC report found that more than 210,000 injuries are sustained by NCAA student-athletes each year. Full athletic scholarships are only guaranteed a year at a time, meaning student-athletes are one catastrophic injury away from potentially losing their scholarship. That is to say nothing of the lasting effects of an injury, like head traumas , which made up 7.4% of all injuries in college football players between 2004 and 2009.

Discover your chances at hundreds of schools

Our free chancing engine takes into account your history, background, test scores, and extracurricular activities to show you your real chances of admission—and how to improve them.

Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

There are a lot of great reasons why college athletes should be paid, but there are also some compelling reasons why college athletes should not be paid—and why not paying athletes is actually good for both the institutions and athletes. 

Compensation Conundrum 

One of the most common reasons cited against paying college players is compensation. Will all college athletes get compensated equally? For example, will the star quarterback receive the same amount as the backup catcher on the softball team? A 2014 CNBC article estimated that Andrew Wiggins, a University of Kansas forward (and soon-to-be first-overall draft pick), had a fair market value of around $1.6 million.

Similarly, will compensation take into account talent? Will the All-American point guard get the same amount as the captain of the swim team? In all likelihood, paying college athletes will benefit big-time, revenue-generating sports and hurt less popular sports. 

Eliminate Competitive Balance 

According to the NCAA , in 2019, the 65 Power Five schools exceeded revenue by $7 million, while all other Division I colleges had a $23 million deficit between expenses and revenue. If college athletes were to get paid, then large, well-funded schools such as those of the Power Five would be best positioned to acquire top talent and gain a competitive advantage. 

From a student’s point of view, paying college athletes will alter their college experience. No longer would fit, college, university reputation, and values factor into their college decisions—rather, choices would be made simply based on who was offering the most money. 

Professionalism vs. the Classroom

There’s a feeling that paying college athletes sends the wrong message and incentivizes them to focus on athletics instead of academics, when the reality is that very few college athletes will go on to play sports professionally. Just 1.6% of college football players will take an NFL field. NCAA men’s basketball players have even slimmer odds of playing in a major professional league ( 1.2% ), while the chances of a professional career are particularly grim for women basketball players, at a mere 0.8% . 

Although the odds of a college athlete turning pro are low, the probability of them earning a degree is high, thanks in part to the academic support athletes are given. According to data released by the NCAA, 90% of Division I athletes enrolled in 2013 earned a degree within six years. 

It Will End Less-Popular, Unprofitable Sports 

If colleges and universities pay their athletes, there is a fear that resources will only go to popular, revenue-generating sports. Programs like football and men’s basketball would likely benefit greatly, but smaller, unprofitable sports such as gymnastics, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, and wrestling could find themselves at best cash-strapped and, at the worst, cut altogether. 

It’s just not less-popular sports that paying athletes could threaten—women’s programs could also find themselves in the crosshairs of budget-conscious administrators. Keep in mind, it was just in March 2021 that the NCAA made national news for its unequal treatment of the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments. 

Financial Irresponsibility 

Former ESPN, and current FOX Sports, personality Colin Cowherd made news in 2014 when he voiced a popular argument against paying college athletes: financial irresponsibility. In Cowherd’s words:

“I don’t think paying all college athletes is great… Not every college is loaded, and most 19-year-olds [are] gonna spend it—and let’s be honest, they’re gonna spend it on weed and kicks! And spare me the ‘they’re being extorted’ thing. Listen, 90 percent of these college guys are gonna spend it on tats, weed, kicks, Xboxes, beer and swag. They are, get over it!”

A look at the professional ranks bolsters Cowherd’s argument about athletes’ frivolous spending. According to CNBC , 60% of NBA players go broke within five years of departing the league and 78% of former NFL players experience financial distress two years after retirement.

Writing an Essay on This? Where to Get Your Essay Edited for Free

Writing an essay on whether college athletes should or shouldn’t be paid? CollegeVine can help! Our peer review tool allows you to receive feedback and learn the strengths and weaknesses of your essay for free.  

Looking for more debate, speech, or essay topics? Check out these other CollegeVine articles for ideas: 

• 52 Argumentative Essays Ideas that are Actually Interesting
• 52 Persuasive Speech Topics That Are Actually Engaging
• 60 Debate Topics for High Schoolers

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

• Bachelor’s Degrees
• Master’s Degrees
• Doctorate Degrees
• Certificate Programs
• Nursing Degrees
• Cybersecurity
• Human Services
• Science & Mathematics
• Communication
• Liberal Arts
• Social Sciences
• Computer Science
• Admissions Overview
• Tuition and Financial Aid
• Incoming Freshman and Graduate Students
• Transfer Students
• Military Students
• International Students
• Early Access Program
• About Maryville
• Our Faculty
• Our Approach
• Our History
• Accreditation
• Tales of the Brave
• Student Support Overview
• Online Learning Tools
• Infographics

Home / Blog

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Reasons Why or Why Not

January 3, 2022 

Tables of Contents

Why are college athletes not getting paid by their schools?

How do student athlete scholarships work, what are the pros and cons of compensation for college athletes, keeping education at the center of college sports.

Since its inception in 1906, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has governed intercollegiate sports and enforced a rule prohibiting college athletes to be paid. Football, basketball, and a handful of other college sports began to generate tremendous revenue for many schools in the mid-20th century, yet the NCAA continued to prohibit payments to athletes. The NCAA justified the restriction by claiming it was necessary to  protect amateurism  and distinguish “student athletes” from professionals.

The question of whether college athletes should be paid was answered in part by the Supreme Court’s June 21, 2021, ruling in  National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, et. al.  The decision affirmed a lower court’s ruling that blocked the NCAA from enforcing its rules restricting the compensation that college athletes may receive.

• As a result of the NCAA v. Alston ruling, college athletes now have the right to profit from their  name, image, and likeness  (NIL) while retaining the right to participate in their sport at the college level. (The prohibition against schools paying athletes directly remains in effect.)
• Several states have passed laws  that allow such compensation. Colleges and universities in those states must abide by these new laws when devising and implementing their own policies toward NIL compensation for college athletes.

Participating in sports benefits students in many ways: It helps them focus, provides motivation, builds resilience, and develops other skills that serve students in their careers and in their lives. The vast majority of college athletes will never become professional athletes and are happy to receive a full or partial scholarship that covers tuition and education expenses as their only compensation for playing sports.

Athletes playing Division I football, basketball, baseball, and other sports generate revenue for their schools and for third parties such as video game manufacturers and media companies. Many of these athletes believe it’s unfair for schools and businesses to profit from their hard work and talent without sharing the profits with them. They also point out that playing sports entails physical risk in addition to a considerable investment in time and effort.

This guide considers the reasons for and against paying college athletes, and the implications of recent court rulings and legislation on college athletes, their schools, their sports, and the role of the NCAA in the modern sports environment.

Back To Top

Discover a first-of-its-kind sport business management program

The online BS in Rawlings Sport Business Management from Maryville University will equip you with valuable skills in marketing, finance and public relations. No SAT or ACT scores required.

• Engage in a range of relevant course topics, from sports marketing to operations management.
• Gain real-world experience through professional internships.

The reasons why college athletes aren’t paid go back to the first organized sports competitions between colleges and universities in the late 19th century. Amateurism in college sports reflects the “ aristocratic amateurism ” of sports played in Europe at the time, even though most of the athletes at U.S. colleges had working-class backgrounds.

By the early 20th century, college football had gained a reputation for rowdiness and violence, much of which was attributed to the teams’ use of professional athletes. This led to the creation of the NCAA, which prohibited professionalism in college sports and enforced rules restricting compensation for college athletes. The rules are intended to preserve the amateurism of student participants. The NCAA justified the rules on two grounds:

• Fans would lose interest in the games if the players were professional athletes.
• Limiting compensation to capped scholarships ensures that college athletes remain part of the college community.

NCAA rules also prohibited college athletes from receiving payment to “ advertise, recommend, or promote ” any commercial product or service. Athletes were barred from participating in sports if they signed a contract to be represented by an agent as well. As a result of the NIL court decision, the NCAA will no longer enforce its rule relating to compensation for NIL activities and will allow athletes to sign contracts with agents.

Major college sports now generate billions in revenue for their schools each year

For decades, colleges and universities have operated under the assumption that  scholarships are sufficient compensation  for college athletes. Nearly all college sports cost more for the schools to operate than they generate in revenue for the institution, and scholarships are all that participants expect.

But while most sports don’t generate revenue, a handful, notably football and men’s and women’s basketball, stand out as significant exceptions to the rule:

• Many schools that field teams in the NCAA’s Division I football tier  regularly earn tens of millions of dollars  each year from the sport.
• The NCAA tournaments for men’s and women’s Division I basketball championships  generated more than $1 billion in 2019 .

Many major colleges and universities generate a considerable amount of money from their athletic teams:

• The Power Five college sports conferences — the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 12, and Southeastern Conference (SEC) —  generated more than $2.9 billion  in revenue from sports in fiscal 2020, according to federal tax records reported by  USA Today .
• This figure represents an increase of $11 million from 2019, a total that was reduced because of restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
• In the six years prior to 2020, the conferences recorded collective annual revenue increases averaging about $252 million.

What are name, image, likeness agreements for student athletes?

In recent years some college athletes at schools that field teams in the NCAA’s highest divisions have protested the restrictions placed on their ability to be compensated for third parties’ use of their name, image, and likeness. During the 2021 NCAA Division I basketball tournament known familiarly as March Madness, several players wore shirts bearing the hashtag “ #NotNCAAProperty ” to call attention to their objections.

Following the decision in NCAA v. Alston, the NCAA  enacted a temporary policy  allowing college athletes to enter into NIL agreements and other endorsements. The interim policy will be in place until federal legislation is enacted or new NCAA rules are created governing NIL contracts for college athletes.

• Student athletes are now able to sign endorsement deals, profit from their use of social media, and receive compensation for personal appearances and signing autographs.
• If they attend a school located in a state that has enacted NIL legislation, they are subject to any restrictions present in those state laws. As of mid-August 2021,  40 states had enacted laws  governing NIL contracts for college athletes.
• If their school is in a state without such a law, the college or university will determine its own NIL policies, although the NCAA prohibits pay-for-play and improper recruiting inducements.
• Student athletes are allowed to sign with sports agents and enter into agreements with school boosters so long as the deals abide by state laws and school policies.

Within weeks of the NCAA policy change, premier college athletes began signing NIL agreements with the potential to  earn them hundreds of thousands of dollars .

• Bryce Young, a sophomore quarterback for the University of Alabama, has nearly $1 million in endorsement deals.
• Quarterback Quinn Ewers decided to skip his last year of high school and enroll early at Ohio State University so he could make money from endorsements.
• A booster for the University of Miami pledged to pay each member of the school’s football team $500 for endorsing his business.

How will the change affect college athletes and their schools?

The  repercussions of court decisions and state laws  that allow college athletes to sign NIL agreements continue to be felt at campuses across the country, even though schools and athletes have received little guidance on how to manage the process.

• The top high school athletes in football, basketball, and other revenue-generating college sports will consider their potential for endorsement earnings while being recruited by various schools.
• The first NIL agreements highlight the disparity between what elite college athletes can expect to earn and what other athletes may realize. On one NIL platform, the average amount earned by Division I athletes was $471, yet one athlete made $210,000 in July alone.
• Most NIL deals at present are for small amounts, typically about $100 in free apparel, in exchange for endorsing a product on social media.

The presidents and other leaders of colleges and universities that field Division I sports have not yet responded to the changes in college athlete compensation other than to reiterate that they do not operate for-profit sports franchises. However, the NCAA requires that  Division I sports programs  be self-supporting, in contrast to sports programs at Division II and III institutions, which receive funding directly from their schools.

Many members of the Power 5 sports conferences have reported shortfalls in their operations, leading analysts to anticipate  major structural reforms  in the governing of college sports in the near future. The recent changes have also caused some people to believe the  NCAA is no longer relevant  or necessary.

How do highly competitive athletic scholarships work? According to the NCAA and Next College Student Athlete: $3.6 billion+ in athletic scholarships are awarded annually, and 180,000+ student athletes receive scholarships every year. Additionally, about 2% of athletes win a sports scholarship; college coaches award scholarships based on athletic ability; full scholarships are given for the top six college sports categories; and athletic scholarships are renewable each year.

The primary financial compensation student athletes receive is a scholarship that pays all or part of their tuition and other college-related expenses. Other forms of financial assistance available to student athletes include  grants, loans, and merit aid .

• Grants  are also called “gift aid,” because students are not expected to pay them back (with some exceptions, such as failing to complete the course of study for which the grant was awarded). Grants are awarded based on a student’s financial need. The  four types of grants  awarded by the U.S. Department of Education are  Federal Pell Grants ,  Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants ,  Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants , and  Teacher Education Assistance for College or Higher Education (TEACH) Grants .
• Loans  are available to cover education expenses from government agencies and private banks. Students must pay the loans back over a specified period after graduating from or leaving school, including interest charges. EducationData.org estimates that as of 2020, the  average amount of school-related debt  owed by college graduates was $37,693.
• Merit aid  is awarded based on the student’s academic, athletic, artistic, and other achievements.  Athletic scholarships  are a form of merit aid that typically cover one academic year at a time and are renewable each year, although some are awarded for up to four years.

Full athletic scholarships vs. partial scholarships

When most people think of a student athlete scholarship, they have in mind a  full-ride scholarship  that covers nearly all college-related expenses. However, most student athletes receive partial scholarships that may pay tuition but not college fees and living expenses, for example.

A student athlete scholarship is a nonguaranteed financial agreement between the school and the student. The NCAA refers to full-ride scholarships awarded to student athletes entering certain Division I sports programs as  head count scholarships  because they are awarded per athlete. Conversely, equivalency sports divide scholarships among multiple athletes, some of whom may receive a full scholarship and some a partial scholarship. Equivalency awards are divided among a team’s athletes at the discretion of the coaches, as long as they do not exceed the allowed scholarships for their sport.

These Division I sports distribute scholarships per head count:

• Men’s football
• Men’s basketball
• Women’s basketball
• Women’s volleyball
• Women’s gymnastics
• Women’s tennis

These are among the Division I equivalency sports for men:

• Track and field
• Cross-country

These are the Division I equivalency sports for women:

• Field hockey

All Division II and National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) sports programs distribute scholarships on an equivalency basis. Division III sports programs do not award sports scholarships, although other forms of financial aid are available to student athletes at these schools.

How college athletic scholarships are awarded

In most cases, the coaching staff of a team determines which students will receive scholarships after spending time scouting and recruiting. The NCAA imposes  strict rules for recruiting student athletes  and provides a guide to help students  determine their eligibility  to play college sports.

Once a student has received a scholarship offer from a college or university, the person may sign a national letter of intent (NLI), which is a voluntary, legally binding contract between an athlete and the school committing the student to enroll and play the designated sport for that school only. The school agrees to provide financial aid for one academic year as long as the student is admitted and eligible to receive the aid.

After the student signs an NLI, other schools are prohibited from recruiting them. Students who have signed an NLI may ask the school to release them from the commitment; if a student attends a school other than the one with which they have an NLI agreement, they lose one full year of eligibility and must complete a full academic year at the new school before they can compete in their sport.

Very few student athletes are awarded a full scholarship, and even a “full” scholarship may not pay for all of a student’s college and living expenses. The  average Division I sports scholarship  in the 2019-20 fiscal year was about $18,000, according to figures compiled by ScholarshipStats.com, although some private universities had average scholarship awards that were more than twice that amount. However, EducationData.org estimates that the  average cost of one year of college  in the U.S. is $35,720. They estimate the following costs by type of school.

• The average annual cost for an in-state student attending a public four-year college or university is $25,615.
• Average in-state tuition for one year is $9,580, and out-of-state tuition costs an average of $27,437.
• The average cost at a private university is $53,949 per academic year, about $37,200 of which is tuition and fees.

Student athlete scholarship resources

• College Finance, “Full-Ride vs. Partial-Ride Athletic Scholarships”  — The college expenses covered by full athletic scholarships, how to qualify for partial athletic scholarships, and alternatives to scholarships for paying college expenses
• Student First Educational Consulting, “Athletic Scholarship Issues for 2021-2022 and Beyond”  — A discussion of the decline in the number of college athletic scholarships as schools drop athletic programs, and changes to the rules for college athletes transferring to new schools

According to College Strategic, Fansided, and Future of Working, reasons why paying college athletes is fair include: 1. Playing sports resembles a full-time job. 2. Sports take time away from studies. 3. Sports generate corporate profits. 4. Pay minimizes athlete corruption. 5. Pay provides spending money. 6. Playing sports creates injury risk. 7. Sports elevate school brands. 8. Pay motivates performance. 9. Scholarships reduce poverty.

There are many reasons why student athletes should be paid, but there are also valid reasons why student athletes should not be paid in certain circumstances. The lifting of NCAA restrictions on NIL agreements for college athletes has altered the landscape of major college sports but will likely have little or no impact on the majority of student athletes, who will continue to compete as true amateurs.

Reasons why student athletes should be paid

The argument raised most often in favor of allowing college athletes to receive compensation is that  colleges and universities profit  from the sports they play but do not share the proceeds with the athletes who are the ultimate source of that profit.

• In 2017 (the most recent year for which figures are available), the NCAA recorded $1.07 billion in revenue. The organization’s president earned $2.7 million in 2018, and nine other NCAA executives had salaries greater than $500,000 that year.
• Elite college coaches earn millions of dollars a year in salary, topped by University of Alabama football coach Nick Saban’s $9.3 million annual salary.
• Many of the athletes at leading football and basketball programs are from low-income families, and the majority will not become professional athletes.
• College athletes take great physical risks to play their sports and put their future earning potential at risk. In school they may be directed toward nonchallenging courses, which denies them the education their fellow students receive.

Reasons why student athletes should not be paid

Opponents to paying college athletes rebut these arguments by pointing to the primary role of colleges and universities: to provide students with a rewarding educational experience that prepares them for their professional careers. These are among the reasons they give for not paying student athletes.

• Scholarships are the fairest form of compensation for student athletes considering the financial strain that college athletic departments are under. Most schools in Division I, II, and III spend more money on athletics than they receive in revenue from the sports.
• College athletes who receive scholarships are presented with an opportunity to earn a valuable education that will increase their earning power throughout their career outside of sports. A Gallup survey of NCAA athletes found that  70% graduate in four years or fewer , compared to 65% of all undergraduate students.
• Paying college athletes will “ diminish the spirit of amateurism ” that distinguishes college sports from their professional counterparts. Limiting compensation for playing a sport to the cost of attending school avoids creating a separate class of students who are profiting from their time in school.

According to Best Colleges, Salarship, and CollegeVine, reasons why paying college athletes is less than ideal include: 1. Money may harm students. 2. Pay diminishes love of the game. 3. Pay deemphasizes academic purpose. 4. Secondary sports struggle. 5. Rich schools monopolize talent. 6. The financial benefit is marginal. 7. Setting salaries can be messy. 8. Academic requirements are substandard. 9. Other program budgets are reduced.

How do college athlete endorsements work?

Soon after the Supreme Court released its decision in NCAA v. Alston, the NCAA issued  guidelines for schools  that allow college athletes to make money from product endorsements, social media accounts, autographs, and other uses of their name, image, or likeness. This counters the NCAA’s longstanding opposition to student athletes profiting from endorsements. At present, implementation of the guidelines varies from school to school and state to state, which means athletes at some institutions may benefit more from NIL agreements than those attending other schools.

Several  NIL consultancy firms  are actively soliciting endorsements from college athletes in the aftermath of the rule change.

• Highly touted 19-year-old basketball recruit Hercy Miller, who joined the Tennessee State University basketball team in 2021, signed a $2 million endorsement deal with Web Apps America.
• University of Michigan quarterback Cade McNamara has entered into an endorsement deal with cryptocurrency company More Management that will  pay him in cryptocurrency .
• Twin sisters Haley and Hanna Cavinder of the Fresno State University basketball team have  marketing agreements  to promote Boost Mobile and Six Star Pro Nutrition to the 3.3 million followers of their TikTok account.
• Gable Steveson, a wrestler for the University of Minnesota, entered into an endorsement deal with the delivery service Gopuff; Steveson has 245,000 followers on Instagram and 30,000 on Twitter.

Despite the rush of high-profile college athletes signing endorsement deals, some educators and analysts express concern about the  impact of the endorsements  on schools, athletes, and college sports.

• Schools with more favorable endorsement rules may entice student athletes away from the schools they are currently attending.
• Likewise, states that have enacted endorsement laws that provide more earning potential for college athletes may see more top recruits choosing to attend schools in those states.
• The time college athletes spend meeting the requirements of their endorsement contracts could detract from study and practice time. This can have an adverse effect on their education and athletic careers — if they are unable to maintain grade requirements, for example, they may be disqualified from playing.
• If a college athlete’s performance in the sport declines, they may be less likely to attract and retain endorsement deals. While the NCAA has banned NIL agreements based on the athlete meeting specific performance criteria, the group acknowledges that a student’s athletic performance  may enhance their NIL value .
• Because of complicated contracts and tax laws, student athletes will have to rely on agents, advisers, and managers, which may leave them vulnerable to exploitation.

From the onset of intercollegiate sports, students have benefited from their participation by learning dedication to their sport, building relationships, and being part of a team. Sports allow students to acquire many important values, such as fair competition and physical and mental health. Education should remain at the forefront of all aspects of college, including sports, whether or not collegiate athletes are paid.

Infographic Source

Best Colleges, “Should College Athletes Be Paid?”

College Strategic, “Why College Athletes Should Be Paid”

CollegeVine, “Should College Athletes Be Paid? Pros and Cons”

Fansided, “64 Reasons College Athletes Need to Be Paid”

Future of Working, “17 Advantages and Disadvantages of Paying College Athletes”

NCAA, “Scholarships”

Next College Student Athlete, “What Are the Different Types of Offers I Could Get?”

Salarship, “Should College Athletes Be Paid: Pros and Cons”

Bring us your ambition and we’ll guide you along a personalized path to a quality education that’s designed to change your life.

Take Your Next Brave Step

Receive information about the benefits of our programs, the courses you'll take, and what you need to apply.

The Aspen Institute

©2024 The Aspen Institute. All Rights Reserved

• 0 Comments Add Your Comment

The History Behind the Debate Over Paying NCAA Athletes

April 23, 2018  • Jon Solomon

The Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program held a conversation May 1 in Washington, DC titled “Future of College Sports: Reimagining Athlete Pay.” The discussion was livestreamed at as.pn/collegesportsfuture. The Aspen Institute discussion explored the implications if NCAA athletes could be paid by outside entities for use of their names, images, and likenesses, like any college student.

While speaking at the Aspen Institute in 2016, NCAA president Mark Emmert raised concerns that University of Texas swimmer Joseph Schooling had recently received a $740,000 bonus from Singapore for winning a gold medal at the 2016 Olympics. Schooling didn’t just win gold; he was Singapore’s first Olympic gold medalist and beat the great Michael Phelps.

