 |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS (JIM TRESSEL AND OHIO STATE BUCKEYES)
|
The Case for Paying College Athletes
By BEN COHEN
Amid all the furor over corruption in college football, there is one often-forgotten fact: In most cases where college athletes take money in violation of NCAA rules, the sums involved are relatively small. This year, Miami quarterback Jacory Harris, to whom the NCAA gave a one-game suspension, was ordered to repay a tally of improper meals, entertainment and nightclub cover charges that totaled slightly more than $140. Several Ohio State players who allegedly traded memorabilia for tattoos were making transactions that could have been worth as little as $100. Even the roughly $5,600 in benefits that resulted in a suspension for North Carolina defensive end Robert Quinn last season was a pittance compared to the $1.8 million the school paid then-coach Butch Davis. NCAA, which is rightly determined to make sure its championships can't be bought, forbids athletes to take anything from supporters beyond the benefits in their scholarships. But NCAA athletes are held to what is, essentially, the strictest code of amateurism in sports. It's not just that the rules prevent them from driving a booster's Ferrari to Las Vegas for the weekend. The rules can make them think twice before bumming a ride to the mall. For years, there's been a drumbeat of talk about whether college players should be paid—or at least free to profit from their fame before they graduate. But this year, the chorus has grown considerably louder. $3,222 SHORT A report released recently by the National College Players Association, an advocacy group for college athletes, found that the average full scholarship at a Football Bowl Series university fails to cover $3,222 in educational expenses, including everything from parking fees to utility bills. Just paying players this much, the report says, could "reduce their vulnerability to breaking NCAA rules." A year ago, NCAA president Mark Emmert told The Wall Street Journal he was committed to increasing the value of scholarships to cover the "full" cost of attending college. He presented the same view this year at a retreat with college presidents. The NCAA remains adamantly opposed to the idea of paying college athletes anything approaching a salary. One problem, critics say, is that it would be a burden for the majority of schools that don't profit from athletics. Paying players a wage or salary could also introduce legal uncertainties, such as ranging from the impact on Title IX to questions about compensation for injuries on the job, and unionization. Gabe Feldman, the head of Tulane's sports law program, notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that the NCAA has a "legitimate and important goal in maintaining the academic integrity of the institution and maintaining amateurism." If the NCAA starts paying its athletes, he adds, "you can't make the amateurism argument," he says. An NCAA spokesman says Mr. Emmert has been clear that "paying student-athletes a salary is in no way on the table." Those who favor some form of payment have one argument on their side: Attending college itself does not necessarily mean taking a vow of poverty. There's nothing about pursuing a bachelor's degree that restricts a person's ability to make money—even a lot of it. A student cello player can take a salary from a local chamber orchestra, for instance, while a promising golfer might major in economics while playing PGA Tour events and cashing sponsor checks from Nike. Yet when a student puts on a uniform with the school's name, the story is different. OLYMPIC MODEL University of New Haven business professor Allen Sack, a former Notre Dame football player, believes there's a way for students to be compensated without forcing schools to pay them. He says NCAA athletes should take a page from the Olympic model of amateurism. They should be allowed to take control of their own marketing rights: to hire agents, sign endorsement deals and engage in other "entrepreneurial" activities. In the current system, This wouldn't cost the NCAA or any of its member institutions a nickel. Marc Isenberg, author of "Money Players," a book about the business of professional sports, supports one model to compensate players while promoting good behavior. He says schools could create a trust fund for athletes, funded by revenue from TV rights payments, to be held in their name until they graduate. That way, he says, "if you stay in school, graduate and don't break any NCAA rules, there's a pot of gold waiting for you."
ADDITIONAL READING "College Football's Last Frontier: Better Food" looks at how some athletic departments are getting serious about what their players eat. "Whose Best Interests Does the NCAA Serve?" is commentary about former Auburn star Cam Newton and his troubles with the NCAA. "Gulf Between College Spending on Academics, Athletics Grows" is a Real Time Economics blog entry that reports on spending per athlete. WEB RESOURCES OBJECTIVE OVERVIEW STANDARDS 1) Why might it be difficult for universities to pay their college athletes? ACTIVITY IDEAS • The article suggests that a way to reduce the temptation to break NCAA rules is to pay student athletes enough to cover the full cost of going to college. This, however, is a violation of NCAA rules, which forbids athletes to take anything beyond the benefits of their scholarship. As a class, discuss this moral hazard: that you need to loosen the rules to prevent rule-breaking. Do you think paying student-athletes a small sum of money would stop them from seeking a bigger payout--and committing bigger rules violations--until after they graduated? Why or why not? • Currently, the NCAA allows athletes to receive scholarship money to cover tuition and fees, room, board and book. As a class, create a list of other expenses a college student might incur. Do you think a university should pick up these costs for its athletes? Why or why not? Discuss as a class. UPDATE: On Oct. 27, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors passed a measure that would allow member schools to grant scholarship athletes up to $2,000 extra to meet expenses. Do you think this is sufficient? Why or why not? Discuss as a class. • The article discusses three options for compensating players: increase scholarships to cover the "full" cost of college, follow the Olympic model of amateurism or create a trust fund from television revenue to pay players after graduation. Select one of these options and use the Internet to research it further. Create a list of pros and cons and then decide whether you think this option is viable for the NCAA. Explain your viewpoint in a written report. • Some people argue that athletes do get paid--with a free education. Visit the website of a four-year university in your state. Review the costs to attend (tuition, room, board, fees). Do you think a free or low-cost college education is the proper payout for a college athlete? Why or why not? Discuss as a class. • Universities financially support athletes from a variety of sports. College athletic programs are divided into revenue sports, like football and basketball, and nonrevenue sports, such field hockey, fencing and crew. Typically the revenue sports subsidize the nonrevenue programs. If the NCAA decided to pay its athletes, how would it decide whom to pay, and how much? Should a benchwarmer for the football team receive the same amount as the star quarterback? Should an All-America field hockey player get the same amount as a player on a basketball team that has a losing record? Discuss as a class. • Read "The Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sport" (link here)--a study by the National College Players Association and the Drexel University Department of Sport Management. Debate the report's connection between being a college athlete and living in poverty. Do you think it is a fair correlation? Why or why not? • Do you know any college athletes? If so, interview one about this article. What is his or her opinion about paying college athletes? What types of benefits does he or she receive as a college athlete? Discuss your findings as a class. • Research the history of the NCAA. When was it formed? Why? What does it do? Why is it so opposed to paying athletes a salary? Has it always taken such a strong stance? Were players every paid? Detail your findings in a written report. ADDITIONAL READING "College Football's Last Frontier: Better Food" looks at how some athletic departments are getting serious about what their players eat. "Whose Best Interests Does the NCAA Serve?" is commentary about former Auburn star Cam Newton and his troubles with the NCAA. "Gulf Between College Spending on Academics, Athletics Grows" is a Real Time Economics blog entry that reports on spending per athlete. WEB RESOURCES
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