This payment was perfectly permissible under NCAA rules, which since 2001 have allowed US Olympians to compete in college while pocketing tens of thousands of dollars (and sometimes six figures) from the United States Olympic Committee for winning gold, silver, or bronze. The NCAA added an exception in 2015 to also allow international athletes to receive bonuses.

Still, a college swimmer making nearly three-quarters of a million dollars concerned some NCAA members because, Emmert said, “that’s a little different than 15 grand for the silver medal for the US of A. … The members at that time hadn’t anticipated this phenomenon of like the Singaporean kid getting paid a very large amount.”

Never mind that NCAA rules allow two-sport athletes to be paid professionals in one sport while competing in a different college sport, such as Kyle Parker’s $1.4 million baseball signing bonus while serving as Clemson’s quarterback in 2010. Or that tennis players can receive up to $10,000 per year in prize money (and additional cash on a per-event basis) before or during college. Or that college football players can receive bowl gifts up to $550 in value, which can involve players selecting high-tech electronics from a gift suite or receiving a Visa gift card. Or that schools have student-assistance funds to help athletes financially, including paying five-figure insurance policies for elite athletes who want to protect their professional futures.

Emmert’s description of his membership’s concerns about the swimming bonus reflects the never-ending definition of NCAA amateurism. Amateurism is whatever the NCAA says amateurism is at any particular moment.

As US District Judge Claudia Wilken wrote in her 2014 ruling in the Ed O’Bannon v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit case against the NCAA over the commercialized use of players’ names, images and likenesses: “The association’s current rules demonstrate that, even today, the NCAA does not necessarily adhere to a single definition of amateurism.”

The challenges are adding up for the NCAA both in the courtroom and in the court of public opinion. Speaking at a 2017 meeting of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, Emmert released internal NCAA polling showing that among all Americans, 79 percent say major universities value money ahead of college athletes.

“I can’t think of anything 79 percent of Americans agree to,” Emmert said, “but they agree to that.”

Such is the state of college sports. How America’s college sports system got here – the only country in the world to attach a highly-commercialized, multibillion-dollar industry to higher education, thus resulting in ongoing legal challenges and public criticism – is a long story. Three key events help trace the journey.

1. Why NCAA athletes are called student-athletes

The term “student-athlete” is ingrained in the college sports vernacular. NCAA-organized press conferences involve a moderator seeking questions for any of the “student-athletes,” a term that historically comes to define the NCAA’s perceived moral authority and its justification for existence.

It’s a term rooted in legal calculations. Walter Byers, the NCAA’s first executive director, created “student-athlete” in the 1950s to help the NCAA fight against workmen’s compensation insurance claims for injured football players.

“The student-athlete was a term used to try to offset these tendencies for state agencies or other governmental departments to consider a grant-in-aid holder” to be an employee, Byers said in court testimony during the 1990s. Soon, the term “student-athlete” became embedded in all NCAA rules and interpretations.

“Student-athlete” first surfaced when the widow of Ray Dennison, who died from a head injury in 1955 while playing in Colorado for the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies, filed for workmen’s compensation death benefits. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with the defendant that Dennison’s widow was not eligible for benefits because the college was “not in the football business.”

“The term student-athlete was deliberately ambiguous,” Pulitzer Prize-winning author Taylor Branch wrote in The Atlantic in 2011. “College players were not students at play (which might understate their athletic obligations), nor were they just athletes in college (which might imply they were professionals). That they were high-performance athletes meant they could be forgiven for not meeting the academic standards of their peers; that they were students mean they did not have to be compensated, ever, for anything more than the cost of their studies. Student-athlete became the NCAA’s signature term, repeated constantly in and out of courtrooms.”

Athletes may be receiving degrees, but many examples show that pockets of athletes are not receiving a quality education.

The student-athlete defense helped the NCAA win – and avoid – numerous liability cases through the years. The most notable win was a lawsuit brought by former Texas Christian University (TCU) running back Kent Waldrep, who was paralyzed in a 1974 football game against the University of Alabama. TCU stopped paying his medical bills after nine months and the Waldrep family coped for years on charity.

Shortly after NCAA Division I schools began carrying catastrophic insurance for football players in 1991, Waldrep sued. He claimed he was an employee of TCU at the time of his injury and covered by workers compensation laws. Waldrep initially won $70 a week for life and medical expenses dating to the accident, but TCU’s insurance carrier appealed.

Finally, in 2000, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that Waldrep was not an employee because he and TCU intended for him to participate in sports as a student. As part of its decision, the Texas Supreme Court wrote that a basic purpose of the NCAA was to make the student-athlete an integral part of the student body, and cited the definition of an amateur student-athlete from the NCAA bylaws: “one who engaged in athletics for the education, physical, mental, and social benefits he derives therefrom, and to whom athletics is an avocation.”

The power of the student-athlete label has played out in legal circles and in the public narrative. Today, the NCAA promotes that more than 460,000 student-athletes compete in 24 sports per year, and more than eight in 10 student-athletes will earn a bachelor’s degree. The value of a college degree is viewed very favorably by many Americans, especially as tuition costs continue to skyrocket that causes students to carry college-loan debt well into adulthood.

Yet the money keeps growing in college sports. The combined revenue for the five major conferences (SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12) increased by 266 percent from 2005-15, according to the Knight Commission. In 2015, the 53 public schools from the five major conferences paid their football coaching staffs (530 individuals) a combined $405.5 million, compared to $179.8 million in scholarships to their football players (4,979 individuals).

In recent years, the NCAA changed some rules to allow new benefits for athletes. Schools can expand the value of athletic scholarships to include cash stipends of a couple thousand dollars to cover athletes’ full cost of attendance. The NCAA now lets schools provide unlimited meals to athletes. The Pac-12 in 2014 became the first conference to guarantee athletes who are injured in college competition will have medical expenses covered up to four years by the school; the other four major conferences recently agreed to a minimum two-year standard for medical expenses covered after college.

But the criticism for the NCAA hasn’t subsided. The NCAA’s academic mission has increasingly been called into question. Athletes may be receiving degrees, but many examples show that pockets of athletes are not receiving a quality education. Some of them essentially major in eligibility – that is, they take (and are sometimes directed to) easier majors/courses in order to stay on the field.

The most glaring example occurred when the University of North Carolina was found by outside parties to have organized fake classes that enabled dozens of athletes to gain and maintain their eligibility. In a ruling last year that caused considerable confusion and frustration among NCAA members, the NCAA did not penalize North Carolina. The NCAA said no association rules were broken because the fraudulent classes were not available exclusively to athletes; other students had access to the courses, too. An independent report commissioned by North Carolina found that of the 3,100 students who took the fake classes over 18 years, 47.4 percent were athletes.

The North Carolina scandal also has played out in state and federal court, where the NCAA argued that it “did not voluntarily assume a legal duty to ensure the academic integrity of courses offered by its member institutions.” The NCAA enforcement model “creates no legal duty to prevent NCAA members from violating NCAA rules,” the association wrote.

North Carolina avoided NCAA penalties by essentially arguing that the NCAA should stay out of irregularities in college courses. This caused many critics to say that the NCAA must decide whether it’s going to continue to be involved in other academic matters, such as:

• Approving or withholding initial NCAA eligibility for players based on their high school transcript and curriculum
• Progress toward degree requirements for college athletes to stay eligible
• Penalties against schools, including postseason bans, if individual teams don’t meet Academic Progress Rate benchmarks showing their players are progressing toward a degree

“Maybe we’ve just reached the point where if a university is going to cheat academically, the public needs to look to the university and university leadership and say, ‘Does winning mean that much to you?’” retired North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Bob Orr, co-counsel in a lawsuit against the NCAA involving the North Carolina scandal, told CBSSports.com in 2016. “Instead, they turn to this outside organization with inconsistent standards and limited resources.”

If the NCAA ever removed itself entirely from academics and became solely an organizer of sporting events, that could pose a significant threat to the association’s current nonprofit model. The entire enterprise is designed around the notion that providing access to an education is sufficient compensation to players for their participation in a multibillion-dollar industry.

After all, the NCAA tells us, these players are student-athletes.

2. 1984 Supreme Court decision shifted the power to conferences

Perhaps more than anyone else, the late Supreme Court Justice Byron “Whizzer” White saw the challenges coming for the NCAA. White essentially predicted so much of this – the commercialization, the defections for TV cash, the NCAA’s struggles to protect amateurism – when he wrote the dissenting opinion in the landmark NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents case that ended the NCAA’s monopoly over college football television contracts.

“By mitigating what appears to be a clear failure of the free market to serve the ends and goals of higher education,” White wrote in 1984, “the NCAA ensures the continued availability of a unique and valuable product, the very existence of which might well be threatened by unbridled competition in the economic sphere.”

The NCAA once controlled football television – who got the exposure on TV and how the money was distributed to schools. The University of Oklahoma and University of Georgia sued to change the power structure. An appellate court and the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision that the NCAA’s control over football TV contracts was illegal.

The Supreme Court handed down a 7-2 decision against the NCAA. The only justice joining White in dissension was William Rehnquist. White warned that the court was making a mistake by “subjugating the NCAA’s educational goals … to the purely competitive commercialism of [an] ‘every school for itself’ approach to television contract bargaining.”

After the decision, schools began merging into larger conferences and ended the once-common practice of independent status. Conferences soon held the power in football – and as football’s popularity grew in America, the sport became the financial engine for athletic departments. Conferences began to negotiate lucrative media rights deals, stage championship games and secure their own bowl games, and ultimately produce college football’s first national championship format.

Today, the conferences now stage the College Football Playoff, which is worth about $470 million annually. Many of them have their own television network. During fiscal year 2017, the SEC distributed on average $41 million to each of its 14 universities, according to USA Today. Ten years ago, the SEC average payout per school was $11 million. The Big Ten Conference is projected to exceed $50 million in its average payout.

There’s another legacy of the 1984 ruling: Buried within the NCAA’s landmark loss was a Supreme Court gift that kept on giving for 30 more years. In the middle of the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens dropped in limited language that states “athletes must not be paid”:

“… moreover, the NCAA seeks to market a particular brand of football – college football. The identification of this ‘product’ with an academic tradition differentiates college football from and makes it more popular than professional sports to which it might otherwise be comparable, such as, for example, minor league baseball. In order to preserve the character and quality of the ‘product,’ athletes must not be paid, must be required to attend class, and the like.”

There were just three sentences in a 19,000-word brief. The topic (player compensation) had nothing to do with the issue at hand (football TV contracts). No one testified about player compensation, and Stevens didn’t appear to give much rigorous thought to what he was writing.

Stevens didn’t define what “paid” means. Does that mean salaries from the school, endorsements from outside entities, or checks written as part of scholarship agreements?

Stevens didn’t explain what “required to attend class” means. Does that mean a part-time student or full-time student, or perhaps attend only one class? How would Stevens interpret “required to attend class” today when compared to how frequently NCAA athletes miss school to travel to play in games? In a 2015 survey, Division I men’s basketball players said they spent an average of 1.7 days a week away from campus and missed 2.2 classes. The Wall Street Journal found that eight top-25 men’s basketball teams in 2018 traveled an average of more than 42 days during the season.

Though NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents wasn’t about compensation for college athletes, Stevens’ five words – “athletes must not be paid” – became a valuable source for many NCAA legal victories in future years. That changed when the O’Bannon case challenged the NCAA’s restrictions preventing football and men’s basketball players from being paid for the licensing use of their names, images, and likenesses (NILs).

Wilken, the judge in O’Bannon v. NCAA , concluded that while NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents “gives the NCAA ‘ample latitude’ to adopt rules preserving ‘the revered tradition of amateurism in college sports’ … it does not stand for the sweeping proposition that student-athletes must be barred, both during their college years and forever thereafter, from receiving any monetary compensation for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses.”

Andy Coats, the lawyer for Oklahoma and Georgia in the 1984 Supreme Court case, said it was only a matter of time before players sought a slice of the TV pie.

“They’re saying, ‘Look, we’re generating this money either by our play or the fact you take my image and sell it, and it’s not fair,’” Coats told CBSSports.com in 2014.

The money grew too big. The time had come for legal challenges on behalf of the players.

Tom McMillen, who oversees the athletic director association for the NCAA’s largest division, sums up a critical question this way: If schools could pay players, who would athletic directors predominantly pay – the players or the coaches? Surveys show ADs don’t currently support constraining coaches’ salaries, McMillen said.

“The system has allowed coaches’ compensation to explode so it’s a fair question,” McMillen said. “If that hadn’t happened, I think the pressure on paying athletes would be far less today. You can’t have a market place where one side wins and another side doesn’t win. You can’t expect one side to be constrained forever. I said that in my book in 1991. I think it holds even more true today.”

3. Impact of Ed O’Bannon v. NCAA

The next chapter of challenges against the NCAA is still being written. The results will be based in part on the O’Bannon ruling – the legal precedent set, how college athletes are more cognizant of the money around them, and the public’s opinion about amateurism and what it even means.

The O’Bannon case ended up with victories for both sides. The plaintiffs won a decision that certain NCAA amateurism rules violate federal antitrust law. The court determined that those rules constituted an anti-competitive conspiracy by the NCAA schools and conferences to deny men’s basketball and football players monetary value for their NILs. This potentially leaves the NCAA vulnerable for more antitrust challenges.

On the other hand, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Wilken’s remedy to the violations: Allow schools, if they so desire, to pay players up to $5,000 per year while they are in college with payment coming after they leave school. Rejecting the remedy was a win for the NCAA. Today, the NCAA clings to a new definition of amateurism through the O’Bannon appellate decision, which tied educational expenses to athlete compensation.

“The difference between offering student-athletes education-related compensation and offering them cash sums untethered to educational expenses is not minor; it is a quantum leap,” two Ninth Circuit judges wrote in 2015.

Legal threats continue against the NCAA. Two lawsuits that challenge the NCAA’s current compensation limits for athletes continue – including the Martin Jenkins case led by attorney Jeffrey Kessler, who brought free agency to the NFL – envision an NCAA in which conferences and/or schools would be free to make their own independent determinations about how to fairly compensate athletes.

The ongoing NCAA college basketball scandal showed that under-the-table payments to players by coaches, financial advisors, and shoe companies are common in the sport.

Wilken, the judge in O’Bannon, recently ordered the lawsuits to trial starting Dec. 3. She essentially left the NCAA with only two arguments to use at trial: The notion that fans are drawn to college football and basketball “in part due to their perception of amateurism,” and the idea that “paying student-athletes would detract from the integration of academics and athletics in the campus community.” The results of the trial, and inevitable appeals, could dramatically reshape the NCAA.

According to McMillen, 79 percent of athletic directors in the NCAA’s highest football subdivision support players making money off their name for non-athletic related activities, and 26 percent favor giving players the right for athletic-related pursuits. Emmert, the NCAA president, has said the Olympic model – athletes receiving sponsor money in exchange for use of their name, image and likeness – is deserving of serious consideration inside the context of college sports.

“I hate to say this, I think the plaintiff lawyers are slowing this down,” McMillen said. “If you didn’t have a court case now, I think college sports could have addressed this. Now, the lawyers will say they’ve made progress because of the court cases. It’s what comes first – the chicken or the egg? But when a court case’s fundamental principle is tethered to education, it’s a slippery slope no one will touch right now. I think the ADs are more sympathetic to (players making money off their NIL) provided some of their concerns are addressed. They don’t want it to be an abusive recruiting tool.”

The NCAA’s history has been to legally fight most attempts to increase benefits for athletes. The NCAA fought two court cases over expanding the value of the traditional athletic scholarship to include additional money that covers miscellaneous costs of attending college. Now, thousands of NCAA athletes who received traditional scholarships, rather than the new cost-of-attendance version, will be compensated for the difference. Last year, the NCAA and 11 major conferences settled for $208.7 million in the Shawne Alston lawsuit, which was impacted by the O’Bannon decision.

The ongoing NCAA college basketball scandal brought by federal prosecutors reflected, not surprisingly, that under-the-table payments to players by coaches, financial advisors and shoe companies are common in the sport. Three criminal cases are tied to the FBI investigation, which has resulted in 10 arrests, including charges against assistant basketball coaches at Auburn, Oklahoma State, Arizona and Southern California.

According to a Yahoo! Sports report in February, federal documents show an underground recruiting operation that could create NCAA rules issues for at least 20 Division I basketball programs – including Duke, North Carolina, Texas, Kentucky, Michigan State, Southern California, and Alabama – and more than 25 players. The amounts of impermissible benefits reported by Yahoo! Sports for one sports agency ranged from $70 for a lunch with a player’s parents to tens of thousands of dollars and loans to a former North Carolina State player.

“These allegations, if true, point to systematic failures that must be fixed and fixed now if we want college sports in America,” Emmert said in a statement in February 2018. “Simply put, people who engage in this kind of behavior have no place in college sports. They are an affront to all those who play by the rules.”

Yet the reality is value does exist for some players above their athletic scholarship. That was highlighted in the O’Bannon case. A vice president of videogame maker Electronic Arts Sports testified that his company wants to pay players for the right to use their NILs in popular NCAA videogames that have been discontinued. EA Sports previously used the likeness of players without their permission, resulting in a $60 million settlement with plaintiffs. The average payout was expected to be around $1,600, with some players receiving several thousand dollars depending on how frequently their likeness appeared in the videogame.

A slight majority of American adults (52 percent) still believe a full scholarship is adequate compensation for a college athlete, according to a 2017 nationwide poll by The Washington Post and the University of Massachusetts Lowell. The racial divide was noteworthy: 54 percent of black Americans support paying NCAA athletes based on revenue they generate, whereas only 31 percent of white Americans support the concept.

Gaining public traction is the idea of allowing players to make money if their NIL is sold through merchandise (66 percent of Americans are in favor). A racial gap exists here as well: 89 percent of blacks say athletes should be paid for use of their NIL, while 60 percent of whites are in favor.

Some proponents of paying players argue for a free market that would reallocate the money flowing to coaches, administrators and facility upgrades to the athletes. Others argue for Congress to provide a limited antitrust exemption for college athletic departments so they could impose caps on coach pay and other athletic spending in exchange for athletes to be guaranteed more benefits, including money through use of their NIL.

“My own personal view: There could be ways to do licensing with players and make sure the companies are legit,” McMillen said. “You could set up an independent, voluntary clearinghouse where the licensing staff would negotiate on behalf of all the student-athletes, much like they do in the pros. In taking this step to help elite student-athletes, like Olympic athletes can do today, it might help reduce the ever-growing pressure for universities to pay student-athletes, and that would undermine the whole college sports model.”

In 2014, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick made the rare public case by an AD that college sports could manage group licensing for athletes to be paid immediately. He argued that the NCAA’s problems stem from years of rules that differentiate athletes from the general student body, such as not allowing players to make money off their own name.

“You could have a group-licensing approach and say, OK, this group licensee can do a deal with EA Sports for student-athlete image and likeness, and we’ll go to EA Sports and negotiate it for all of the student-athletes,” Swarbrick told CBSSports.com. “Here’s what it’s worth if you wear the jersey in the EA Sports video(game) and here’s what it’s worth if you don’t. You get a market read on it and you distribute it based on the way all group licenses work.”

Nothing in the NCAA’s history suggests it would proactively take such an approach. Allowing players to be paid by outside entities might require a court ruling, federal legislation and/or a player boycott. Big 12 Conference commissioner Bob Bowlsby predicted in 2015 that the day will come when players decide not to play in a major college sporting event.

The Olympics once passionately believed in the evolving definition of amateurism. Paid professional athletes were not allowed. During the 1980s, the move toward professionalism gradually gained full steam sport by sport over several years. The change was aided in part by the suspicion that athletes from some Eastern Bloc nations were already professionals anyway through full-time support and training by their governments.

The public hasn’t stopped watching the Olympics with professionals. Making money through endorsements while being good at a sport doesn’t seem to hurt interest in the Olympics, which once had the most stringent definition of amateurism. In 1960, athletes who simply had decided to turn pro were no longer amateurs under Olympic rules.

College sports is gradually changing amateurism definitions, too. Times change, as reflected by some NCAA members’ concerns in 2016 about allowing an Olympian to get paid $740,000 while still competing in college. Some money is OK, in the view of NCAA members, but where’s the limit?

If swimmers and gymnasts can be paid for winning at the Olympics, why not basketball and football players for other forms of outside compensation? If $740,000 is deemed too much for Schooling to accept from Singapore while swimming for the University of Texas, why would American swimmer Katie Ledecky making $115,000 from the Olympics be OK to swim at Stanford? And for that matter, since Ledecky made $115,000 from Olympic success, why did NCAA rules prevent her from making endorsement money and cause her to turn pro early?

Once a line has been crossed to pay athletes, what makes one amount acceptable and another unacceptable?

That’s NCAA amateurism – a floating definition that’s always evolving, consistently inconsistent, and forever under scrutiny.

Jon Solomon is editorial director of the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program. He was an award-winning college sports reporter for 18 years, most recently at CBSSports.com.

Related Posts

April 17, 2023 Sports & Society Program

August 29, 2022 Tom Farrey

The best of the Institute, right in your inbox.

Sign up for our email newsletter

Paying College Athletes – Top 3 Pros and Cons

ARCHIVED WEBSITE

This topic was archived on Mar. 22, 2024, in light of recent developments. A reconsideration of the topic is possible in the future. 

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) is a nonprofit organization formed in 1906 that regulates college athletics, including game rules, athlete eligibility, and college tournaments. [ 1 ] As of Mar. 2021, the NCAA was composed of “[n]early half a million college athletes [who] make up the 19,886 teams that send more than 57,661 participants to compete each year in the NCAA’s 90 championships in 24 sports across 3 divisions.” [ 1 ] [ 2 ]

The NCAA is seemingly the final authority to decide whether college athletes should be paid to play college sports. However, in 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Play Act that allows college athletes to hire agents, sign endorsement deals, and be paid for the use of their likeness. [ 3 ]

California was the first state to pass a NIL (name, image, and likeness) law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2023. But California was quickly followed by more states. As of June 10, 2021, 18 states have passed NIL laws; five more states have passed bills that were awaiting the governor’s signature to become law; 14 states have introduced NIL bills; and one state has a bill passed by the Senate and awaiting a House vote, according to the Business of College Sports. [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ] [ 42 ]

The NCAA was scheduled to vote on new NIL rules in Jan. 2021, but it then postponed the vote, citing “external factors.” [ 10 ] Days before the scheduled vote Makan Delrahim, JD, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice under the Trump administration, questioned the proposed rules’ compliance with antitrust laws. [ 11 ]

Additionally, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear a case (National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Shawne Alston, et al.) about whether the NCAA is violating antitrust laws by restricting college athletes’ compensation. [ 12 ] The Supreme Court heard arguments on Mar. 31, 2021 as the NCAA March Madness tournament heads into Final Four games just days later on Apr. 3. Respondents were split 50/50 in a June 1, 2021 New York Times survey about whether the NCAA strictly limiting paid compensation is constitutional. [ 13 ] [ 14 ] [ 41 ]

Gabe Feldman, JD, Professor of Sports Law, Director of the Sports Law Program and Associate Provost for NCAA compliance at Tulane University, noted that the last time the NCAA was at the Supreme Court was in 1984 (NCAA vs. the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma). The ruling changed the broadcast regulations for college football. Feldman explained, “That was a shape-shifting decision that in many ways fundamentally changed economics of college football and college football television. And ever since that 1984 decision, courts have been relying on that language to try to interpret antitrust law applies to all NCAA restrictions, including player compensation.” [ 15 ]

On June 21, 2021, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the NCAA cannot ban certain payments to student athletes under the premise of maintaining amateurism. Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, stated, “traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.” [ 43 ] [ 44 ]

On June 28, 2021, the NCAA Division I Council recommended to the NCAA Division I Board of Directors that student athletes be allowed to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Schools would not be allowed to pay students and no one could offer compensation for students to attend a particular school. If adopted, the rule would only apply to Division I schools and would be temporary until the NCAA or Congress acts. [ 45 ]

On June 30, 2021, fewer than 12 hours before some states’ NIL laws went into effect, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors issued an interim ruling stating that Bylaw 12 (the rules that say athletes cannot receive payment) will not be enforced. Divisions II and III of the NCAA followed suit and the changes went into effect for all three divisions on July 1, 2021. [ 46 ]

The University of North Carolina became the first school to organize group licensing deals for student athletes in July 2021. UNC athletes will be able to earn money for NIL marketing including UNC trademarks and logos in groups of three or more athletes. For example, a student athlete will be compensated for the sale of a jersey featuring their name, or for a sponsorship deal in which they appear wearing a UNC jersey. Group licensing deals in theory can allow lesser-known players to reap the benefits of appearing alongside a well-known player. [ 47 ]

By Jan. 2022, without a clear NIL structure from the NCAA, some schools were questioning how to navigate deals for players or whole teams without violating NCAA policy. [ 48 ]

NCAA president Charlie Baker sent a letter on Dec. 5, 2023, to the 362 Division I member schools calling for reformations including creating a separate division for the top-earning schools that would mimic professional sports and updating NIL regulations so female athletes could better benefit. The rule changes will have to be considered by the NCAA governing boards, a process which could take up to a year. [ 50 ]

A 2019 Seton Hall Sports Poll found that 60% of those surveyed agreed that college athletes should be allowed compensation for their name, image, and/or likeness, while 32% disagreed, and 8% were unsure. This was quite a change from polling conducted in 2017, when 60% believed college scholarships were enough compensation for college athletes. [ 16 ]

Should Colleges and Universities Pay College Athletes?

Pro 1 The NCAA, colleges, and universities profit unfairly from the work and likenesses of college athletes. The NCAA reported over $1.06 billion in revenue in 2017 (the most recent available numbers). In 2018, NCAA president Mark Emmert was paid more than $2.7 million. Nine other NCAA executives were paid more than $500,000 in 2018, with one paid more than $1.3 million. [ 18 ] [ 19 ] Michael Sokolove, author of The Last Temptation of Rick Pitino (2018), explained, “If you look at a program like [University of] Louisville, …they generate about $45 million a year in revenue. They give out 13 scholarships. That adds up to about $400,000 a year. The rest of it gets spread out to the coach, who makes $8 million a year, to the assistant coaches, who make as much as a half-million dollars a year. All throughout the athletic department, people are making six-figure salaries. It does not go to the players, what I call the unpaid workforce.” [ 3 ] As of Nov. 17, 2020, the University of Alabama head football coach Nick Saban was the highest paid NCAA college football coach, making $9.3 million per year. 81 other head football coaches made more than $1 million annually and another 29 more than $500,000. [ 20 ] The highest paid men’s basketball coach was the University of Kentucky head coach, John Calipari, who was paid $8.2 million per year. 69 other head men’s basketball coaches were paid more than $1 million annually, and another three more than $500,000. [ 20 ] Michigan coach Jim Harbaugh, who was forecast to earn about $11 million in 2023, says, “I would take less money for the players to have a share. I hope other coaches would use their voice to express the same thing.” [ 50 ] College athletes, arguably the stars of the show who earn millions year after year for the well-paid NCAA executives, coaches, and staff, were forbidden by the NCAA from not only being paid for their work-, but from seeking other related compensation such as endorsement deals. And, as John I. Jenkins and Jack Swarbrick, President and Athletics Director of Notre Dame University argue, “We have been vocal in our conviction that student-athletes should be allowed to… profit from their celebrity — for one simple reason: Other students are allowed to. If a college student is a talented artist or musician no one begrudges him the chance to make money from his skills. And athletes should as far as possible have the opportunities other students enjoy.” [ 49 ] Read More

Pro 2 College athletes are risking their bodies as well as their future careers and earning potential to play for colleges and universities while often receiving a sub-par education. Governor of California Gavin Newsom, stated, “Collegiate student athletes put everything on the line — their physical health, future career prospects and years of their lives to compete. Colleges reap billions from these student athletes’ sacrifices and success but, in the same breath, block them from earning a single dollar. That’s a bankrupt model.” [ 3 ] Zachary Kerr, PhD, Researcher at the University of North Carolina’s Center for the Study of Retired Athletes, stated, “I definitely think research indicates strong evidence that injuries during one’s sports career can potentially be associated with adverse health outcomes later in life.” [ 21 ] In 2017, 67% of former Division I athletes had sustained a major injury and 50% had chronic injuries, 2.5% higher than non-athletes. [ 21 ] Azmatullah Hussaini, MD, President of the New York/New Jersey chapter of the American Muslim Health Professionals, and Jules Lipoff, MD, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, offered additional context: especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, “[g]iven that athletes are disproportionately Black in the biggest revenue-generating sports — football and basketball — this dynamic also evokes America’s horrific history of unpaid slave labor. It’s hard to ignore the racist undertones when the financial benefit to these institutions is based on the unpaid work of young Black men.” [ 22 ] The NCAA requires players to have health insurance but does not pay for that insurance and can refuse to pay medical expenses for sports injuries, some of which can have life-long consequences for the players’ bodies and career opportunities. The NCAA also does not prohibit schools from canceling injured athletes’ scholarships, leaving athletes without a sport or education. [ 23 ] Adding insult to sometimes literal injury, college athletes are also frequently denied the NCAA’s other form of “compensation”: a quality education. As Jon Solomon, Editorial Director for the Sports and Society Program at the Aspen Institute explained, “The most glaring example occurred when the University of North Carolina was found by outside parties to have organized fake classes that enabled dozens of athletes to gain and maintain their eligibility… of the 3,100 students who took the fake classes over 18 years, 47.4 percent were athletes… North Carolina avoided NCAA penalties by essentially arguing that the NCAA should stay out of irregularities in college courses.” [ 24 ] The NCAA polices athletes’ finances but does not ensure a quality education. Read More

Pro 3 College athletes are often valued at more than $1 million, but they (and their families) frequently live below the poverty line. A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the top two college football positions–the quarterback and wide receiver–were worth $2.4 million and $1.3 million per year respectively, while starting men’s basketball players in the Power Five schools were worth between $800,000 and $1.2 million per year. [ 25 ] [ 26 ] If college players earned about 50% of their teams’ revenues like the NFL and NBA players do, the average football player’s yearly salary would be $360,000 and the average basketball player’s yearly salary would be $500,000. [ 25 ] [ 26 ] The study found that “[t]he player-level analysis reveals that the existing limits on player compensation effectively transfers resources away from students who are more likely to be black and more likely to come from poor neighborhoods towards students who are more likely to be white and come from higher-income neighborhoods.” [ 25 ] College athletes are required to make up the difference between NCAA scholarships and the actual cost of living. Tuition shortfalls amount to thousands of dollars per year and leave about 85% of players to live below the poverty line. For example, fair market value for a University of Texas football player was $513,922. However, players lived $778 below the federal poverty line and owed $3,624 in tuition. [ 27 ] About 25% of Division I athletes reported food poverty in the past year and almost 14% reported being homeless in the past year. Erin McGeoy, a former water polo athlete at George Washington University, explained, “a common occurrence was that we would run out of meal money halfway through the semester and that’s when I started to run into troubles of food insecurity.” She turned to boarding dogs in her no-dogs-allowed apartment in order to pay rent because housing costs increased each year but her housing allowance remained static. [ 28 ] The NCAA keeps players in poverty and denied them ways to earn money, while making millions on their performance. Read More

Con 1 Scholarships are fair financial compensation for college athletes, especially considering the precarious finances of athletic departments. According to the NCAA, the organization provides “more than $3.6 billion in athletic scholarships annually to more than 180,000 student-athletes.” Divided equitably, each student would receive about $20,000 per year. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the average total cost of public college (tuition, fees, room, and board) for the 2017–18 academic year was $17,797. Considering other scholarships and aid are widely available and not all college athletes require financial aid, the NCAA scholarships are generous. [ 29 ] [ 30 ] Further, most college programs do not generate the income needed to run their athletic programs, much less pay athletes. In fiscal year 2019, the collective expenses of the 65 Power Five schools–the largest and richest Division I schools in the NCAA–exceeded revenue by $7 million. Other Division I schools had an almost $23 million collective difference between revenue and expenses. No Division II or III schools’ revenue exceeded expenses. [ 31 ] If students were paid, the NCAA argues, many colleges and universities would have to offer fewer scholarships and the remaining scholarships would be distributed unfairly to top football and men’s basketball players because those two sports bring in the most revenue. Schools would also have to cut unprofitable sports including gymnastics, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, and wrestling. [ 32 ] Discrepancies between men’s and women’s sports such as the weight room during the 2021 NCAA basketball tournament would only worsen. [ 40 ] Paying players would also limit the literal and figurative playing fields to elite universities with large budgets. As John Thelin, PhD, Research Professor of History of Higher Education & Public Policy at the University of Kentucky, explained, “paying salaries to players will increase [athletic] program expenditures without necessarily increasing revenues… [and] a handful of powerful programs will stand to gain in competition for athletic talent simply because they can afford to pay salaries. Others will mimic as they try to keep up but eventually will fall short in trying to outbid Auburn University, Florida State, the University of Southern California or the University of Texas in the college player arms race.” [ 33 ] Read More

Con 2 Very few college athletes will go pro, so athletes should take advantage of the education being offered in exchange for playing a college sport. The reality is that the vast majority of college athletes will never play professionally. Of the 36,011 college baseball players, only 8,002 are eligible to play professionally each year. 1,217 will be draft picks, but only 791 will be drafted yearly, meaning about 9.9% of college baseball players will go pro, which is the largest likelihood in NCAA sports. [ 34 ] The major money-makers, football and men’s basketball, have very low odds. Of the 73,712 NCAA football players, about 16,380 are draft-eligible and 254 will be drafted, meaning about 1.2% of college football players will go pro. Of the 18,816 male basketball players, 4,181 are draft-eligible and 60 will be drafted, but only 52 will go pro, or a 1.2% chance a college basketball player will play professionally. The odds are even lower for women’s basketball at 0.6%. [ 34 ] The NCAA noted, “[p]rofessional opportunities are extremely limited and the likelihood of a high school or even college athlete becoming a professional athlete is very low. In contrast, the likelihood of an NCAA athlete earning a college degree is significantly greater; graduation success rates are 86% in Division I, 71% in Division II and 87% in Division III.” [ 34 ] In other words, it would be more prudent and more profitable for college athletes to focus on education as their compensation. Data analyzed from the Department of Labor showed nine out of 10 new jobs were going to employees with college degrees in June 2018. [ 35 ] Further, a Gallup poll of “74,385 U.S. adults with a bachelor’s degree, finds that college graduates who participated in NCAA athletics experience a host of positive long-term life outcomes at greater rates than non-athletes.” [ 36 ] Those positive outcomes include: 70% of NCAA athletes graduated in four years or fewer, 50% agree that college was worth the cost, 39% earned an advanced degree, 33% have “good” jobs after graduation, and 24% “are thriving at the highest levels,” all higher percentages than their non-athlete peers. [ 36 ] Amy Perko, CEO of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, said of the Gallup findings, “It’s a positive report for the educational benefits for college sports, and it reinforces the point that we’ve tried to make over the years. There’s an important role for college sports in higher education, and that role needs to be placed in the proper perspective as part of the educational mission, not apart from it.” [ 37 ] Read More

Con 3 Paying college athletes would not solve the real problem: the American amateur sports system is broken. Football and basketball players cannot play professionally immediately after high school. The NBA requires players to be at least 19 and a year out of high school, while the NFL requires players to be three years out of high school. [ 38 ] These rules can effectively limit players’ options to playing in college or choosing another profession altogether. Most players have no real “amateur” sport option and those who would rather not go to college have no other established feeder system to make it to a professional team. Further confusing the issue, the NCAA does not have a consistent or fair definition of “amateurism” and allows some significant forms of financial compensation. College athletes are allowed to compete in the Olympic Games and be financially compensated, such as Joseph Schooling, a University of Texas swimmer, who earned a $740,000 bonus for winning Singapore’s first gold medal ever at the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Summer Games for the 100m butterfly. College athletes may also play a second sport professionally and be compensated, such as Clemson quarterback Kyle Parker who earned a $1.4 million baseball signing bonus from the Colorado Rockies in 2010 while still playing football for the Tigers. Tennis players may earn up to $10,000 in prize money yearly while playing college tennis and college football players may earn up to $550 in bowl gifts. [ 24 ] B. David Ridpath, EdD, Associate Professor of Sports Administration at Ohio University, noted, “The only amateur quality about college athletics is that colleges refuse to pay their players.” Ridpath explained, “The United States is the only country in the world that has a significant portion of elite athletic development and commercialized sport embedded within its education systems. Consider that ten of the biggest outdoor sports stadiums in the world (excluding auto racing venues) are American college football stadiums. None of the largest ones are NFL stadiums.” [ 39 ] To fix the problem, and separate athletes who are getting an education just because they want to play a sport from those who actually want to go to college, the United States needs a true amateur or minor league that feeds into professional sports. Read More

Discussion Questions

1. Should college athletes be paid? Why or why not?

2. Should the college athletics system be revised in another way to compensate amateur athletes? Explain your answer.

3. How should the NCAA (or another governing body) balance college athletes’ sport, educational, and financial interests? Explain your answer(s).

4. Do you think well-established minor-league systems would be attractive to high-school graduates and college athletes less interested in (or ill-prepared for) higher education? Explain your answer(s).

Take Action

1. Consider the pro position of the National College Players Association that paying college athletes is a civil rights issue.

2. Explore the NCAA site and think critically about the organization as the governing body of college athletics.

3. Analyze the argument that paying athletes would “ruin college sports” from Cody J. McDavis , former college basketball player.

4. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.

5. Push for the position and policies you support by writing US national senators and representatives .

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

© 2023 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved

• Social Media
• Death Penalty
• School Uniforms
• Video Games
• Animal Testing
• Gun Control
• Banned Books
• Teachers’ Corner

Cite This Page

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

The Case for Paying College Athletes

The case against paying college athletes, the era of name, image, and likeness (nil) profiting, legal action against the ncaa, the bottom line, why college athletes are being paid.

In 2024 the NCAA signed off on a proposal to pay student athletes, but challenges remain

Thearon W. Henderson / Getty Images

Should college athletes be able to make money from their sport? When the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) was founded in 1906, the organization’s answer was a firm “no,” as it sought to “ensure amateurism in college sports.”

Despite the NCAA’s official stance, the question has long been debated among college athletes, coaches, sports fans, and the American public. The case for financial compensation saw major developments in June 2021, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA cannot limit colleges from offering student-athletes “education-related benefits.”

In response, the NCAA issued an interim policy stating that its student-athletes were permitted to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL) , but not to earn a salary. This policy will remain in place until a more “permanent solution” can be found in conjunction with Congress.

Meanwhile, the landscape continues to shift, with new cases, decisions, and state legislation being brought forward. In 2024, the NCAA signed off on a proposed settlement in response to a class-action anti-trust lawsuit. If finalized, the deal would see the NCAA pay out nearly $2.8 billion to 14,000 current and former student-athletes over the next decade, starting as soon as fall 2025. However, the proposed deal would allow schools to pay out athletes in the future, but would not require it.

College athletes are currently permitted to receive “cost of attendance” stipends (up to approximately $6,000), unlimited education-related benefits, and awards. A 2023 survey found that 67% of U.S. adults favor paying college athletes with direct compensation.

Key Takeaways

• Despite the NCAA reporting nearly $1.3 billion in revenue in 2023, student-athletes are restricted to limited means of compensation.
• Although college sports regularly generate valuable publicity and billions of dollars in revenue for schools, even the highest-grossing college athletes tend to see only a small fraction of this.
• One argument for paying college athletes is the significant time commitment that their sport requires, which can impact their ability to earn income and divert time and energy away from academic work.
• Student-athletes may face limited prospects after college for a variety of reasons, including a high risk of injury, fierce competition to enter professional leagues, and lower-than-average graduation rates.
• The practical challenges of determining and administering compensation, as well as the potential impacts on players and schools still need to be worked out.
• A settlement proposed in 2024 between the NCAA and the five biggest conferences (the Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, SEC, and Pac-12) would allow schools to pay athletes, but wouldn't require it.

There are numerous arguments in support of paying college athletes, many of which focus on ameliorating the athletes’ potential risks and negative impacts. Here are some of the typical arguments in favor of more compensation.

Financial Disparity

College sports generate billions of dollars in revenue for networks, sponsors, and institutions (namely schools and the NCAA). There is considerable money to be made from advertising and publicity, historically, most of which has not benefited those whose names, images, and likenesses are featured within it.

Of the 2019 NCAA Division I revenues ($15.8 billion in total), only 18.2% was returned to athletes through scholarships, medical treatment, and insurance. Additionally, any other money that goes back to college athletes is not distributed equally. An analysis of players by the National Bureau of Economic Research found major disparities between sports and players.

Nearly 50% of men’s football and basketball teams, the two highest revenue-generating college sports, are made up of Black players. However, these sports subsidize a range of other sports (such as men’s golf and baseball, and women’s basketball, soccer, and tennis) where only 11% of players are Black and which also tend to feature players from higher-income neighborhoods. In the end, financial redistribution between sports effectively funnels resources away from students who are more likely to be Black and come from lower-income neighborhoods toward those who are more likely to be White and come from higher-income neighborhoods.

Exposure and Marketing Value

Colleges’ finances can benefit both directly and indirectly from their athletic programs. The “Flutie Effect,” named after Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie, is an observed phenomenon whereby college applications and enrollments seem to increase after an unexpected upset victory or national football championship win by that college’s team. Researchers have also suggested that colleges that spend more on athletics may attract greater allocations of state funding and boost private donations to institutions.

Meanwhile, the marketing of college athletics is valued in the millions to billions of dollars. In 2023, the NCAA generated nearly $1.3 billion in revenue, $945.1 million of which came from media rights fees. In 2023, earnings from March Madness represented more than 80% of the NCAA’s total revenue. Through this, athletes give schools major exposure and allow them to rack up huge revenues, which argues for making sure the players benefit, too.

Opportunity Cost, Financial Needs, and Risk of Injury

Because participation in college athletics represents a considerable commitment of time and energy, it necessarily takes away from academic and other pursuits, such as part-time employment. In addition to putting extra financial pressure on student-athletes, this can impact athletes’ studies and career outlook after graduation, particularly for those who can’t continue playing after college, whether due to injury or the immense competition to be accepted into a professional league.

Earning an income from sports and their significant time investment could be a way to diminish the opportunity cost of participating in them. This is particularly true in case of an injury that can have a long-term effect on an athlete’s future earning potential.

Arguments against paying college athletes tend to focus on the challenges and implications of a paid-athlete system. Here are some of the most common objections to paying college athletes.

Existing Scholarships

Opponents of a paid-athlete system tend to point to the fact that some college athletes already receive scholarships , some of which cover the cost of their tuition and other academic expenses in full. These are already intended to compensate athletes for their work and achievements.

Financial Implications for Schools

One of the main arguments against paying college athletes is the potential financial strain on colleges and universities. The majority of Division I college athletics departments’ expenditures actually surpass their revenues, with schools competing for players by hiring high-profile coaches, constructing state-of-the-art athletics facilities, and offering scholarships and awards.

With the degree of competition to attract talented athletes so high, some have pointed out that if college athletes were to be paid a salary on top of existing scholarships, it might unfairly burden those schools that recruit based on the offer of a scholarship.

‘Amateurism’ and the Challenges of a Paid-Athlete System

Historically, the NCAA has sought to promote and preserve a spirit of “amateurism” in college sports, on the basis that fans would be less interested in watching professional athletes compete in college sports, and that players would be less engaged in their academic studies and communities if they were compensated with anything other than scholarships.

The complexity of determining levels and administration of compensation across an already uneven playing field also poses a practical challenge. What would be the implications concerning Title IX legislation, for example, since there is already a disparity between male and female athletes and sports when it comes to funding, resources, opportunities, compensation, and viewership?

Another challenge is addressing the earnings potential of different sports (as many do not raise revenues comparable to high-profile sports like men’s football and basketball) or of individual athletes on a team. Salary disparities would almost certainly affect team morale and drive further competition between schools to bid for the best athletes.

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA violated antitrust laws with its rules around compensation, holding that the NCAA’s current rules were “more restrictive than necessary” and that the NCAA could no longer “limit education-related compensation or benefits” for Division I football and basketball players.

In response, the NCAA released an interim policy allowing college athletes to benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) , essentially providing the opportunity for players to profit off their personal brand through social media and endorsement deals. States then introduced their own rules around NIL, as did individual schools, whose coaches or compliance departments maintain oversight of NIL deals and the right to object to them in case of conflict with existing agreements.

Other court cases against the NCAA have resulted in legislative changes that now allow students to receive “cost of attendance” stipends up to a maximum of around $6,000 as well as unlimited education-related benefits and awards.

The future of NIL rules and student-athlete compensation remains to be seen. According to the NCAA, the intention is to “develop a national law that will help colleges and universities, student-athletes, and their families better navigate the name, image, and likeness landscape.” However, no timeline has been specified as of yet.

In 2020, former Arizona State swimmer Grant House and former TCU/Oregon basketball player Sedona Prince filed an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA for refusing to allow NIL payments for athletes prior to 2021. They claimed that the five biggest conferences (the ACC, the Big 10, the Big 12, the Pac-12, and the SEC) work in tandem with the NCAA to exploit the labor of student-athletes and limit the compensation that they can receive, and that the NCAA's limitations on NIL and their control over TV markets obstructs athletes from receiving their fair share of market value.

The NCAA was also involved in two other antitrust cases, Hubbard vs. the NCAA and Carter vs. the NCAA, seeking damages on behalf of athletes.

In July 2024, formal settlement documents were filed with the Northern District Court of California to resolve all three cases. If finalized, the deal would see the NCAA direct nearly $2.8 billion to 14,000 current and former student-athletes over the next 10 years, with payments beginning as soon as fall 2025. However, while the proposed deal would allow schools to pay out athletes in the future, it would not require it. Other important details are yet to be determined as well, such as whether the new compensation model would be subject to Title IX laws.

In their official statement, the A5 conference commissioners and NCAA president expressed the following: "This is another important step in the ongoing effort to provide increased benefits to student-athletes while creating a stable and sustainable model for the future of college sports. While there is still much work to be done in the settlement approval process, this is a significant step toward establishing clarity for the future of all of Division I athletics while maintaining a lasting education-based model for college sports, ensuring the opportunity for student-athletes to earn a degree and the tools necessary to be successful in life after sports."

However, they also noted that the settlement "does not resolve the patchwork of state laws, many of which may conflict with the settlement," and that "these laws will need to be preempted by federal legislation in order for the settlement to be effective."

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid?

Common arguments in support of paying college athletes tend to focus on players’ financial needs, their high risk of injury, and the opportunity cost they face (especially in terms of academic achievement, part-time work, and long-term financial and career outlook). Proponents of paying college athletes also point to the extreme disparity between the billion-dollar revenues of schools and the NCAA and current player compensation.

Is It Illegal for College Athletes to Get Paid?

Although the NCAA once barred student-athletes from earning money from their sport, the rules around compensating college athletes are changing. In 2021, the NCAA released an interim policy permitting college athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL) through social media and endorsement and sponsorship deals. In 2024, the NCAA reached a settlement on a series of anti-trust lawsuits that, if approved, would pay out nearly $2.8 billion in damages to current and former athletes and allow them to be paid in the future. However, current regulations and laws vary by state.

What Percentage of Americans Support Paying College Athletes?

In 2023, a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults found that 67% of respondents were in favor of paying college athletes with direct compensation. Sixty-four percent said they supported athletes’ rights to obtain employee status, and 59% supported their right to collectively bargain as a labor union .

The NCAA is under growing pressure to share its billion-dollar revenues with the athletes it profits from. In 2024, they reached a proposed settlement to address three different anti-trust lawsuits, which, if approved, would have them pay out nearly $2.8 billion in damages to current and former student-athletes, and would change the guidelines around how, and how much college athletes should be paid.

Many of the implications of these changing policies are still unclear, but future rules and legislation will need to take into account the financial impact on schools and athletes , the value of exposure and marketing, pay equity and employment rights, pay administration, and the nature of the relationship between college athletes and the institutions they represent.

NCAA. “ History .”

Marquette Sports Law Review. “ Weakening Its Own Defense? The NCAA’s Version of Amateurism ,” Page 260 (Page 5 of PDF).

U.S. Supreme Court. “ National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston et al. ”

NCAA. “ NCAA Adopts Interim Name, Image and Likeness Policy .”

AP News. " Paying College Athletes Is Closer Than Ever. How Could It Work and What Stands in the Way? "

NBC. " NCAA Signs Off on Deal That Would Change Landscape of College Sports - Paying Student-Athletes ."

PBS NewsHour. “ Analysis: Who Is Winning in the High-Revenue World of College Sports? ”

Sportico. “ 67% of Americans Favor Paying College Athletes: Sportico/Harris Poll .”

Sportico. “ NCAA Took in Record Revenue in 2023 on Investment Jump .”

National Bureau of Economic Research. “ Revenue Redistribution in Big-Time College Sports .”

Appalachian State University, Walker College of Business. “ The Flutie Effect: The Influence of College Football Upsets and National Championships on the Quantity and Quality of Students at a University .”

Sportico. " NCAA's Cash Cow Remains (for Now) Amid Wholesale Change ."

Grand Canyon University. “ Should College Athletes Be Paid? ”

Flagler College Gargoyle. “ Facing Inequality On and Off the Court: The Disparities Between Male and Female Athletes .”

U.S. Department of Education. “ Title IX and Sex Discrimination .”

Congressional Research Service Reports. “ National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston and the Debate Over Student Athlete Compensation .”

NCSA College Recruiting. “ NCAA Name, Image, Likeness Rule .”

Duke University Chronicle. " Breaking Down the House v. NCAA Settlement and the Possible Future of Revenue Sharing in College Athletics ."

NCAA. " Settlement Documents Filed in College Athletics Class-Action Lawsuits ."

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy

College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid? Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

College sport becomes more popular with the public because of its entertaining and mass character. Furthermore, college sport is a necessary part of the American youth’s culture. That is why the problematic questions associated with the aspects of college sport attract the large audience to discussing the issues.

Today, the question of paying college athletes salaries is actively discussed within the society because the profits gained by athletes for their teams and colleges increase regularly. From this point, the issue is in the necessity to encourage the athletes’ activities and provide them with some merits. Many researchers state that it is unfairly for colleges to gain all the possible benefits from the athletes’ successful performance without paying salaries (Johnson).

Nevertheless, it is also impossible to speak about the absence of financial benefits for the athletes because there are different kinds of special scholarships provided by colleges for their student-athletes. Thus, college athletes should not be paid because they receive their wages in the form of scholarships, college sport cannot be compared with the commercialized professional sports industry, and there is no effective system to provide athletes with salaries according to their efforts and performance.

The supporters of the idea to provide college athletes with salaries develop their arguments referring to the necessity to guarantee the students’ compensation for successful performance. However, student-athletes receive their regular scholarships without any dependence on performance in this or that season.

This scholarship is rather advantageous for them because it provides financial assistance and accentuates their role for the college’s development with references to the sports successes. College athletes can generate significant annual revenues for college teams, but different colleges perform differently in competitions.

From this point, the dependence of regular salaries on the athletes and team’s performance can be discussed as a kind of discrimination (Donaldson). That is why all the student-athletes receive the fixed scholarships which can vary about definite bonuses. Thus, the system based on scholarships can be discussed as more effective and advantageous for students about their successes as sportsmen.

It is possible to speak about only additional payments and bonuses for successful athletes without changing the current system of scholarships.Furthermore, those athletes who begin to receive wages for their performance should be discussed as professional sportsmen for whom sport is a kind of job.

College athletes are amateurs who can be successful or not in their performance. The necessity to pay each college athlete can be rather risky for many colleges where the sport is not developed. Moreover, the utilization of significant financial resources in colleges in the form of athletes’ wages is the source for increasing the corruption within the educational institutions (Johnson).

Sport in college is the part of the educational program, and it cannot be discussed as part of the commercialized industry with references to the professional sport. College athletes are not professionals in spite of the fact their sport results can be rather high.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) does not support the idea of paying students for their sports successes because it is necessary to follow the standard rules of paying any wages for all the colleges and all the athletes without references to their performance (Johnson).

Colleges’ merits in relation to the athletes’ successes are different, and “it would be a burden for the majority of schools that don’t profit from athletics”, and moreover, “paying players could also introduce legal uncertainties ranging from the impact on Title IX to questions about workers compensation and unionization” (Cohen).

Thus, the new approach to the whole system of funding colleges and paying students is necessary. However, it is possible to speak about the professional career of a sportsman after graduating from college without concentrating on similar issues.

The implementation of a new system of paying college athletes should be developed with references to such important questions as the principles of distribution of resources among the athletes and the position of colleges which do not receive any profits from their college athletes.

It is significant to pay attention to the fact that only several colleges can gain real benefits from college sports competitions because of the high performance of their teams. The majority of college teams do not demonstrate extremely high results to provide their colleges with billions of profits. That is why, it is more rationally to discuss the question of paying students locally, basing on the definite bonus system.

If student-athletes are paid for their performance, they become equal in their status to professional sportsmen. From this perspective, the situation of providing students with special wages and regular salaries can influence the change in accents within the educational system.

It is important to avoid the evolution of the college sport into commerce, market, and the professional sports industry. Although the participation of athletes in college sports competitions which can provide the college with profits can be discussed as exploitation, the balance is preserved because of providing students’ scholarships for athletes.

Works Cited

Cohen, Ben. The Case for Paying College Athletes . 2011.

Donaldson, James. Standing above the Crowd: Execute Your Game Plan to Become the Best You Can Be . USA: Trinadigm, 2011. Print.

Johnson, Dennis. Point/Counterpoint: Paying College Athletes . 2012.

• What Are Fan Behaviors Towards Sports Officials at the Middle School Level?
• Adventure Recreation
• Student-Athletes Compensation: Utilitarian View
• Commercialized Media and Cultural System on Prevailing Power Structure
• Recalling the Great UNC Sports Scandal
• Cycling Culture in France
• The Structural Sources of the Issue of ‘Juiced’ Athletes According to Mills’ Theory
• Professional Sports Governance Issue
• Hockey Violence Intervention
• Sport can be local and global
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, March 11). College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid? https://ivypanda.com/essays/college-athletics-should-college-athletes-be-paid/

"College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid?" IvyPanda , 11 Mar. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/college-athletics-should-college-athletes-be-paid/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid'. 11 March.

IvyPanda . 2020. "College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid?" March 11, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/college-athletics-should-college-athletes-be-paid/.

1. IvyPanda . "College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid?" March 11, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/college-athletics-should-college-athletes-be-paid/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid?" March 11, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/college-athletics-should-college-athletes-be-paid/.

Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay: Useful Arguments and Sources

Did you know that college sports generate billions of dollars in revenue each year? Yet, the athletes who dedicate countless hours to their craft often receive no financial compensation for their efforts. This has sparked a heated debate on whether college athletes should be paid for their contributions to their respective sports programs. Writing a Should College Athletes Be Paid essay is a good way to delve into the controversial topic and explore the various arguments surrounding this issue.

Arguments in Favor of Paying College Athletes

Here are three most compelling arguments to support the idea of paying for playing:

• The time commitment and sacrifices made by athletes . College athletes dedicate countless hours to their sport, often sacrificing their personal lives and academic pursuits. They endure grueling training sessions, travel extensively for competitions, and face immense pressure to perform at their best. These commitments can significantly impact their ability to excel academically and enjoy a well-rounded college experience.
• The financial benefits colleges and universities reap from athletics. Colleges and universities generate substantial revenue from their athletic programs. Ticket sales, merchandise, and television contracts contribute to the financial success of these institutions. Without the talent and hard work of the athletes, the financial gains enjoyed by colleges and universities would not be possible.
• The potential for exploitation and unfair treatment of athletes. College athletes may be required to sign contracts that limit their rights and control their image, preventing them from profiting from their own success. Additionally, the intense physical demands can lead to injuries that may have long-term consequences, without adequate compensation or support.

Other arguments to support this idea is a strong public support and the fact that colleges get not only financial benefits, but also use sports to attract non-athlete students and donors.

Counter Arguments Against Paying College Athletes

Below are the counterarguments against paying college athletes, which can be useful for writing your essay:

• The value of a college education and scholarships. First, the value of a college education and scholarships is a crucial point to consider. Many argue that the opportunity to receive a free education and valuable scholarships is already a form of compensation for athletes.
• The potential impact on college athletes’ motivation to study . If college athletes are approached as employees who are paid to play, their academic obligations may be taken less seriously.
• The potential financial strain on smaller athletic programs . These programs often operate on limited budgets and rely heavily on revenue generated by larger sports programs. Introducing payment for athletes would require additional funds to be allocated towards compensating these individuals, which could result in reduced resources for other aspects of the athletic program.

Alternative Solutions and Compromises

An interesting angle for a Should College Students Be Paid essay is to refuse from YES/NO stances and suggest alternative policies that will account for the associated shortcomings and risks. Four potential solutions that been discussed as a good alternative, and some of these have already been implemented:

• Allowing athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness (the right eventually granted to college athletes in 2021 );
• Enhanced scholarship opportunities for athletes, including improved healthcare, academic support, and career development programs (In the same year of 2021, NCAA was prohibited to limit education-related compensation that colleges offer athletes, including computers and internships)
• Implementing revenue-sharing models that will distribute a portion of the profits generated by college sports programs to student-athletes;
• Establishing trust funds to provide financial support to athletes after their college careers, ensuring long-term benefits.

This alternative approach acknowledges the dedication and hard work of athletes and enables profit-generating opportunities, while maintaining the distinction between amateur and professional sports.

How to Write a Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay

Here is how to write a good essay on the topic Should College Athletes Be Paid step by step:

1. Find Credible Sources and Know Your Stance

Look for credible sources discussing pros and cons of paying college athletes and/or presenting other relevant facts to decide what your personal attitude to the topic is and have quality sources that will help you support your argument.

Here are some great sources to start with:

Why The Public Strongly Supports Paying College Athletes

Britannica: Pro and Con: Paying College Athletes

At Risk: Are Unpaid College Athletes Exploited While Others Reap Millions?

College athletes are unpaid. What if injury ruins their chance of turning pro?

Google Scholar database search for the latest studies related to the topic

2. Write an Introduction

Write an engaging essay introduction paragraph . It is good to start with background information about the NCAA and its regulations and the financial landscape of college sports. You appeal to readers’ emotions and thus make your essay more persuasive by starting an essay with a personal story of a sportsman.

Mind that you’ll need to use a different story, depending on what side you’re on. If you suggest that college students should be paid, look for the stories of injuries that didn’t let a promising college athlete excel in sports and get a well-deserved revenue after graduating from the college. If your main argument is that the opportunity to receive a free education and valuable scholarships is already a good form of compensation, tell a story of an athlete from a low-income background who received a good education thanks to achievements in sports but chose not to pursue a career as a sportsman.

3. Write a Strong Thesis Statement

Your introduction paragraph should finish with a thesis statement – a sentence that shows your position on the controversial topic and gives a roadmap to your argument.

For example, good thesis statements for an essay advocating that college athletes should be paid would be:

“College athletes deserve to be compensated for their dedication, talent, and the immense revenue they generate for their institutions.”

“College athletes should be compensated for their participation in collegiate sports due to the high probability of injury and the substantial revenues generated for colleges.”

A strong thesis statement arguing against paying college athletes that presents three key arguments may be:

“While college athletes contribute greatly to the success and revenue generation of their respective institutions, they should not be paid due to the potential negative consequences it may have on the integrity of collegiate sports, the educational priorities of student-athletes, and the financial stability of smaller athletic programs.”

4. Write the Body of Your Essay

Now, develop each of your arguments in a separate paragraph. Begin a paragraph with a topical sentence presenting this argument. Then, develop the idea, presenting quotes from the sources and explaining their relevance in your own words. Restate what readers learnt in this paragraph and how it supports your general argument (thesis statement).

5. Write a Concluding Paragraph

Round up your essay by restating your arguments and showing the impact of following the route you have suggested. For example,

In conclusion, paying college athletes is a topic that warrants serious consideration. The time commitment and sacrifices made by athletes, the financial benefits colleges and universities receive from athletics, and the potential for exploitation and unfair treatment all highlight the need for a fair compensation system. By acknowledging the contributions and challenges faced by college athletes, NCAA and colleges can work towards creating a more equitable and supportive environment for these dedicated individuals.

All in all, whether you are a sports enthusiast, a student-athlete, or simply interested in the intersection of sports and academia, Should College Athletes be Paid is a great topic to choose for an essay. Examining the current state of college athletics, exploring arguments both for and against paying college athletes, and considering alternative solutions will help you be well-informed about the ongoing debate.

Good Transition Words for Essays: Enhancing Coherence and Flow

50 Problem Solution Essay Topics for College Students

50 Process Essay Topics for High School and College Students

Should College Athletes Be Paid: Pros, Cons, and Structure Tips for an Essay

How to Quote in an Essay: A Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

The American Dream Essay: Best Topics and Controversies to Consider

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

An Argument For Not Allowing College Athletes To Earn Compensation

NPR's Mary Louise Kelly speaks with Ekow Yankah, author of The New Yorker essay, "Why N.C.A.A. Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid," about the NCAA's decision to allow college athletes to earn compensation.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Pro and Con: Paying College Athletes

To access extended pro and con arguments, sources, discussion questions, and ways to take action on the issue of paying college athletes, go to ProCon.org .

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) is a nonprofit organization formed in 1906 that regulates college athletics, including game rules, athlete eligibility, and college tournaments. As of Mar. 2021, the NCAA was composed of “[n]early half a million college athletes [who] make up the 19,886 teams that send more than 57,661 participants to compete each year in the NCAA’s 90 championships in 24 sports across 3 divisions.”

The NCAA is seemingly the final authority to decide whether college athletes should be paid to play college sports. However, in 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Play Act that allows college athletes to hire agents, sign endorsement deals, and be paid for the use of their likeness.

California was the first state to pass a NIL (name, image, and likeness) law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2023. But the state was quickly followed by more states. As of June 10, 2021, 18 states have passed NIL laws; five more states have passed bills that were awaiting the governor’s signature to become law; 14 states have introduced NIL bills; and one state has a bill passed by the Senate and awaiting a House vote, according to the Business of College Sports . 

The NCAA was scheduled to vote on new NIL rules in Jan. 2021, but it then postponed the vote, citing “external factors.” Days before the scheduled vote Makan Delrahim, JD, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice under the Trump administration, questioned the proposed rules’ compliance with antitrust laws.

Additionally, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear a case (National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Shawne Alston, et al.) about whether the NCAA is violating antitrust laws by restricting college athletes’ compensation. The Supreme Court heard arguments on Mar. 31, 2021 as the NCAA March Madness tournament headed into Final Four games just days later, on Apr. 3. Respondents were split 50/50 in a June 1, 2021, New York Times survey about whether the NCAA strictly limiting paid compensation is constitutional.

Gabe Feldman, JD, Professor of Sports Law, Director of the Sports Law Program and Associate Provost for NCAA compliance at Tulane University, noted that the last time the NCAA was at the Supreme Court was in 1984 (NCAA vs. the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma). The ruling changed the broadcast regulations for college football. Feldman explained , “That was a shape-shifting decision that in many ways fundamentally changed economics of college football and college football television. And ever since that 1984 decision, courts have been relying on that language to try to interpret antitrust law applies to all NCAA restrictions, including player compensation.” 

On June 21, 2021, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the NCAA cannot ban certain payments to student athletes under the premise of maintaining amateurism. Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority , stated, “traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.”

On June 28, 2021, the NCAA Division I Council recommended to the NCAA Division I Board of Directors that student athletes be allowed to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Schools would not be allowed to pay students and no one could offer compensation for students to attend a particular school. If adopted, the rule would only apply to Division I schools and would be temporary until the NCAA or Congress acts.

On June 30, 2021, fewer than 12 hours before some states’ NIL laws went into effect, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors issued an interim ruling stating that Bylaw 12 (the rules that say athletes cannot receive payment) will not be enforced. Divisions II and III of the NCAA followed suit and the changes went into effect for all three divisions on July 1, 2021. 

The University of North Carolina became the first school to organize group licensing deals for student athletes in July 2021. UNC athletes will be able to earn money for NIL marketing including UNC trademarks and logos in groups of three or more athletes. For example, a student athlete will be compensated for the sale of a jersey featuring their name, or for a sponsorship deal in which they appear wearing a UNC jersey. Group licensing deals in theory can allow lesser-known players to reap the benefits of appearing alongside a well-known player.

By Jan. 2022, without a clear NIL structure from the NCAA, some schools were questioning how to navigate deals for players or whole teams without violating NCAA policy.

A 2019 Seton Hall Sports Poll found that 60% of those surveyed agreed that college athletes should be allowed compensation for their name, image, and/or likeness, while 32% disagreed, and 8% were unsure. This was quite a change from polling conducted in 2017, when 60% believed college scholarships were enough compensation for college athletes.

• The NCAA, colleges, and universities profit unfairly from the work and likenesses of college athletes.
• College athletes are risking their bodies as well as their future careers and earning potential to play for colleges and universities while often receiving a sub-par education.
• College athletes are often valued at more than $1 million, but they (and their families) frequently live below the poverty line.
• Scholarships are fair financial compensation for college athletes, especially considering the precarious finances of athletic departments.
• Very few college athletes will go pro, so athletes should take advantage of the education being offered in exchange for playing a college sport.
• Paying college athletes would not solve the real problem: the American amateur sports system is broken.

This article was published on January 21, 2022, at Britannica’s ProCon.org, a nonpartisan issue-information source. Go to ProCon.org to learn more.

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid, Essay Sample

One of the most pressing issues in college sports is the debate over whether or not college athletes should be paid. This topic has gained significant attention in recent years, with many arguing that it is only fair for college athletes to receive compensation for their hard work, dedication, and revenue-generating contributions. This free essay sample from Edusson will explore the various reasons why college athletes should be paid and will provide a comprehensive analysis of the issue.

Time Commitment and Workload

College athletes put in a tremendous amount of time and effort into their sport, often at the expense of their studies and personal life. As a student-athlete, I know firsthand the dedication it takes to balance academics and sports. We have rigorous practice schedules, intense training sessions, and games that require travel, leaving little time for anything else. Many athletes have to miss classes or sacrifice study time to attend competitions or travel with their teams. The workload of a college athlete can be overwhelming and can negatively impact their academic performance and mental health. Some may argue that athletes receive scholarships and other benefits, but these do not fully compensate for the amount of time and effort they put into their sport. Paying college athletes would help to alleviate some of the financial burden that many student-athletes face, while also compensating them for their time and workload.

Financial Struggles

As a student, I believe that college athletes should be paid for their hard work and dedication to their sports. One of the main reasons for this is the financial struggles that many college athletes face. These athletes come from low-income families and often struggle to make ends meet while attending college. They are unable to work part-time jobs to earn extra income due to the rigorous demands of their sport. This creates a challenging situation where they are unable to support themselves or their families financially. Paying college athletes would provide much-needed financial support and alleviate some of their financial struggles. This would allow them to focus on their studies and athletics without the added stress of financial instability. It would also give them the opportunity to contribute financially to their families, which many of them are unable to do currently. In short, paying college athletes would help alleviate the financial burdens they face and provide a fair compensation for their hard work and dedication to their sport.

Health and Safety Risks

As college athletes compete at a high level, they put their bodies on the line and are exposed to various health and safety risks. These athletes often play through injuries, which can exacerbate the severity of the injury, resulting in long-term physical damage. Therefore, it’s essential to consider the health and safety risks associated with college sports. Paying college athletes would acknowledge the risks that they take and provide a safety net if they get hurt. Furthermore, college athletes who are injured may not have access to the same level of healthcare as professional athletes. Paying them would help ensure they have the proper medical care and resources to recover from injuries. Moreover, paying college athletes could also incentivize schools to prioritize athlete safety and ensure that their health is a top priority. Overall, providing financial compensation to college athletes for the risks they take and the injuries they sustain is not only fair but also necessary for their wellbeing.

Revenue Generation

One of the main arguments in favor of paying college athletes is that they deserve to be compensated for their role in generating revenue for their universities and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). When fans attend a college sports event or purchase team merchandise, they are supporting the team and the entire athletic program. The athletes who are responsible for the success of these programs, however, do not receive any monetary compensation for their efforts. It is unfair that the NCAA and universities benefit from the work of college athletes without providing them with fair compensation. It is also worth noting that college sports have become a commercial enterprise, with the NCAA and universities treating them as such. Many top college sports programs generate millions of dollars in revenue every year, and the athletes who contribute to this success are essential to the financial health of their respective programs. However, athletes often struggle to make ends meet due to the demands of their sport, and they don’t have the time or resources to work part-time jobs to earn extra income.

Fairness and Equity

As college athletes put in countless hours of hard work and dedication to their respective sports, it’s only fair to compensate them for their efforts. However, one aspect that often goes unnoticed is the lack of rights and privileges that college athletes are subjected to, especially when it comes to earning money from their name, image, and likeness.

It is unfortunate that college athletes are the only ones on campus who are not allowed to monetize their skills and talents. This is in stark contrast to everyone else on campus, including musicians, artists, and actors, who can earn money from their talents while attending college. This discrepancy can cause a sense of injustice among college athletes who are forced to watch others monetize their talents while they are restricted from doing so.

In recent years, the issue of fairness and equity has gained considerable attention, and rightfully so. Paying college athletes would go a long way in promoting fairness and equity among all students. It would ensure that athletes have the same rights and opportunities as other students, allowing them to monetize their skills and talents just like everyone else. Additionally, paying college athletes would help eliminate the economic disparities that exist on campuses, especially among low-income athletes who may not have the financial support they need to sustain themselves.

Furthermore, paying college athletes would promote gender equality. Female athletes have historically been paid less than male athletes, even at the professional level. This inequality also extends to college sports, where female athletes often receive less funding and attention than their male counterparts. By paying college athletes, regardless of gender, colleges and universities would help bridge this gap and promote equality among all athletes.

In this table, we will outline some of the main reasons why college athletes should be paid.

Related posts:

• College Research Paper Example
• Freedom of Speech Argumentative Essay
• Exploring My Motivations for Pursuing a Supervisory Role
• The Importance of Women’s Choice: Exploring the Reasons Why Abortion Should Be Legal Essay

Improve your writing with our guides

Youth Culture Essay Prompt and Discussion

Reasons Why Minimum Wage Should Be Raised Essay: Benefits for Workers, Society, and The Economy

Why Marijuana Should Not Be Legal: Potential Risks and Drawbacks

Get 15% off your first order with edusson.

Connect with a professional writer within minutes by placing your first order. No matter the subject, difficulty, academic level or document type, our writers have the skills to complete it.

100% privacy. No spam ever.

Point/Counterpoint: Paying College Athletes

The notion of paying college football players has been an ongoing debate since the early 1900’s. With current television revenue resulting from NCAA football bowl games and March Madness in basketball, there is now a clamoring for compensating both football and basketball players beyond that of an athletic scholarship. This article takes a point/counterpoint approach to the topic of paying athletes and may have potential implications/consequences for college administrators, athletes, and coaches. Dr. John Acquaviva defends the current system in which colleges provide an athletic scholarship that provides a “free college education” in return for playing on the university team. Dr. Dennis Johnson follows with a counterpoint making the case that athletes in these sports should receive compensation beyond that of a college scholarship and forwards five proposals to pay the athletes.

Key words: pay for play, athletic scholarships

Introduction: History of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)

The idea of paying college athletes to compete dates back to what is considered to be the first intercollegiate competition. In a regatta between Harvard and Yale Universities, Harvard used a coxswain who was not even a student enrolled at the Ivy League school (5). Much like today’s universities whose appetites for appearances in corporate-sponsored “big money” football bowl events; Harvard may have used the non-student to please regatta sponsor Elkins Railroad (23).

In the late 1800’s, football played by college teams was a brutal sport but enjoyed by many fans. However, from 1900 to 1905, there were 45 players who died playing the sport (22). This prompted President Theodore Roosevelt to summon the presidents of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, and threaten them with a ban unless the sport was modified. As a result of that meeting, a group of 62 university presidents convened to form the Intercollegiate Athletic Association in 1906. This group evolved into the NCAA in 1910, but as a group it only possessed supervisory power (22).

College football became even more popular in the period of 1920-1940. This was a time when commercialism in the educational system was being questioned on a variety of levels. One such fundamental question was posed in 1929 by Howard Savage, a staff member of the Carnegie Foundation. He raised a question in an article entitled Athletics in American College (originally published in 1930 but reprinted in 1999) “whether an institution in the social order whose primary purpose is the development of the intellectual life can at the same time serve an agency to promote business, industry, journalism, and organized athletics on an extensive commercial basis? More importantly, the report asked “can it (the university) concentrate its attention on securing teams that win, without impairing the sincerity and vigor of its intellectual purpose” (9, p.495)? Savage also states that “alumni devices for recruiting winning teams constitutes the most disgraceful phase of recent intercollegiate athletics” (9, p. 495). In sum, the original 1929 report claimed that “big time” college sports were not educational, but were entirely financial and commercial.

Athletes during the early and mid-1900’s were routinely recruited and paid to play; and there were several instances where individuals representing the schools were not enrolled as students. For example, there is one report of a Midwestern university using seven members of its team that included the town blacksmith, a lawyer, a livery man, and four railroad employees (5). Other athletes at colleges were given high paying jobs for which they did little or no work. In 1948, the NCAA adopted a “Sanity Code” that limited financial aid for athletes to tuition and fees, and required that aid otherwise be given based on need (5). In the early 1950’s, with the threat of several southern schools bolting from the NCAA, the code was revised to allow athletic scholarships to cover tuition, fees, and a living stipend.

However, by the mid-1950’s many schools were still struggling with the issue of offering athletic scholarships. Some university presidents ultimately decided to maintain the principles of amateurism and further serve the mission of higher education. Those were presidents of universities that today make up the Ivy League. They concluded that it was not in the best interest of their universities to award athletic scholarships, and have remained steadfast even today.

After passing Title IX in the mid 1970’s, the NCAA absorbed the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) and began to govern women’s sport at the collegiate level. Over the past 50 years, the NCAA has also expanded into three divisions with a multitude of championship events on a yearly basis (20). There are more than 1,300 member institutions that represent an estimated 400,000 student athletes who participate in sport (21). The result of this growth and development are enormous increases in revenue. NCAA President Mark Emmert reports the NCAA revenues for the 2010-11 fiscal year is projected at $757 million, of which $452.2 million will go to Division I members (14).

While seemingly operating in a purely capitalistic/professional atmosphere, the NCAA continues to endorse an amateurism concept in college athletics. These competing, and often contradictory, values lead some college athletes in big time football and basketball programs to question the status quo of the present system through their words and actions. For example, many athletes are still attempting to get their “piece of the pie,” albeit under the table. And so it leads to our point-counterpoint.

Point: College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

The intensity of the argument to pay college athletes has escalated in the past few years. Perhaps it’s because of the current economic climate and everyone, including amateur athletes is looking for ways to make money? Or maybe it’s because many higher learning institutions have given the public access to their annual budget and readers focus on the profit of select athletic programs? Or maybe it is due to the absurd coaches’ salaries and the money that colleges make from football bowl games and basketball tournaments? Regardless, this has magnified the fact that the athletes see none of these profits and thus begs the simple question: “Where’s my share?” Perhaps a fair question, but to understand this argument better, a healthy debate is needed. So, here are some points to consider.

Point #1: Education is Money

Colleges and universities provide an invaluable and vital service to our communities: education. A now-famous bumper sticker once read: “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” To address that very slogan, the U.S. census bureau, as reported by Cheesman-Day and Newberger (7), expressed this best when they reported that the lifetime earnings for those with a college degree are over $1 million dollars more than non-graduates. Despite such a statistic, essays and op-ed columns continue to pour in from those who favor paying student-athletes while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge or accept the value of a college education. Is a college education priceless or not?

A sports-journalist in a recent national radio interview proposed that any argument against paying college athletes based on the sole reason that education is the prize is “antiquated”. But what seems antiquated and even shortsighted is the belief that paying a college athlete some (or even a lot of) money will solve all or even some of student’s long-term issues. The fear of the NCAA, as it should be, is that the mere notion of paying college athletes undermines the university’s primary purpose – education, something far more valuable than a modest annual stipend proposed by many. If it currently appears that the universities “don’t really care” about the athlete, paying them would intensify that belief, not dissolve it.

The irony in this dispute is that student-athletes do cost the university a substantial amount of money each year. For example, a full scholarship over four years can range between $30,000 and $200,000 depending if the institution is public or private (29). But let’s address this main point head on: There is an obvious lack of appreciation of a college degree from those in favor of paying athletes, and until a genuine gratitude for this concept develops, this argument will probably continue to linger.

Point #2: There Are Problems with Payment

Despite the well-documented scandals and corruption in college athletics (30), many would probably agree that paying athletes would exponentially increase the need for intense NCAA oversight – an enormous task by all accounts. Plus, there are the practical issues to consider. For example, how much should the athletes get paid and will payments be based on performance? What if the athlete gets hurt? What if the athlete is a bust and despite remaining on the team, doesn’t start or even play at all? – Issues that seem to raise far more questions than answers. But perhaps most important – What will happen to the non-revenue sports at the colleges who lose money from all of their sports programs – including football and basketball? It has been shown that only a fraction of Division I football and men’s basketball programs turn a profit (24, 20). The other Division I football and basketball programs as well as sports such as baseball, softball, golf, hockey, women’s basketball (minus a couple of notable programs), and just about all Division II sports not only fail to make money, but actually drain their athletic budgets. The outcome here would be inevitable: Forcing athletic departments to pay its football and basketball players would result in the eventual elimination of most, if not all, of the non-revenue sports. Is that what we want?

We cannot afford to be myopic on this issue. That is, there are only a limited number of programs that make big money, but yet there are hundreds of schools who absorb big losses at the cost of providing athletes a place to compete and earn a degree. The purpose of the NCAA, along with Amateur Athletic Union (AAU), Little League, and dozens of other organized forms of amateur sport is to provide a venue to play these sports – something we should not take for granted. The problem is that some have shifted in thinking that playing an organized sport is a right, whereas it still stands as a privilege.

Point #3: The University Offers More Than an Education

Concerts, lecture series by prominent people, on-stage productions, movies, intramural sports, fitness facilities, and a variety of clubs are all part of the typical university experience. Most students agree that colleges are self-contained acres of learning and socializing, all which takes place in a safe environment. It’s common for schools to subsidize the above-mentioned on-campus activities by adding fees to the tuition – which means that it’s free to a full-scholarship athlete. Other benefits to the athlete include the regular use of pristine gyms, well-manicured fields, athlete-only (and often team-only) workout facilities, sports medicine care, the opportunity to travel via away games, specialized meal plans and free foot gear and athletic attire. In addition, athletes are improving their trade from the best coaching minds in the sport; not to mention having access to some of the best nutrition and strength/conditioning personnel. And perhaps the most overlooked benefits are that the school provides the player with high-profile name recognition, a dedicated fan base, media exposure, and a competitive atmosphere with proven rivals, all of which took decades, effort and money for each institution to establish.

Point #4: The Athletic Department Has Its Role

Keep in mind that student-athletes are not employees of the university, rather they are students first and athletes second. The university can indeed make money from the sports programs; however, for those that do, the money simply goes back into the athletic program to fund the non-revenue sports (24). In fact, every year the NCAA sponsors over 80 national championships in three divisions, demonstrating the range and depth of their organization (20). While it is true that the champion in football and men’s basketball (and most other sports for that matter) seem to come from a relatively small pool of universities, it might be safe to assume that paying athletes would create an even bigger disparity since so few universities actually make money. Let’s face it, we are an underdog-loving country, and paying athletes would all but ensure that teams like Butler University, who made it to the Final Four in consecutive tournaments (2010 and 2011), will never do it again.

Point #5: Athletes Know the Deal

From the moment the full-scholarship papers are signed, each participant’s role is very clear: Schools accept the responsibility of the student’s tuition, meal plan, and boarding, while the athlete is provided with the opportunity to earn a degree, engage in college life and play their favorite sport in a well-organized, and often high profile fashion. The document signed by each student-athlete describes this agreement in an unmistakable manner. Although wordy and at times complex – a necessity due to the nature of the agreement – there’s no vagueness in the general arrangement or a hidden agenda from either party (10). A failure to honor the basic premise of any such contract would cause all forms of business – big or small – to crumble. If for some reason the university could be held liable for entrapment or some other form of dishonesty, then their athlete’s argument would stand on firmer ground. But frankly, the details of this agreement are well known by all involved, and rather strangely, no one seems to mind when signing them.

In conclusion, it should be noted that any NCAA improprieties or blatant corruption may have a carry-over effect into empathizing with the position given here. While corruption and other related-concerns are legitimate and need investigation, paying college athletes still remains a separate debate. It is vital to this process to view each NCAA issue independently and avoid making judgments on them as a whole. The position here is that, like many organizations, the NCAA should not be dismissed or discredited on one issue due to the mishandling of others. Further, if the contention is that many student athletes enter college unprepared or that athletics takes up too much time to excel (or even earn a degree), those are separate, but much needed arguments, and are not related to the issue of paying athletes.

Now more than ever, we live in an era of entitlement. At one time our country viewed the chance at higher education as a priceless commodity. However, it now seems that a college education is not held in the same esteem and worse yet, some see it as simply an opportunity to earn money. Although it is now evident that there has been a failure to convince much of the public of the true value of an education, keeping college athletes as pure amateurs remains the right thing to do.

Counter Point: Athletes in “Big-Time” Sports Should Be Paid

Introduction.

The argument that a college athletic scholarship is an equal quid pro quo for a college education has been utilized since athletic scholarships were approved by the NCAA in 1950’s. My colleague makes one point that is totally accurate – a college graduate can in fact make a great deal more money over a lifetime when compared to non-graduates. However, the remainder of the author’s points are half-truths and in reality just plain falsehoods. For instance, a “full athletic scholarships” do not provide a “free” education (as it does not cover all costs incurred from matriculation to graduation. In many cases, the university does not live up to its end of the bargain of providing an education; as evidenced by the dismal number in the graduation rates, especially among African Americans. Furthermore, the athletic scholarship is only a one-year (renewable) agreement that can be terminated by the coach or university in any given year for any reason.

In debating the pay-for-play issue in college athletics, the history of the governing body (i.e., currently the NCAA), their mission and view of amateurism, the past history of college athletes benefitting financially, and the degree to which athletes benefit from the university experience must all be examined. The counter point section of this paper addresses each point made by my colleague. Using the Eitzen (12) analogy comparing the NCAA and big-time athletic programs to the old southern plantation system will be the underpinning wellspring for the subject of athlete exploitation and the financial benefits enjoyed by the university derived from that plantation-like exploitation. An economic viewpoint will be presented to demonstrate the cartel-like atmosphere held by the NCAA while maintaining the illusion of amateurism.

Finally, five proposals that outline means to promote pay-for-play in NCAA Division I football and men’s basketball will be presented. The arguments that follow are specifically tailored for those two sports at schools who receive bonus money from the NCAA, as those universities and their coaches enjoy considerable revenue from TV contracts and sponsorships generated by bowl games and “March Madness” appearances.

Point #1: Athletic Scholarships Provide a “Free Education” is not correct

As mentioned, in the 1950’s the NCAA approved adding living stipends to athletic scholarships that previously included only tuition and fees. Today, the “full ride” scholarship can only include tuition, fees, room, board, and books. And as mentioned in the previous section, in some cases, depending on the school attended, that scholarship can be worth anywhere from $30,000 to $200,000, although the figures $20,000 to $100,000 over a four year period might be more accurate. In any case, that still does not cover the full cost of attending college.

The Collegiate Athletes Coalition (CAC) estimates that NCAA scholarships are worth about $2000 less than the cost of attending a university, as it does not account for expenses such as travel and sundries. Former Nebraska head football coach and United States Congressman, Tom Osborne (R-NE), calculates the gap between scholarship funding and the actual cost of attendance to be closer to $3,000. Even former NCAA President, Myles Brand, indicated that he favored increasing scholarship limits: “Ideally, the value of an athletically related scholarship would be increased to cover the full-cost of attendance, calculated at between $2,000 to $3000 more per year than is currently provided, I favor this approach of providing the full cost of attendance” (23, p.232).

So yes, the scholarship can be seen as pay for play, or at the very least, a quid pro quo for services rendered during a four year period. However, even with a full scholarship, an athlete will have to pay somewhere between $8,000 and $12,000 out of pocket to bridge the cost-of-living gap. Therefore, the full athletic scholarship does not provide a “free” education. Thus question remains: is the full scholarship a fair and equitable deal for the athlete?

Athlete Exploitation-The Plantation System

Eitzen (12) among others (27) makes the analogy that the NCAA operates like the “plantation system” of the old south. The coaches are the overseers who get work from the laborers (players) who provide riches for the masters (universities) while receiving little for their efforts. Perhaps slightly over-stated (obviously the athlete is not a slave, but maybe an indentured servant), the student–athlete is dominated, managed, and controlled, and they don’t receive a wage commensurate to their contribution as expressed in dollars earned by the university. Eitzen notes that athletes are sometimes mistreated physically and mentally and are often denied the rights and freedoms of other citizens. Ultimately, they have no real democratic recourse in an unjust system.

There are other similarities to the plantation analogy. Slaves were not free to leave the plantation much like an athlete cannot get out of a letter of intent (without penalty) and/or transfer without the penalty of sitting out a year. Much like the slaves who had no right to privacy, athletes are subject to mandatory drug testing (even though their coaches/masters are not tested), room checks, and limits on where they can and cannot go in the community. The athletes can be prohibited from political protests and the right to assemble. And finally, they can be subjected to mental cruelty and physical abuse (e.g., early morning torture sessions), all in order to create obedient slaves; student athletes.

Furthermore, collegiate athletics is often the only game in town for many of these athletes. For instance, football players must be in their third year of college or over the age of 21 to enter the National Football League (NFL). Basketball players, on the other hand, must attend college for one year or ultimately sit out a year before they can enter the National Basketball Association (NBA). Thus, the college game has become a “feeder system” similar to a minor professional league and it is in reality, “the only game in town.”

Point #2: Athletes Don’t Know the “Real” Deal

My colleague is partially correct in that most student athletes know that they are getting a scholarship that will allow them to go to school and play a sport. However, many don’t know the “real deal” as they generally have very little understanding they are about to enter a “plantation-like” system in which their scholarship in not guaranteed (i.e., renewable yearly) and can be terminated at any time. Student-athletes are also a led to believe that they will play and receive a college degree while possibly picking up a few fringe benefits along the way.

Take, for example, the recent stories regarding players like Reggie Bush, Cam Newton, or the players at Ohio State who received money and/or other benefits as a result of playing football. Even though student athletes know they will not get directly paid for playing, many desire and even expect some form of compensation. Slack (25) surveyed 3,500 current and retired football players in 1989 only to find that 31% had received under the table money during their college careers and 48% knew of others who had received payments. This seems to imply that while many recruits may indeed know “the deal”, they display their discontent by accepting payments or other benefits not currently allowed by the NCAA.

In reality, the statement “athletes know the deal” with regard to academic achievement and degree completion seems to lack substance. Dr. Nathan Tublitz, co-chair of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletes, an organization of 51 faculty senates whose purpose is to remind college presidents, athletic directors, and coaches that student athletes are students first. He points out that:

“…schools aren’t doing these kids any favors by admitting them when it’s unlikely that they will succeed academically. We bring 17 year-old kids, some of them from the inner city and we wine and dine them. They have female chaperones. We put them up in fancy hotels. They come here and see an incredibly fancy locker room with individual TV screens, air conditioning and videogames. They go in and see the new football stadium and the new $200 million basketball arena. They see a medical training facility that is stunningly beautiful with waterfalls, treadmill pools, and the sate-of-the-art medical and dental equipment. They come here and are treated like royalty. Until they break a leg or get put on the second string and they get set aside. Many don’t earn a degree. They don’t have the training or the skills to be independent after they leave the university. They’re lost (28, p.D10).”

When the scholarship is signed, the athlete and his family have reasonable expectations which include efforts by the coaching staff and university administration to meet all obligations of the contract. Additionally, my colleague notes, “that failure to honor the basic premise of any such contract would cause all forms of business – big or small – to crumble.” If the NCAA and athletic departments in higher education are a business, why are they allowed to act in a cartel-like fashion? And finally, do student athletes really know the “deal” when they penned their name on national signing day? It appears they don’t.

Point #3: The University Offers More than Education-It’s Possible-But Not Probable

Academic Detachment. My colleague also makes the claim that the university offers more than an education (e.g., concerts, lectures, intramurals, and clubs) in settings that enrich the college experience. Due to the plantation effect, however, many athletes are not able to take advantage of those events. For instance, few if any of the scholarship athletes would be allowed to play in an intramural contest for the coach’s fear of injury. Student athletes are also over-scheduled with study halls, practices, weight training sessions, film study, individual workouts, more practice, travel, and competition; all in an attempt to help athletes maintain focus on their sport.

Adler and Adler (1) spent five years recording systematic information regarding the athletes’ lives in a big-time college basketball program. After observing, interviewing, and traveling with them, they concluded that big-time basketball and being seriously engaged in academics were not compatible. They also found that freshmen had a period of optimism regarding academics when they first arrived on campus, but after about two semesters they found that the social isolation combined with the fatigue of training kept them from becoming involved in academic life.

Positive feedback these basketball players earned was always athletic-related and not academic. They soon learned what they had to do to stay eligible. Coaches made sure they scheduled classes that did not interfere with practices. Ultimately, the researchers realized that academic detachment was encouraged by the peer culture, and because of their social status (e.g., big man on campus), it became difficult for them to focus on academics.

Coakley (8) reported that not all of the athletes in the Adler & Adler (1) study experienced academic detachment. Those who entered college well-prepared with appropriate high school courses, strong parental support and an ability to develop relationships outside of sport were able to succeed in the classroom. It’s important to note that too many minority athletes from low socioeconomic environments struggle in academics – an issue that is often perpetuated by the coaches. For instance, Robert Smith, former running back for Minnesota Vikings and pre-med student while at Ohio State, needed two afternoon labs in the same semester. Since the labs conflicted with practice, coaches suggested that he drop them because of the commitment he made to play football. Against the wishes of the coaching staff, Smith took the classes but was forced to sit out the season as red shirt athlete; a further example of the plantation effect.

Benson (3) noted that one perspective was missing from the literature included a full expression from the black athletes point of view. Benson conducted a qualitative interview study of 12 African American students at a DI football program where the graduation rate was 31-40% for black football players compared to 60-70% of white football players. The results in this instance cannot be generalized due to the small sample size (N=12), but it does provide a snapshot of the thoughts regarding education and athletics of this group. Further, they reflect the results obtained by Adler & Adler (1).

Another major finding of the Benson (3) study was that the marginal academic performance was created by a series of interrelated practices engaged in by all significant members of the academic setting, including peers, coaches, advisors, teachers, and the student athletes themselves. It began in the recruitment, and continued through the first year. Black student athletes received the message that school was not important, and that as time passed, they had no real control over their destiny in the classroom. It was simply a matter of survival to keep the grade point average (GPA) to a point to be eligible. They all felt like the coaches did not “walk the talk” in terms of academics. They would just talk the academic game in public but then in reality they would have “fits” if classes ever interfered with the program. Simply put, student athletes learned it was a matter of survival and a basic expectation to maintain a GPA just high enough to remain eligible to compete (3).

“The Black Dumb Jock”. Harry Edwards (13) discussed the creation of the “black dumb jock” image prior to studies completed by Alder and Alder (1), Benson (3), and Coakley (8). He (i.e., Edwards) theorized that they were not born, but rather systematically created. The previous mentioned studies serve as evidence to support his statement (1, 3, 8). The exploitation of athletes is not solely an NCAA issue but a societal one. For example, Fred Butler was passed on through elementary, middle, and high school because he was a good football player. He graduated from high school reading at a second grade level and went to El Camino Junior College. There he took a number of physical activity classes while hoping to be drafted into the NFL. When no offer came, he played at California State University-Los Angeles for a year and a half. When again no offer came and his eligibility expired, he failed out of school within months with no degree, no offers to play pro ball, and no skills to use for employment. And he still could not read! (18). Similarly, Former NFL player Dexter Manley testified before a Senate Committee that he played four years at Oklahoma State University, only to leave the school illiterate. And the sad feature is that academic detachment from the university athletic department perspective doesn’t seem to be an issue because there are always more impoverished (and usually minority) kids waiting to come in and play.

Thus, student athletes in many cases cannot take advantage of the many extras offered by a college education. Why do athletes accept a diluted academic experience or the corruption of doctored transcripts, phantom courses, surrogate test takers, and tutors writing papers? Perhaps it is because they are disenfranchised under the current system, and will lose scholarships, starting roles, and eligibility if they complain. George Will argued that “College football and basketball are, for many players, vocations, not avocations, and academics are unsubstantiated rumors” (12, p.5). So do full scholarship athletes get a chance to take advantage of all the extras of the university experience? More than likely it is not the case especially when they can’t even hope for a meaningful degree.

NCAA as a Cartel. Kahn (16) examined the operation of the college football and basketball systems of the NCAA and offers lessons about the determinants and effects of supply and demand. Specifically he utilizes economic principles to calculate the value of college football player to a university. He notes that total ticket revenues for football and men’s basketball were $757 million in 1999, total value that exceeded the total ticket sales for all of professional baseball, football, and hockey that year. A figure indicating that the NCAA is a very successful business entity engaged in capitalism.

According to the cartel theory, the NCAA has “enforced collusive restrictions on payments for factors of production, including player compensation, recruiting expenses, and assistant coaches salaries; it has restricted output; and it has defeated potential rival groups (16, p. 211).” He notes, along with others (11, 15, 16, 30), that the NCAA can impose sanctions that range from scholarship reductions, elimination from post-season play to program death penalties (e.g., Southern Methodist football); and possibly even threaten a school’s academic accreditation. However, restriction of pay to players is the main way in which the organization acts to restrict competition.

Economists who have studied the NCAA “view it as a cartel that attempts to produce rents, both by limiting payments for inputs such as player compensation and by limiting output” (16, p.210). When looking at the rent values based on college football or men’s basketball players’ performances, they are paid below a competitive level of compensation based on estimates of marginal revenue product produced of these players (6). Their analysis considered the total revenue for a school and the number of players that were eventually drafted by a major professional league. Utilizing this framework they concluded that in 2005 dollars a draft-ready football player returned $495,000 to the university, while a draft-ready basketball player was worth $1.422 million for men’s basketball. And all of this compared to the approximately $40,000 paid in scholarship worth. This indicates that the NCAA does indeed use cartel power to pay top athletes less than the athlete’s market value.

Based on a workload of 1000 hours per year and an average scholarship value, economist Richard Sheehan (16) calculated the basic hourly wage of a college basketball player at $6.82 and a football player at $7.69. Coaches’ hourly wages, on the other hand, ranged from $250-$647 per hour (depending on salary). Again, using the Eitzen metaphor, the masters accumulate wealth at the slave’s expense, even though the athlete/slave’s health is jeopardized by participation (12).

Parent (23) notes the hypocrisy of the amateurism construct when looking at these capitalism issues. He notes that the former president of the University of Washington, William Gerberding, said, “As one contemplates the obvious fact that so many of the most gifted athletes are economically and educationally disadvantaged blacks, this becomes less and less defensible. I have become increasingly uncomfortable about having a largely white establishment maintaining an elaborate system of rules that deprives student-athletes, many of whom are non-white, of adequate financial support in the name of the ideals of amateurism” (p.236).

So, why do athletes tolerate this system? They do mainly because they are disenfranchised and fear losing their scholarships and eligibility if they complain. In essence, this pay-for-play discussion revolves around amateurism, as advertised by the NCAA, and its competing capitalistic drive for income. According to Tulsa Law School professor Ray Yasser, the best option for athletes to change the system for their benefit is to unite and “file an antitrust suit…against the NCAA and their universities, with the claim being that the NCAA and their universities are colluding to create a monopoly over the athlete’s ability to share in the profits generated from college athletics” (23, p.236).

While the points for maintaining the status quo were stated previously, there has been sufficient evidence presented in this section to stimulate discussion of paying players. The “play for a diploma” agreement is not happening in many cases, as the athlete failure rate indicates. Another example is national champion Connecticut men’s basketball program losing two scholarships for the upcoming season as a result of a poor Academic Performance Rating (APR) from the NCAA (11). Thus, the following pay for play proposals are being submitted for consideration.

Pay Proposals

It would appear that NCAA should get out of the commercial business of football and basketball and follow the Ivy League example of providing an environment that is truly amateur where student athletes actually are students first. That move would certainly place the student first in the student athlete term. However, it doesn’t seem pragmatic that either the NCAA or any of the major universities are in any hurry to turn away millions of dollars per year in profits. Therefore, it is time to consider some pay-for-pay proposals. California and Nebraska have already passed state legislation that would enable colleges to compensate athletes; however they are blocked by the NCAA from doing so (23). Therefore, I submit five proposals that could possibly be implemented:

• Big Ten Plan and/or Work Study Proposal: At the very least, the NCAA should follow former NCAA President Miles Brand’s suggestion and allocate athletes include a $2,000-$3,000 cost of living increase to full scholarships. Since athletes are supposedly only allowed to spend 20 hours per week involved with sport-related activities, this might actually be paid as 20 hours of work study or as a monthly living stipend. This would provide the athletes with the needed income for clothes, laundry, sundries, travel, and other small item expenses. Officials from the Big Ten are currently discussing a similar proposal that would help their athletes meet expenses not covered in an athletic scholarship. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany reports league athletic directors and university officials have seriously discussed using some of their growing TV revenue to pay athletes more. This proposal which would give athletes a $2,000-$5,000 per year living stipend also has the support of current NCAA president Mark Emmert (2).
• SEC Game Pay Proposal: The Southeastern Conference, another of the big time football conferences recently entered into the pay for play discussion. University of South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier put forth a proposal at the recent conference meetings to pay players $300 per game. The proposal was supported by several other coaches. This type of a proposal could pay athletes anywhere from $300-$1000 per game based on time played per game. Since most players do not play more than 30 minutes a game, a player could be paid on a per-minute of competition basis. At a rate of $20 per minute a player could net $600 for a game and approximately $6000-$7,000 per season.
• Professional League Proposal: Ron Woods (27) puts forth a proposal submitted by Peter Plagensa, visiting professor at Middlebury College, regarding the pay-for-play issue. He appears to agree with the likes of Stanley Eitzen that the current practice of colleges and the NCAA do in fact “amount to a little more than a plantation system” (27, p. 67). He suggests that the big time college football and basketball maintain the million-dollar industry by making them an age 23 and under professional league. This proposal would allow universities to hire players as college staff (much like the cafeteria or groundskeepers) at moderate salaries plus room and board. Universities could also grant the athletes free academic classes until they earn a degree (even after playing days are over).

“College basketball players watch the coach roaming the sidelines in his $1,500 custom-make suit. They read about his $500.000 salary and $250,000 perk from a sneaker deal. They watch the schools sell jerseys (and T-shirts) with the player’s numbers on them. They see the athletic director and NCAA officials getting rich and you wonder why they might ask; hey where’s my share? What am I, a pack mule” (17, p.46)

My colleague has argued in point #2 that paying athletes raise a myriad of other issues, such as how much should they receive, what happens if an athlete gets hurt, and so on. That is a discussion for another time. First, we must agree that it is fair to compensate NCAA Division I football and basketball athletes beyond that of an athletic scholarship; then and only then may payout details be chronicled. Note: a reminder that we are only discussing compensation for the NCAA Division I-A football and basketball players; not the athletes in the AAU, Little League or other truly amateur venues of organized sport.

Throughout the history of the NCAA, college athletes have routinely received compensation beyond that of a full college scholarship (e.g., room and board, tuition, books). While such compensation is illegal, athletes like Reggie Bush and others receive under-the-table benefits as evidenced in the Slack survey (25).

Additionally, many athletes in “big time” programs do not receive a degree for their efforts in the athletic arena. Universities routinely admit students based on their athletic skills that are academically ill-prepared for success. As seen in the research (1, 3), many athletes that aspire to be academically successful soon lose hope with the over-scheduling and pressures of sport preparation. As a result, many college athletes, a majority of which are minorities, fail out of school once coaches have utilized their eligibility.

The NCAA functions like a cartel, keeping cost down while increasing profits. Rents for a draft-ready athlete earn the university somewhere between $500,000 for football and $1.422 million for men’s basketball (16), leading to a pseudo-plantation system where the coaches oversee the athletes demanding work and controlling their schedules on and off the field. This unbalanced system allows athletes to earn the equivalent of $6.80-$7.69 an hour (12) while coaches like Nick Saban of Alabama or Mack Brown of Texas earn over five million dollars a year (4).

If the NCAA continues as a corporate entity and acting in a cartel-like fashion making millions of dollars a year, implementing a plan to pay student athletes for playing must be considered. Otherwise, America’s institutions of higher learning should follow the Ivy League schools’ example and eliminate athletic scholarships, get out of the big time sport business, and get on with providing students with a complete educational experience.

Applications in Sport

Few discussions within sport are more common or controversial than the debate to pay college athletes. Some arguments are well thought and articulated, while others lack insight and are simply driven by passion. The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with a new perspective and some historical insight – all supported by the literature – regardless of their stance on this issue. Moreover, readers who may actually be heard by the NCAA may offer a position that has yet to be considered. The concession here is that despite any decision by the NCAA in the near future, we can be assured that college administrators, coaches, and athletes will continue this debate. However, their arguments may now be seen as relevant and more reasoned.

POSTSCRIPT: According to Michelle B. Hosick at the NCAA.org, the NCAA board of directors has moved on two issues discussed in this article since its submission. In April (2012), the board moved to implement a $2,000 allowance to an athlete’s full scholarship. They also voted to grant multi-year scholarships. However, both measures have been put on hold with the threat of an override vote by member institutions. On January 14, 2012 at the NCAA convention the board delayed implementation of the $2,000 supplement and sent it back to committee for revision at its April meeting. The multi-year scholarship issue will continue to be implemented on a conference-by-conference basis. And so the pay-for-play discussion continues.

• Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1999). College athletes in high-profile media sports: The consequences of glory. In Inside sports (pp. 162–70), edited by J. Coakley and P. Donnelly. London: Routledge.
• Bennett, B. (May 19, 2011). Big Ten considers pay research proposal . ESPN College Football. Retrieved from http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6564134.
• Benson, K. F. (2000) Constructing academic inadequacy: African American athletes’ stories of schooling. Journal of Higher Education, 71, 223- 46.
• Berkowitz, S., & Gardiner, A. (2011, May 17). Coach K made $4.7M in 2009. USA Today, 2C.
• Bronson, A. G. (1958). Clark W. Hetherington-Scientist and philosopher. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
• Brown, R. W., & Jewell, T. R. (2006). The marginal revenue product of a women’s college basketball player. Industrial Relations, 45 (1), 96-101.
• Cheesman-Day, J., & Newberger, E. (2002). The big pay-off educational attainment and synthetic estimates of work-life earnings. Retrieved from www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs.
• Coakley, J. (2007). Sports in society: Issues and controversies. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
• Crowley, W. H. (1999). Athletics in American colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 70, 494-502.
• Cozzillio, M. J. (1989). The athletic scholarship and the college national letter of intent: A contract by any other name. Wayne Law Review, 35, 1275-1379.
• Eaton-Robb, P. (2011, May 20). UConn loses 2 men’s basketball scholarships. Norwich Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.norwichbulletin.com/newsnow/x31866796/UConn-mens-hoops-loses-2-scholarships#axzz1NCVV1385.
• Eitzen, S. D. (2000, September). Slaves of big-time college sports: College athletes. USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), 125.
• Edwards, H. (1984). The black dumb jock: An American sports tragedy. College Board Review, 131, 8-13.
• Emmert, M. (2011). How it all adds up. NCAA Champion Magazine, 4 (2), 5.
• Fleisher, A. A., Goff, G. L., & Tollison, R. D. (1992). The National Collegiate Athletic Association: A study in cartel behavior. Chicago, IL: University Of Chicago Press.
• Kahn, L. M. (2007). Markets: Cartel behavior and amateurism in college sports. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21, 209-226.
• Kornheiser, T. (1999, December 13). Six billion? Where’s mine? ESPN The Magazine, 46.
• Lapchick, R. (1989). Pass to play: student athletes and academics. National Education Association of the United States.
• Madesen, R. (2001). The role of the NCAA and the need for reform in big-time college sports. Academic Exchange – EXTRA. Retrieved from http:/www.unco.edu/AE-Extra/2001/3/NCAA.html.
• National Collegiate Athletic Association (2011). Why student-athletes are not paid to play. Retrieved from www.ncaa.org.
• National Collegiate Athletic Association (2010). 2009-10 guide for college bound student athlete: Where academics and athletic success is your goal. Indianapolis, IN: NCAA.
• Olterddorf, C. (1999). But what is the NCAA? What is the real purpose? And is it achieving it? Texas Alcalde, 28, 3-5.
• Parent, C. M. (2004, spring). Forward progress? An analysis of whether student-athletes should be paid? Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal, 226-244.
• Rosner, S., & Shropshire, K. (2004). The business of sports. (pp.527-531). Ontario, Canada: Jones and Bartlett.
• Slack, A. (1991).The underground economy of college football. Sociology of Sport Journal, 8 (1), 1-15.
• Stewart, J., & Albanese, R. (2011, June 2). The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. [Television broadcast] New York: The Comedy Channel (MTV Networks Entertainment Group).
• Woods, R. B. (2007). Social issues in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Yost, M. (2008, March 19). A cultural conversation with Nathan Tublitz: Has serious academic reform of college athletics arrived? The Wall Street Journal, D10.
• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Digest of education statistics, 2009 (NCES 2010-013).
• Zimbalist, A. (1999). Unpaid professionals: Commercialism and conflict in big-time college sports. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Share this:

Share this article, choose your platform.

Former college athletes could get between a few dollars and more than a million under settlement agreement

The $2.78 billion deal settles several lawsuits claiming that previous ncaa rules denied thousands of athletes the opportunity to earn millions of dollars off the use of their names, images and likenesses., by ralph d. russo | the associated press • published july 28, 2024 • updated on july 28, 2024 at 1:17 pm.

Thousands of former college athletes will be eligible for payments ranging from a few dollars to more than a million under the $2.78 billion antitrust settlement agreed to by the NCAA and five power conferences, a deal that also paves the way for schools to directly compensate athletes while attempting to regulate payments from boosters.

Details of the sprawling plan were filed Friday in federal court in the Northern District of California, a little more than two months after the framework of an agreement was announced. The deal must still be approved by a judge.

“College athletes will finally be able to share in the billions of dollars their compelling stories and dynamic performances have generated for their schools, conferences, and the NCAA,” the filing said. “This is nothing short of a seismic change to college sports following more than four years of hard-fought victories in this case.”

24/7 New York news stream: Watch NBC 4 free wherever you are

US & World

Who gets paid? How much? What to know about the landmark NCAA settlement

NCAA votes to accept $2.8 billion settlement that could dramatically change college sports

The full term sheet includes guidelines on roster caps for individual sports that will replace scholarship limits; how the new financial payments will be monitored and enforced to ensure compliance by schools; how third-party payments to athletes will be regulated; and how nearly $3 billion in damages will be doled out over the next 10 years.

Those payouts will vary drastically and are determined by sport played, when, how long and what conference an athlete competed in. While Division I athletes across all sports will be eligible to collect damages, the majority of damages is expected to go to football and basketball players from power conferences because those leagues and teams generate most of the revenue that comes from billion-dollar media rights contracts.

Get Tri-state area news delivered to your inbox. Sign up for NBC New York's News Headlines newsletter.

Olympic triathlon training event in Seine River canceled over water quality concerns

US swimmers fueled by Aussie legend's smack talk

Team USA races to 5 medals in first full day of Paris Olympics

The deal covers three antitrust cases — including the class-action lawsuit known as House vs. the NCAA — that challenged NCAA compensation rules dating to 2016. The plaintiffs claimed NCAA rules denied thousands of athletes the opportunity to earn millions of dollars off the use of their names, images and likenesses.

The NCAA lifted its ban on athletes earning money through endorsement and sponsorship deals in 2021.

The agreement does not settle the issue of whether college athletes should be deemed employees, but it does include language that would suggest the deal would be subject to change if “a change in law or circumstances permits collective bargaining."

The NCAA and college sports leaders continue to plead for help from Congress in the form of a federal law that would supersede state laws and allow the association and conferences to self govern without fear of future antitrust litigation.

“This settlement is an important step forward for student-athletes and college sports, but it does not address every challenge,” the commissioners of the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, Southeastern Conference and NCAA President Charlie Baker said in a joint statement. “The need for federal legislation to provide solutions remains. If Congress does not act, the progress reached through the settlement could be significantly mitigated by state laws and continued litigation."

While that help still seems unlikely to come soon — especially with a presidential election months away — college sports leaders hope the settlement can provide some certainty for schools and finally stem the constant legal attacks on its antiquated model of amateurism.

The NCAA and conferences have agreed to amend their rules to permit a landmark compensation system that allows schools to share up to about $21 million in athletic revenues with their athletes annually, starting in 2025.

The NCAA and conferences will be permitted to make rules that prevent schools from circumventing the cap.

That number is derived from taking 22% of the average revenue generated through media rights contracts, tickets and other sources by power conference schools. The agreement will create an audit system that allows plaintiffs to monitor athletic revenue, which is expected to rise in the coming years as new media rights agreements kick in for conferences and the College Football Playoff.

Athletes are projected to receive $1.5 billion to $2 billion annually.

All athletes will be eligible to receive the new financial benefits, but each school will be permitted to determine how they want to divvy up the money among sports. How exactly Title IX gender equity rules apply is still unclear and will require federal clarification. How schools comply with Title IX will be the responsibility of each institution.

Replacing scholarship limits with roster caps could mean even more athletic scholarship opportunities in Division I.

Most notably, major college football teams will now be permitted to have 105 player on scholarship instead of the current 85, though schools will no longer be required to give full scholarships to every football player.

Partial scholarships have been used in some sports for years, but will now be permitted in all.

The roster caps for baseball (34), softball (25) and volleyball (18) will also allow for a significant jump in the number of scholarships schools can provide in those sports, though schools will not be required to meet the cap.

NCAA rules have been tweaked to allow schools to be more involved in providing NIL opportunities for college athletes, but they will still be allowed to strike deals with third parties.

However, athletes will be required to report deals with third parties that surpass $600 to an outside clearinghouse.

The NCAA is also creating a public database that it hopes will allow athletes to assess fair market value.

Booster-funded NIL collectives have become a common way athletes are compensated, but now those deals will be subject to review through an arbitration process to determine if it is for a “valid business purpose,” according to the agreement.

Violations could lead to eligibility penalties for athletes and sanctions for schools.

The plaintiffs in the House case are responsible for doling out damages. Included in Friday's filing was a chart breaking down the categories of eligible athletes along with four different types of payouts they could be in line to receive.

According to the plaintiffs, about 19,000 power conference football players and men's basketball players will be in line to receive an average of $91,000, with payments ranging from $15,000 to $280,000 just for what is referred to broadcast name, image and likeness.

Some of those same athletes could also be in line for tens of thousands of dollars more related to lost opportunities to earn NIL money while in college and what is deemed by the plaintiffs as pay-for-play. Plaintiffs' lawyers say a few athletes will be eligible to receive upward of $1 million.

Plaintiffs' attorneys say they will file a motion for preliminary approval and — if granted — a public website will go up in about two months where former college athletes can determine how much they are eligible to receive.

Still, the settlement is months away from final approval. There will be an opportunity for athletes who are members of the plaintiffs' class to object to the settlement and ask to be excluded. Already one school, Houston Christian, has objected — though the judge denied its request to intervene.

“We are moving forward in the right direction by giving college athletes what they have EARNED & DESERVE which has been long overdue,” said Sedona Prince, a college basketball player now at TCU and one of the plaintiffs in the House case. “We still have a long way to go and I pray athletes ask more questions and demand more answers from the leaders at their schools, conferences and the NCAA.”

This article tagged under:

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Paying College Athletes — Paying College Athletes: Arguments for Fair Compensation

Paying College Athletes: Arguments for Fair Compensation

• Categories: College Tuition Paying College Athletes Student Athletes

About this sample

Words: 772 |

Published: Mar 18, 2021

Words: 772 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Education Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 788 words

1 pages / 436 words

3 pages / 1316 words

2 pages / 1014 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Paying College Athletes

Should college athletes be paid? This essay argues that student athletes at universities around the country should not only obtain a percentage of income made off their athletic performance but also pursue business deals and [...]

In the past five to ten years, there has been a controversial question going around: should students who play a sport get paid as a reward of being a College Athlete? The answer is no. Student athletes should not get paid [...]

The question of whether coaches and players should receive equal compensation in the realm of professional sports is a topic that has sparked intense debate. The Should Coaches and Players Make the Same Amount of Money Essay [...]

The discussion whether the college athletes should be paid has been re-hashed several times. There are those who advocates in favor and many against the idea of paying athlete who plays sports for their colleges. Many reasons [...]

In our society today many people believe that student athletes have it easier than the average everyday student. They have these ideals about student athletes because they think that every athlete is on scholarship and has their [...]

On common on average only 1/3 of college athletes are given a scholarship and a majority are half as much as a full scholarships as stated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association. From that 1/3 about two percent make it [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election results
• Google trends
• AP & Elections
• U.S. Open Tennis
• Paralympic Games
• College football
• Auto Racing
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

College athlete advocacy group opposes NCAA lawsuit settlement, says it limits potential earnings

Florida State’s DJ Uiagalelei throws the ball during the NCAA college football game between Georgia Tech and Florida State at the Aviva stadium in Dublin, Saturday, Aug. 24, 2024. (AP Photo/Peter Morrison)

FILE - Coastal Carolina quarterback Grayson McCall, right, passes while under pressure from UCLA defensive lineman Gabriel Murphy during an NCAA college football game, Sept. 2, 2023, in Pasadena, Calif. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill, File)

FILE - The Stanford women’s volleyball team holds the championship trophy after defeating Wisconsin for the NCAA Division I women’s volleyball championship, Dec. 21, 2019, in Pittsburgh. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic, File)

• Copy Link copied

A prominent advocacy group for college athletes announced Thursday it opposes the $2.8 billion settlement agreement of antitrust litigation facing the NCAA and major college conferences, saying a plan for schools to share athletics revenue will actually limit the earning potential of the athletes.

The National College Players Association said the so-called House settlement aims to eliminate booster-funded collectives that are currently responsible for millions of dollars in payments to college athletes for the right to use their names, images and likenesses.

“This is an unjust settlement that would not only harm current athletes but future college athletes who are only in fourth grade,” NCPA executive director Ramogi Huma said.

A court hearing is scheduled for next Thursday, where a federal judge in California could rule on the plaintiffs’ request for preliminary approval of the deal, which includes $2.78 billion in damages to former and current college athletes. Several requests to deny preliminary approval have already been filed, including one from the plaintiffs of another antitrust lawsuit filed in Colorado who declined to be part of the settlement agreement.

Even if granted preliminary approval, challenges to the settlement can still be brought before final approval in the months ahead.

“The NCPA will work to get this settlement rejected so that parties can come up with a fair settlement or go to trial,” Huma said in a statement. He declined to detail the NCPA’s strategy.

Steve Berman, a Seattle-based lawyer for the House plaintiffs who negotiated the settlement, said he hasn’t seen evidence that NIL collectives are going to be put out of business by the terms of the NCAA settlement. He added the NCAA already has rules banning NIL payments that are disguised pay-for-play enticements.

“Those rules are currently subject to enforcement by the NCAA as judge, jury and executioner,” Berman said. “The settlement does not prohibit the NCAA from continuing to have such rules against pay-for-play payments by boosters and collectives, but it sets up a neutral arbitration system for athletes and schools to challenge the application of such rules so that they will have more rights than they have now to limit the power of the NCAA with respect to collectives.”

The NCPA also said it opposes the deal because it gives conferences the ability to end proposed revenue-sharing if athletes are deemed to be employees with the right to collectively bargain with schools or leagues. That topic is the subject of several fights likely to end up in court, including a unionization effort by the Dartmouth men’s basketball team.

Marc Edelman, a sports law professor at Baruch College in New York, called the settlement agreement a “meaningful and innovative” attempt to change the way college athletes are compensated. He also agreed with the NCPA’s concerns about the plan to set a cap on the amount of revenue schools will be permitted to share with athletes and cutting off third-party compensation from those deemed by the NCAA to be boosters.

“He discusses very real concerns,” Edelman said.

Huma confirmed group licensing organization OneTeam Partners, which works with the NFL Players’ Association, had emailed thousands of college football players recently, encouraging them to join the NCPA. He said the outreach was not related to the NCPA announcing its opposition to the settlement proposal.

Jim Cavale is the chairman of Athletes.org, which is trying to organize athletes and said it already has nearly 4,000 members. He called the House settlement a huge step in the right direction.

“When it comes to the terms it’s not perfect because the athletes weren’t involved,” he said. “That’s the umbrella problem in college sports. The only sustainable solution is a partnership between athletes and schools.”

Cavale said he believes the settlement will ultimately receive final approval, but that athlete-led challenges to certain terms could lead to changes in the final version that could provide them the right to negotiate revenue-sharing contracts with their schools.

Huma, a former UCLA football player, and the NCPA have been at the forefront of pushing for reforms in college sports and more benefits for athletes for decades.

The NCPA filed a complaint in 2022 with the National Labor Relations Board in California, asking that USC athletes be deemed employees of the school and its conference. A final ruling is pending. In the Dartmouth case, a NLRB regional director did rule that the basketball players should be considered employees and gave them the go-ahead to vote to join a union.

The school is challenging that ruling.

The NCPA says the settlement also does not do enough to ensure schools won’t cut revenue sports and could result in a decrease in athletic scholarships being made available by the wealthiest programs.

Follow Ralph D. Russo at https://twitter.com/ralphDrussoAP

AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

• Corrections
• Campaign 2024
• Putin's war in Ukraine
• Business & Economy
• Media Spotlight
• Waste, Fraud & Abuse
• Inside the Beltway
• Inside the Ring
• Higher Ground
• Entertainment
• Just the Headlines
• Photo Galleries
• Dive Deeper
• 40 years of The Washington Times
• Threat Status
• Energy & Environment
• Banking & Finance
• Health Care Reform
• Second Amendment
• Immigration Reform
• Homeland & Cybersecurity
• Aerospace & Defense
• Taxes & Budget
• Law Enforcement & Intelligence
• Transportation & Infrastructure
• Commentary Main
• Charles Hurt
• Cheryl K. Chumley
• Kelly Sadler
• Jennifer Harper
• Tim Constantine
• Joseph Curl
• Joseph R. DeTrani
• Billy Hallowell
• Daniel N. Hoffman
• David Keene
• Robert Knight
• Clifford D. May
• Michael McKenna
• Stephen Moore
• Tim Murtaugh
• Peter Navarro
• Everett Piper
• Scott Walker
• Black Voices
• To the Republic
• Sports Main
• Washington Commanders
• Thom Loverro
• Horse Racing
• NASCAR & Racing
• District of Sports Podcast
• Sports Photos
• Health Care on the Hill
• Invest in Portugal
• Health Care 2022
• Africa FDI Edition
• Immigration 2022
• Future of Clean Energy
• The Baltic States 2022
• Invest in Ireland
• ESG Investments
• U.S. & South Korea Alliance
• Invest in Malta
• National Clean Energy Week
• Victorious Family
• Energy 2024
• Infrastructure 2024
• Free Iran 2024
• Transportation 2024
• Reinventing after Globalization
• The Chiefs Forum: The Next 100 Days
• Harm Reduction and Public Health
• Subscriber Only Events
• Higher Ground Events
• All Podcasts
• The Front Page
• Politically Unstable
• History As It Happens
• Bold & Blunt
• The Higher Ground
• Court Watch
• Victory Over Communism
• District of Sports
• Capitol Hill Show
• The Unregulated Podcast
• The Rebellion Podcast
• Play Sudoku
• Crossword Puzzle
• Word Search

WATCH: A look at our nation’s origins and the Future of Washington’s Mount Vernon

Inside the high-stakes of AI and cybersecurity In-Q-Tel’s Katie Gray joins Threat Status

WATCH: Mainstream media ignores DNC lies while RFK Jr. rips biased coverage of his campaign

Montana college athletes are offered nil cash to back sen. jon tester.

Student-athletes in Montana are being offered thousands of dollars to endorse Sen. Jon Tester’s reelection bid in a race that could determine control of the Senate.

Montana Together contacted the athletes at the University of Montana with offers of $400 to $2,400 to back Mr. Tester as part of a name, image and likeness deal, according to reports.

Mr. Tester is locked in a tight race with Republican Tim Sheehy, and the GOP believes the path to control the Senate runs through the Treasure State.

University of Montana Athletic Director Kent Haslam told The Washington Times that in late July he was approached by Opendorse, a platform that helps student-athletes get NIL deals, with an offer from Montana Together for students who were “interested in spreading the word” about Mr. Tester . 

Mr. Haslam said that when his department gets NIL requests, his team forwards them to students. 

“Athletics sent along the opportunity to all of the athletes in case any were interested,” he said.

News of the pitch came from Lily Meskers, a University of Montana track and field athlete who said she and others were offered money to support the vulnerable three-term incumbent. 

Ms. Meskers, who is also a journalism student, first wrote about the offer this week for the conservative radio show “Montana Talks.” 

She then was interviewed by the show’s host, Aaron Flint, to whom she said a lot of women on the track team shared a “similar reaction” to the offer because of Mr. Tester’s vote against the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. 

The bill was meant to prevent biological men from competing in women’s sports. 

“I think me and a lot of the girls on the team honestly shared a really similar reaction to this,” Ms. Meskers said. “Why would we endorse something that fundamentally goes against us?”

She added, “As women athletes, you know, we work really hard to get to the level that we’re at to be Division I athletes, and to have biological men take away these positions from us, it’s really frustrating. And so when we got this email from Tester asking us to endorse him as athletes, it was kind of like … well, where is your endorsement for us? Where is you standing up for us as female athletes?”

Mr. Sheehy has made that vote a focal point of his campaign stump speeches, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee that backs him pounced on the news of Montana Together incentivizing athletes to back Mr. Tester . 

“ Jon Tester sided with woke D.C. Democrats when he voted to let men compete in women’s sports,” NRSC spokeswoman Maggie Abboud said in a statement to The Times. Now his dark money allies are trying to pay students off to cover up his far-left voting record. Jon Tester is spiraling and resorting to every underhanded tactic in the book.”

A spokesperson for the Tester campaign told The Times that the campaign “had no knowledge of these actions from an outside group, and we are not in communication with them.”

The Times reached out for comment from Montana Together. 

Montana Together’s origins are murky, with little to no digital footprint of the organization. Indeed, it doesn’t have any filings with the Federal Election Commission, and its Facebook page, which lists Montana Together as a political organization, hasn’t been active since late February. 

Still, the offer of NIL money to endorse a political campaign is legal, according to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. 

Meg Durham Wright, a spokeswoman for the NCAA, told The Times that college athletes “are permitted to enter into NIL arrangements that include endorsements for political candidates if they choose.”

• Alex Miller can be reached at [email protected] .

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission .

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide

Top of the Times

• Share full article

Sedona Prince’s Work Off the Court Is Far From Over

The basketball player is fighting in a landmark case for college athletes to get paid. She worries a settlement in the suit may not do enough for female and Olympic athletes.

Sedona Prince, a 6-foot-7 basketball player at Texas Christian University, became an avatar for the upheaval in college sports. Credit... Christopher Lee for The New York Times

Supported by

By Billy Witz

• Aug. 29, 2024

Sedona Prince graduated from high school outside Austin, Texas, as an all-American basketball player intent on making her mark. As she enters her final year in college, she has left an indelible imprint — but not on the court.

Prince, a 6-foot-7 center at Texas Christian University, became an avatar for the upheaval in college sports.

She is a plaintiff in two antitrust lawsuits, including House v. N.C.A.A., whose settlement agreement , if approved by a judge, would fundamentally change college sports by allowing schools to directly pay their athletes. Her video of a paltry weight room at the 2021 N.C.A.A. women’s basketball tournament laid bare the disparate treatment between men’s and women’s players, which has led to significant changes.

Prince, 24, has 2.6 million followers on TikTok, has testified before Congress and consulted with lawmakers who want to codify rights for college athletes. She is trying to organize college athletes to give them a more powerful voice, and fears that the settlement may be bad news for female and Olympic athletes.

Ramogi Huma, who leads the player advocacy group National College Players Association, also opposed the settlement on Thursday, saying it would allow schools to collude against revenue-sharing and restrict payments from collectives.

Complications from a broken leg just before college turned Prince from a self-conscious teenager into an activist. “I didn’t think I was every going to play basketball again because of my leg and so I was like, ‘you know what? I’m just going to try to make a change while I’m here,’” she said.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Advertisement

Details for the Commemoration of Jackie Robinson Day in 2024

The annual recognition of the trailblazing american icon will highlight his impact on the sport and contributions to society through the mlb together pillars.

Major League Baseball, in coordination with the Robinson Family, MLB Clubs and various partners, has announced Baseball’s efforts to celebrate the legacy of Jackie Robinson through the MLB Together platform ( www.MLBTogether.com ) on Jackie Robinson Day – Monday, April 15 th .

IN BALLPARK

NUMBER ‘42’ IN DODGER BLUE – As is tradition, players, managers and coaches will once again wear Robinson’s iconic number on April 15 th , with all teams using Dodger blue “42” jersey numbers (regardless of their primary team colors).

• Additionally, Players, coaches, managers, and umpires will have New Era caps with a “42” side patch. Nike Breaking Barriers t-shirts also will be worn during batting practice.
• Commemorative base jewels and lineup cards will be used for each game.
• Stance socks with commemorative “42” logo, as well as Jackie Robinson products available for purchase at retail.

“PASADENA FIELDS” TRIBUTE VIDEO – A special tribute video, titled “ Pasadena Fields,” will be shown in all ballparks on Jackie Robinson Day. The video also will be played extensively on MLB.com, MLB Social Platforms, MLB.tv and more. The video can be viewed HERE .

In the spirit of the pillars of MLB Together, below are different ways Jackie Robinson Day will be commemorated throughout Major League Baseball:

VOLUNTEERISM

• On April 15 th , MLB will host a volunteer event at the Jackie Robinson Museum in collaboration with Foster Love . Volunteers, comprised of MLB Central Office employees, will assemble superhero gift boxes and sweet cases that will be donated that afternoon to children at a local foster care agency. By building awareness and volunteer opportunities, Foster Love hopes to better the lives of children in foster care and provide them with a sense of normalcy and comfort through a turbulent time in their lives.

YOUTH EMPOWERMENT

• JRF SCHOLARS – MLB and the Jackie Robinson Foundation (JRF) have continued their longstanding partnership, primarily to provide students from under-represented communities with college scholarships. Many of the current JRF Scholars, as well as JRF Scholars alumni, will be recognized by Clubs. MLB and JRF have partnered on MLB and Club internships, full-time job opportunities, and exposure to MLB careers. MLB has also set aside summer internship slots specifically for JRF Scholars. Historically, MLB and its Clubs have contributed approximately $20 million to the Jackie Robinson Foundation, including supporting college scholarships for more than 150 JRF scholars.
• TRAILBLAZER SERIES – This weekend at the Jackie Robinson Training Complex in Vero Beach, Fla., MLB and USA Baseball will host the 2024 Trailblazer Series . This annual youth baseball experience for young women, ages 13 and under from across the country, is a three-day event serving as both instructional and developmental. The event has been held in conjunction with Jackie Robinson Day since it launched in 2017. Sonya Pankey , the first grandchild of Jackie and Rachel Robinson, once again will attend to observe and speak to the young athletes.
• A special PLAY BALL event will be held at the JRTC on Saturday, April 13 th in celebration of Jackie Robinson Day, featuring hundreds of children from throughout Indian River County, Florida.
• MLB ID TOUR – MLB is continuing its 18-city MLB ID Tour with the goal of discovering the best athletes within diverse and under-served communities across the country to invite them to future baseball development programs, such as the Breakthrough Series , DREAM Series or Hank Aaron Invitational , many of which will be held at the Jackie Robinson Training Complex. The MLB ID Tour event during Jackie Robinson Day weekend will take place Saturday, April 13 th in Charlotte, NC and Sunday, April 14 th in Anderson, SC.
• For The Kids – Printable education activities aimed at providing kids information on Jackie’s life and legacy will be found at MLBTogether.com/42 . This includes fun activities such as word scramble, word search and coloring pages.
• Nike RBI Day at Jackie Robinson Museum – Participants of local Nike Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities (RBI) programs and their families will have an opportunity to visit the Jackie Robinson Museum in NYC on Saturday, April 13 th and learn about Robinson’s legacy in fun ways with JRF and MLB staff.

MLB CLUB & PARTNER ACTIVATIONS

MLB CLUBS – See separate attachment for Club Activations (with more to be announced leading up to April 15 th )

CAPITAL ONE – Since becoming the Official Bank and Credit Card Partner of Major League Baseball in 2022, and establishing the Capital One Walk-Off program, Capital One has committed over a million dollars to the Jackie Robinson Foundation in support of its programs. Once again, Capital One is supporting JRF and donating $1,000 for each “Capital One Walk-Off” (game-winning play) this year, committing to a total donation of $250,000 for the season.

GAMING – Major League Baseball’s award-winning video game franchise MLB The Show will continue to support the legacy of Jackie Robinson through its "Storylines: Negro Leagues Season 2" storytelling content. Sony Interactive Entertainment and San Diego Studio will once again sell a Jackie Robinson Foundation Pack that will support the JRF/MLB The Show Scholars program, supported by PlayStation Career Pathways Program, to help reduce the achievement gap in higher education.

MULTIMEDIA & BROADCAST

MLB NETWORK & MLB.com – MLB Network and MLB.com will highlight Jackie Robinson related programming and content throughout Jackie Robinson Day. MLB.com and all 30 Club sites will have extensive editorial content and coverage highlighting each team's special connection with Jackie, as well as special features that explore his impact as a baseball pioneer and his influence over today's players.

SOCIAL MEDIA – MLB Social Media platforms in both English and Spanish will demonstrate the many ways Jackie inspired baseball and society – not just as a member of the Brooklyn Dodgers, but most importantly, his character and what he represented before, during and after his career. Highlights include custom illustrations, collages, classic Jackie Robinson highlights and infographics.

Sign up to receive our daily Morning Lineup to stay in the know about the latest trending topics around Major League Baseball.

JACKIE ROBINSON DAY BACKGROUND

Robinson played his first Major League game at Ebbets Field on April 15, 1947 as a first baseman for the Brooklyn Dodgers. Major League Baseball has celebrated Jackie Robinson’s legacy in an extensive and unified League-wide show of support over the years, including retiring his number throughout the Majors in 1997, dedicating April 15 th as Jackie Robinson Day each year since 2004, and requesting that every player and all on-field personnel wear his Number 42 during games scheduled on Jackie Robinson Day since 2009. Major League Baseball aims to educate all fans about Jackie Robinson, his life’s accomplishments and legacy, while spearheading initiatives that support communities and meaningfully address diversity and inclusion at all levels of our sport. For more information, please visit MLBTogether.com .

Contact: Steve Arocho or Aby Goodman, Major League Baseball, (212) 931-7800, mlbpressbox.com , @MLB_PR .

JACKIE ROBINSON DAY 2024 – CLUB ACTIVATION EXAMPLES

Atlanta Braves

• The Atlanta Braves will commemorate Jackie Robinson Day at Truist Park on April 19 as the team takes on the Texas Rangers. In honor of the day, the Braves will host 55 children and chaperones from the Jackie Robinson Boys & Girls Club in Cairo, Georgia, the birthplace of Robinson, for a special day of celebration and activities at Truist Park. Before the game, the kids of the Jackie Robinson Boys and Girls Club will enjoy carnival games, a rock wall and zip line inside Truist Park at the Hope and Will’s Sandlot. As part of the Braves’ Jackie Robinson Day pregame ceremony, Ella Elbeck, the Atlanta Braves and MLB Jackie Robinson Scholar, will throw out the ceremonial first pitch, and the club members will stand in line with Braves players during the National Anthem. Additionally, the Atlanta Braves Foundation will make a charitable contribution to the Jackie Robinson Boys & Girls Club, bolstering their ongoing mission to offer a secure after-school environment where children can connect, develop essential skills, and cultivate the confidence necessary for successful futures.

Arizona Diamondbacks

• Jackie Robinson Day will be celebrated league-wide and the Diamondbacks special pregame ceremony will salute those in the community who are making a positive impact and carrying on the legacy of Jackie Robinson. Pilgrim Rest Baptist Church Choir will perform the National Anthem as well as the Black National Anthem. The ceremonial first pitch will be thrown by Valley-native Raven Gibson, the founder of Legendary Rootz, a Phoenix business that sells apparel and gift items celebrating the Black community and was one of Target’s featured businesses for Black History Month. The team will recognize the Boys & Girls Club Youth of the Year as well as the East Valley United Black Firefighters, who focus on involvement and development in African-American communities, fostering promotion and advancement and promoting overall well-being. Fans with the special event ticket package will receive an exclusive hat featuring Robinson’s number “42.” Tickets: dbacks.com/jackierobinson

Baltimore Orioles

• In honor of Jackie Robinson Day, the Orioles and Nike will host 150 youth baseball and softball players from the Jackie Robinson Baseball League at Monday’s game. Allison Alston, a senior at the University of Virginia and Baltimore’s Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholar, will throw out the ceremonial first pitch in a custom No. 42 jersey, provided by Nike. The Orioles and Nike will also donate 12 copies of “Testing the Ice: A True Story about Jackie Robinson” to students at Harlem Park Elementary Middle School. The book, which was written by Robinson’s daughter, Sharon, talks about what it was like growing up with Robinson as her father and his career in Major League Baseball.
• The Orioles and Harlem Park Elementary Middle School recently announced a long-term partnership, in which the Orioles will use their platform to provide Harlem Park with various resources and opportunities, standing as a committed partner to positively impact West Baltimore students for years to come.

Boston Red Sox

• The Boston Red Sox will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day in pregame ceremonies preceding their traditional Patriots’ Day game at 11:10 a.m. on Monday, April 15. During the ceremonies, Jackie Robinson Scholars will be recognized on field, and Red Sox players will wear their home jerseys featuring “Boston” on the front, with ‘42’ in blue on the back to mark the 77 th anniversary of Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier.
• Earlier this year, the club paid tribute to Jackie Robinson with a “Celebration of Life” on January 31, what would have been the 105 th birthday for the Hall of Famer. Now in its 21 st year, the event included a visit from Red Sox Hall of Famer Tommy Harper and 2007 World Series Champion Manny Delcarmen with students at Tech Boston Academy to speak about Robinson’s impact on Major League Baseball and his connection to the Boston Red Sox. The event was also attended by Jackie Robinson Foundation Vice President of Community Engagements and Partnerships Ivo Philbert, Red Sox Vice President/Club Counsel and Red Sox Hall of Fame Inductee Elaine Steward, and Red Sox Foundation Executive Director Bekah Salwasser; both Steward and Salwasser are Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholars.

Chicago Cubs

• The Chicago Cubs will celebrate the life and legacy of baseball legend Jackie Robinson at Wrigley Field Thursday, April 18. For Jackie Robinson Night, the Cubs will recognize The Support Group , a Chicago-based organization that inspires and educates underserved youth in Chicago with after-school programs, on the field pregame, as well as include both the Black national anthem and national anthem in the pregame festivities. JRF Scholars will sing the seventh-inning stretch.
• Cubs fans interested in attending the April 18 game are encouraged to purchase a ticket through the Jackie Robinson Night Special Ticket Offer which comes with a special-edition Jackie Robinson “42” hat. A portion of the proceeds from the Special Ticket Offer will be donated to The Support Group.

Chicago White Sox

• The White Sox will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day by honoring baseball’s trailblazers and empowering local youth as leaders in the classroom, on the field and beyond. The organization launched its eighth annual Jackie Robinson Student Contest, inviting students to submit a creative work that celebrates former Negro Leagues greats or Black baseball pioneers. Dozens of young artists found unique ways to spotlight unsung heroes who greatly contributed to the history and legacy of the sport. All contest participants received tickets for the game and an opportunity to participate in a pregame parade, while three grand prize winners will receive a VIP experience, including tickets to a suite and recognition during a special pregame ceremony. The White Sox also will welcome more than 250 players and family members from the organization’s Amateur City Elite (ACE) program, created to reverse the declining interest and participation in baseball among Black youth, and ten Little League teams served by the club’s RBI Jersey program to enjoy a pregame parade on the ballpark’s warning track. The ACE invitees, four of whom the Sox welcomed to a Negro Leagues Baseball Museum tour in Kansas City in early April, and the youth teams, including notable clubs like Jackie Robinson West and Rosemoor Little League, received a total of 1,300 game tickets for the evening. Chicago Bears offensive assistant coach Jennifer King will throw the game’s ceremonial first pitch. She is the first female coach in Bears history and the first full-time Black female coach in the NFL. Several 12U ACE players will take the field alongside the 2024 Sox lineup, as well as announce “play ball” to start the game. Additional resources and content surrounding Black baseball pioneers and the White Sox connection to the Negro Leagues is available at whitesox.com/negroleagues .

Cincinnati Reds

• The Reds will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on April 19 at Great American Ball Park (Reds vs. Angels) with pregame ceremonies and events in the Cincinnati community.
• Throwing out a ceremonial first pitch will be Cincinnati Cyclones hockey team head coach Jason Payne, one of the two Black head coaches of the ECHL. The Cyclones made history on March 30 th when Black players Landon Cato, Elijah Gonsalves, Jalen Smereck, Kyle Bollers, and Josh Burnside took the ice as the starting lineup.
• Members of the AACE LLC ownership group, Reds shareholders since 2005, will be recognized during pregame ceremonies. The AACE group was one of the first Black ownership groups in American sports history.
• Fans in attendance will receive a Jackie Robinson Baseball Card, presented by LifeCenter.
• In the community, the Reds have the following events planned:
• Reds players Hunter Greene, Will Benson and Bubba Thompson are scheduled to visit Cincinnati Public School’s Woodward High School on April 19 to speak to the baseball and softball teams about their journey to the major leagues.
• HBCU schools Wilberforce University and Kentucky State University are playing in the annual Joe Morgan Classic on April 17 at the P&G MLB Cincinnati Reds Youth Academy. Players from both teams will be wearing authentic replica Negro Leagues jerseys and will receive custom baseball cleats from Nike.
• The Skyline Chili Reds Futures High School Showcase presented by Cincinnati Children’s Sports Medicine & Orthopaedics will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on April 13 & 14 by hosting Cincinnati Public Schools baseball and softball teams. In honor of Robinson, all baseball and softball players will wear “42” jerseys provided by Nike.
• In conjunction with Jackie Robinson Day, the Reds Country Cares initiative for April focuses on the message that “Reds Baseball Welcomes All” to highlight the Reds commitment to diversity, inclusion and disability awareness. More information on Jackie Robinson Day activities and how the Reds promote positive change and inclusiveness through Reds Country Cares and other initiatives is available at reds.com/Unity .

Cleveland Guardians

• The Guardians will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on April 19 at Progressive Field with pregame ceremonies and community events. Ahead of JRD, Germaine Harvey, who is a Jackie Robinson Scholar currently enrolled at Case Western Reserve University, will be throwing out a first pitch. National anthem will be performed by Michael Williams on Sax, an inspirational saxophonist who began playing as a church musician for the Family Baptist Church in Ohio. Jackie Robinson information and education will be incorporated into inning break scoreboard features like our jersey number challenge.

Detroit Tigers

• On Jackie Robinson Day, the Detroit Tigers will host 42 local baseball and softball players from two local high schools at Comerica Park for a “Breaking Barriers” educational panel. The panel will feature Tigers front office staff providing background on their careers and the path they took to become successful, focusing on Robinson’s nine core values (courage, determination, commitment, persistence, integrity, justice, teamwork, citizenship and excellence). Tigers Nike RBI baseball player Jordan Spencer will throw out a ceremonial first pitch. Prior to the panel, attendees will also be invited to watch batting practice and are scheduled to meet with Tigers players, coaches and broadcasters.

Houston Astros

• The Astros Foundation distributed 100 copies of the book “I Never Had It Made” an autobiography written by Jackie Robinson to high school students from the Mickey Leland College Prep and students from the Astros Youth Academy. Those students wrote an essay on Jackie Robinson and are invited to the game on April 15 and a special pregame reception in his honor.
• During the Jackie Robinson Day pregame reception, held in the 42 Room at Minute Maid Park (a meeting space that celebrates the legacy of Jackie Robinson), the students will get a chance to hear from J.C. Hartman, Houston’s first Black major leaguer, who played for the Colt .45s from 1962-63. The students will also hear from Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholars during this pregame reception and assistant GM Gavin Dickey. There will also be a celebration of J.C. Hartman’s 90 th birthday during the reception, which is April 15, 1934.
• In an on-field pregame ceremony in honor of Jackie Robinson Day, Hartman will throw out a ceremonial first pitch. A portion of the proceeds from LDI Homes Share2Care 50/50 raffle on Monday will go to the Jackie Robinson Foundation.

Kansas City Royals

• In honor of Jackie Robinson Day, the Kansas City Royals hosted close to 80 high school students on Thursday, April 11 th as part of Club 42. The students listened to a panel made up of front office staff before enjoying lunch and watching as the team took on the Houston Astros.
• For the remainder of the month the public can stop by the Kansas City Urban Youth Academy (KCUYA) to view a Jackie Robinson exhibit. The exhibit includes replicas of three jerseys Robinson wore during the early days of his baseball career - before he debuted with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947 breaking the color barrier in the then-established Major Leagues. Jerseys include the 1945 Kansas City Monarchs, the 1945 Kansas City Royals, and the 1946 Montreal Royals.
• On Monday, April 15 th , the media is invited to sit and talk to Emmanuella Alawode, the Royals’ Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholar who hopes to break barriers in the medical field. The now senior attends the University of Missouri- Kansas City (UMKC) and is set to throw out the first pitch on Friday, April 19 th .

Los Angeles Dodgers

• The Los Angeles Dodgers and the Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation (LADF) will host multiple events throughout Los Angeles to celebrate the 77 th anniversary of Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in Major League Baseball.
• On Thursday, April 11 th , students from Alma Fuerte Public School, located on the campus of Jackie Robinson’s elementary school, learned about the legacy of Jackie Robinson from Dodger historian Mark Langill. The 190 students grades TK-8 helped prepare care packages for troops in honor of Jackie’s military service.
• On Sunday, April 14 th , in partnership with Nike and the Los Angeles Dodgers, LADF will release a Dodgers Dreamteam Coaches Playbook, the first of its kind in the program’s history. This playbook will incorporate Jackie Robinson’s nine values and is a direct investment from the 2022 MLB All-Star Game Legacy. The playbook will expand the curriculum Dodgers Dreamteam coaches currently use, which focuses on providing the highest level of sport skill while also focusing on social and emotional development. Dodgers manager Dave Roberts will join the group to unveil the new playbook and provide guidance on coaching skills.
• On Monday, April 15 th , the Dodgers and Dodgers Foundation will host a youth baseball and softball clinic at UCLA in Jackie Robinson Stadium.  Youth participants are coming from Dodgers Dreamteam, Orville Wright Middle School and Westchester High School. Attendees will participate in a baseball and softball clinic, in addition to a College & Career Panel that will include members of the Los Angeles Dodgers leadership team. 
• Also on the 15 th , the Dodgers will be joined by the Washington Nationals as they host their annual team meeting at the Jackie Robinson statue in the Center Field Plaza as the teams reflect on Robinson’s continued impact on today’s game.
• On Tuesday, April 16 th , in partnership with Mookie and Brianna Betts’ 5050 Foundation, LADF will host a ceremony to celebrate renovations and upgrades for John Muir’s baseball field. These renovations continue Jackie Robinson’s legacy at his alma mater in Pasadena and include a rebuilt pitcher’s mound and batter boxes, updated infield mix, updated fence signage, and updated scoreboard signage. Additionally, the dugouts are being updated, along with backstop padding, installation of a home plate halo, and an updated windscreen.

Los Angeles Angels

• The Angels Baseball Foundation is hosting their 4th annual “Angels JR42 Clinic, Presented by Nike” on Monday, April 15 th . Taking place on Jackie Robinson Day at the Anaheim Family YMCA Community Complex, the clinic will provide an outlet for children in Anaheim and the surrounding community to participate in a youth baseball and softball event to learn more about Jackie Robinson’s impact on the game and society. Approximately 75-100 pre-registered children, aged 6-12, will participate in a station-rotation event, learning skills such as: hitting, throwing, fielding, baserunning and the mental focus necessary to be an athlete and successful in life. Orange County Health Care Agency, an Angels partner, will provide games and activities at one of the stations to teach the kids teamwork, leadership and confidence, all skills shared by the clinic’s namesake, Jackie Robinson. Each child participant will receive an Angels hat and t-shirt.
• In addition, the Los Angeles Angels and the Anaheim Ducks hosted a screening of the documentary film “Beyond Their Years” on April 4 th for their staff members. The film depicts the lives of two Black athletes, Herb Carnegie playing hockey, and Buck O’Neil playing baseball. Although these two icons were excluded from playing at the highest professional level of their sport because of their race, the positive attitude they carried throughout their lives allowed them to overcome the hardships they faced. Through their involvement in the Future Aces (Carnegie) and Negro Leagues Baseball Museum (O’Neil), they continued to inspire others long after their playing careers were over. The screening was followed by a panel discussion with Angels Manager Ron Washington, Bernice Carnegie (Herb’s daughter), and the film’s producer Bryant McBride, as they discussed their own experiences and the importance of educating others by continuing to tell the story of these pioneers.
• On Saturday, April 6 th , the Angels welcomed former NHL player Willie O’Ree to Angel Stadium. O’Ree, the first Black player in the National Hockey League, is regarded as the “Jackie Robinson of hockey.” He was greeted by Angels Manager Ron Washington, Special Assistant to General Manager Torii Hunter, Outfielders Mike Trout and Jo Adell, as well as other players and staff members during batting practice. He shared his compelling story of breaking the NHL color line as a Boston Bruin on January 18, 1958.

Miami Marlins

• For the third consecutive year, the Marlins and loanDepot park hosted the Jackie Robinson Classic presented by Nike on Tuesday, April 9 th . The game, organized by the Miami Marlins Foundation, featured two predominantly black local high schools, Booker T. Washington & Boyd Anderson, providing them with the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to play a game at a Major League ballpark. On Wednesday, April 10 th , a member from the Jackie Robinson Museum in NYC hosted a Kahoot! trivia game on Zoom about the life and legacy of Jackie Robinson for Marlins employees.
• On Jackie Robinson Day, April 15 th , mentors and mentees from the Miami-based 5000 Role Models of Excellence Project will learn about the life and legacy of Jackie Robinson, as part of a pregame event at the ballpark. 5000 Role Models is a dropout prevention, mentoring program committed to closing the minority male achievement (access) gap by guiding minority male students along a carefully charted path through grades K-12 and college or ensuring the attainment of other post-secondary credentials, and increasing their employability in higher wage, high skills jobs within high demand industries. The mentors and mentees will greet fans at the gates with signs featuring Jackie Robinson’s Nine Values. The mentees will line up between Marlins players during the National Anthem.
• Additionally, the Marlins will honor the organization’s 2023 Jackie Robinson Award winners with a special pre-game on-field ceremony. The honorees include one from Baseball Operations (Joe Caro, Special Assignment Scout) and one from Business Operations (Daniel Hernandez, Director of Facilities). They were selected by their colleagues for best demonstrating Jackie Robinson’s Nine Values not only as professionals, but as people too.A Jackie Robinson Foundation Legacy Scholar from the University of Miami (Nasir Grant) will throw out the first pitch.

Milwaukee Brewers

• The Milwaukee Brewers partnered with Sharp Literacy to launch the Jackie Robinson Art Contest encouraging Milwaukee Public School students to use their creativity and imagination to submit an original artistic expression that captures the spirit of one or more of Jackie Robinson’s values of citizenship, commitment, courage, determination, excellence, integrity, justice, persistence, and teamwork. On April 15, the top three artists will receive a fan pack filled with Brewers memorabilia, the book “Who Was Jackie Robinson” and on-field pre-game recognition with their artwork displayed on the scoreboard during the presentation. The 1 st place artist will throw out the ceremonial first pitch.

Minnesota Twins

• The Minnesota Twins will honor and celebrate Jackie Robinson’s enduring impact on our game and society across the club’s digital platforms, along with activations in the Twin Cities. Twins social platforms will share a video sponsored by Nike that features personal comments from centerfielder Byron Buxton, who reflects on Jackie’s legacy and how it has influenced his own journey. On Tuesday, April 16, Twins mascot T.C. and front office staff will visit a local elementary school as part of the club’s “Reading is Powerful” program – which promotes the fun of reading and shares life lessons through the telling of baseball-themed stories – to entertain and educate students on Jackie’s Nine Values. Additionally, Chelsey Falzone, the Twins’ Manager of Youth Engagement, will be assisting MLB and USA Baseball at the 2024 Trailblazer Series.

New York Mets

• The Mets will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on April 15 with their second-annual Black Legacy Game, honoring former Black players and Jackie Robinson throughout the day. Beginning at 5:45 p.m., the team will host a Black Legacy panel featuring world renown rappers and recording artists, DJ Webstar & Mims to discuss the impact of Jackie Robinson’s legacy on the world of rap – the panel will be attended by Queensboro College students. Pregame ceremonies begin at 6:45 p.m., with the Canaan Baptist Youth Choir singing the Black National Anthem and Renee Neufville from the R&B Group Zhane performing the National Anthem. Jackie Robinson Scholar’s, fourth-year Harvard university student, Olusola Babalola will throw out the Honorary first pitch. Pregame festivities also include special appearances by the Robinson Family . David Robinson, Jackie’s son , will throw out the ceremonial first pitch, caught by Butch Huskey . Rachel Robinson, Jackie’s 101 year-old wife, will also be in attendance for the game and will be presented with flowers from Mookie Wilson and Manager Carlos Mendoza as well as a special video tribute. Additional recognition of former Mets and MLB Black players will continue throughout the game and the Amazin’ Mets Foundation will be supporting the Jackie Robinson Foundation with their 50/50 raffle for the game.

Oakland Athletics

• The A's will commemorate Jackie Robinson Day at the Coliseum on April 15 as the team hosts the St. Louis Cardinals. In honor of the day, early arriving fans will receive a special Jackie Robinson T-shirt giveaway. Additionally, partial proceeds from all special event tickets purchased will benefit the Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholarship and leadership development programs.

Philadelphia Phillies

• The Phillies have several special happenings surrounding Jackie Robinson Day on Monday, April 15. Before that night's game against the Rockies, the club will officially unveil Pioneers in Pinstripes, a new area in the Hall of Fame Club at Citizens Bank Park created to honor the trailblazers of Phillies integration and racial/ethnic diversity, focusing mostly on the time from when Jackie Robinson broke baseball’s color barrier to when Dick Allen became the Phillies’ first Black superstar. Pioneers in Pinstripes pays tribute to both the well- and lesser-known figures who helped pave the way for future generations of Black and other minority athletes on the Phillies and in the city, while also educating the public and serving as a home base for collections and research on the subject of Phillies integration. Taking part in the unveil will be Tazena Kennedy (daughter of John Kennedy, the first Black Phillies player), Terry Washington (son of pioneer Ted Washington - the first Black player signed by the Phillies), Ruben Amaro Jr. (whose dad, Ruben Amaro Sr., was part of the first wave of players of color in the 1960s), Willa Allen (widow of Phillies great Dick Allen), and alumni Gary Matthews and Milt Thompson. Family members of pioneers featured in the new area will also be recognized at the event. As part of the team's on-field tribute to Jackie Robinson, there will be a ceremonial first pitch by Gail Quarles, daughter of pioneer Hank Mason (who in 1955 was one of the first Black players to appear in games in the Phillies minor league system), who will be accompanied by Phillies Managing Partner and Chief Executive Officer John Middleton. In addition, the on-field tribute will include the Phillies honoring their 2024 Jackie Robinson Foundation scholar Julian Fields-Jackson from the University of Pennsylvania, as well as their Phillies Charities grant recipient Rukudzo Taruwinga, also a Nike RBI softball player. A portion of that night’s 50/50 Phillies Charities Raffle will benefit the Jackie Robinson Foundation. Earlier in the day, the Phillies will also be participating in a Jackie Robinson Day Celebration at the Philadelphia Stars Negro League Memorial Park, a free outdoor event honoring the legacy of Jackie Robinson and the Philadelphia Stars.

San Diego Padres

• The Padres continue to honor the legacy of Johnny Ritchey for his role as the “Jackie Robinson of the West Coast” for breaking the Pacific Coast League’s color barrier in 1948 while playing for the San Diego Padres. His debut came just one year after Jackie Robinson broke the major league color barrier, with Ritchey playing the position of catcher for the Padres in 1948 and 1949. On Monday, April 8, the Padres presented 10 high school seniors with the Johnny Ritchey Scholarship award worth $10,000 each during the pregame ceremony. The Johnny Ritchey Scholarship is designed for students that have encountered and, more importantly, have overcome significant personal adversities in his or her life and have used these challenges to strengthen themselves in their pursuit of higher education. Follow the ceremony, the students took the field with Padres starters prior to the game. The next day on April 9, the Padres hosted the Breaking Barriers Forum on the Sycuan Stage in Gallagher Square at Petco Park prior to Tuesday’s game. Three hundred students attended the panel that featured three prominent females who have “broken barriers” in the world of professional sports.

Seattle Mariners

• The Mariners will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on April 15 with their game beginning at 6: 42 pm. Pregame festivities include a Ceremonial First Pitch thrown by Cassius Culpepper , Rainier Beach High School and Baseball Beyond Borders Nike RBI student-athlete and descendant of Jackie Robinson, and national anthem performance by Dr. Richard Hodges , Western Washington University Assistant Professor of Music. The club will also celebrate Hometown All-Star, Omari Salisbury (founder of Converge Media) for his work to create culturally relevant content across the Pacific Northwest for urban audiences, as well as recognize the Hometown Nine Fellow Class of 2028 as Honorary Mariners for the evening. The first 10,000 fans at T-Mobile Park that evening will receive a Ken Griffey Jr. “Home Run Robbery” bobblehead.

St. Louis Cardinals

• The St. Louis Cardinals will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day at Busch Stadium on Wednesday, April 24. The festivities will include an honorary pitch ceremony featuring a local Jackie Robinson Foundation Scholar. The team will also recognize CommunityAmerica for their support of both the Jackie Robinson Foundation and Cardinals Care, with a pregame check presentation ceremony. In partnership with Nike, Cardinals Care will recognize nonprofits who represent at least one of Jackie Robinson’s 9 Values. And the team will provide educational activities about Jackie Robinson for kids in Ford Plaza.

Tampa Bay Rays

• The Tampa Bay Rays will celebrate Jackie Robinson Day on Monday, April 15 when they host the Los Angeles Angels. A special pregame presentation will highlight the five recipients of the Rays Baseball Foundation and Rowdies Soccer Fund’s fifth annual Racial Equity Grants. The program was launched in 2020 to build power in communities that have been historically overlooked because of systemic racism. The grants support organizations making an impact in the areas of housing, workforce development, health equity, criminal justice reform, education and youth development. This year’s recipients will each be given $20,000 and will be recognized on the field before the game and hosted in a suite with local community leaders: AMIKids, The Helen Gordon Davis Centre for Women, James B. Sanderlin Neighborhood Family Center, Sing Out and Read and Where Love Grows Inc.
• In addition, the Rays will host students from The Write Field Program, a Poynter Institute writing and mentoring program for African American and Hispanic students from middle and high schools in Pinellas County. The students will have the opportunity to interview local community leaders including State Champion Boys Basketball Coach Larry Murphy of Gibbs High School and Roosevelt ‘Bubba’ Swinton who was recognized by the City of St. Petersburg in January for his more than 50 years of service to youth baseball as a coach, mentor, scorekeeper, umpire and commissioner of the Wildwood Dodgers youth baseball club. The students’ stories written from the interviews will be published in the Tampa Bay Times . Dr. Alex Harris, CEO and Co-Founder of the Arts Conservatory for Teens, will sing “The Star-Spangled Banner” and “Lift Every Voice and Sing.” National Football League wide receiver Marquez Valdes-Scantling, a graduate of St. Petersburg’s Lakewood High School, will get the game started with the ceremonial first pitch.

Texas Rangers

• While the Rangers will be in Detroit on April 15, the club plans to have related programing at its Rangers MLB Youth Academy in Dallas next week. The Rangers Baseball Foundation will also make its annual contribution to the Jackie Robinson Foundation.

Toronto Blue Jays

• The Blue Jays will honor the legacy of Jackie Robinson and his impact on sport and society with a Blue Jays “42” hat giveaway to fans, spoken word tribute produced by a local Toronto artist and musician that will run in-stadium and on social, and various activations throughout the ballpark including a memorabilia display from the Canadian Negro League and Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame. All of the team’s in-game “42” items (player jerseys/hats/socks, commemorative bases, lineup card) will be authenticated and auctioned with proceeds going to Jays Care Foundation educational programs for kids across Canada.

Washington Nationals

• While in Los Angeles on the 15 th , the Nationals will join the LA Dodgers in their annual team meeting at the Jackie Robinson statue in the Dodger Stadium’s Center Field Plaza to reflect on Robinson’s continued impact on today’s game.
• Closer to home in Washington D.C., Washington Nationals Philanthropies, the official charitable arm of the Washington Nationals, are hosting a week of programming at the Nationals Youth Baseball Academy to educate and inspire scholar athletes through Jackie Robinson’s legacy. The programming includes Jackie Robinson “character trait” jersey creation, viewing and discussion of the movie “42”, and baseball/softball activities themed around overcoming adversity.
• Additionally, the Nationals will be donating signed, game-worn apparel from the day, which will be auctioned off to fans by the team’s charitable arm. Proceeds will benefit the Jackie Robinson Foundation and the Nationals Youth Baseball Academy, supporting its mission is to help children, families, and communities thrive through sports-based youth development and access to healthy food.