Paying College Athletes

[erpowers]

For years the idea of paying college athletes has been debated. When I first heard the issue I was against paying college athletes. However, I am becoming more inclined to support the idea of paying college athletes. Now I contend that since these schools make so much money off the sports played at their schools and since coaches make so much some of the money should go to either the kids or their families. There are college basketball and football coaches that make about $5 million dollars a year. In addition, I saw a portion of a 60 minutes story that claimed that even though the NCAA tirelessly keeps track of whether athletes are making deal while playing sports the coaches are allowed to make lucrative contracts with shoe companies and demand that the athletes wear those shoes. It seems the schools make even more money. If so much money is made due to these athletes it seems like they should benefit.

It seems like paying athletes may prevent some of the problems we have seen in recent years. Yes, Maurice Clarett and Rhett Bonner both made choices to do the wrong thing and they should have been punished. However, if they had been paid maybe they would not have done what they did.

I understand that there are many issues that arise if someone decides to pay athletes. For instances if football is the only profitable sport at a school should only the football players get the money. Or, If multiple sports are profitable which kids get paid and how much do they get paid? However, I think the problems can be solved. So what do others think, should college athletes be paid.

[LisaM]

1. I think they should be paid work-study, at the going rate

Just like any other student who works in his or her department. No favors, but compensate them for the time they put in that benefits the University.

[jakefrep]

2. Absolutely yes.

The NCAA should end the silly charade that major college football and basketball are amateur sports. As a practical matter, it will never happen. Due to title IX, every athlete in every sport would have to be paid, which probably isn't feasible. If the colleges were truly intent on keeping guys like Clarett & Bomar in school, they would drop the silly restrictions on how scholarship athletes can earn money.

[democracyindanger]

3. Scholarship athletes

get a free education.

They get free room and board.

Know what that adds up to at a D-1 school?

I'm hardly a fan of the NCAA, and schools definitely are making money hand over fist, but scholarship athletes are paid, in kind.

[northzax]

5. you think your average football player gets an education?

Between the 5 hours of practicing, the travelling, the workouts and everything? Sure, a lot of programs are fine, but would you say a basketball player at Texas, or a football player at USC is really 'getting an education?' no, they are, in essence, apprentice professionals, there to learn a trade, and should be compensated for it.

let's say that the quarterback at Texas works about 60 hours a week, in season, and 30 hours a week, out of season, for the University. that's about right. in state tuition is $7600, room and board is another $8000 or so. so let's call it $16,000 total. not a lot of money for a full time job with significant risk of career ending injury, is it?

[democracyindanger]

6. If they're "apprentice professionals"

then schools should dump collegiate sports altogether and let the professions start their own farm system.

And yeah, plenty of college football and basketball players get an education. Not all of them are stereotypical only-there-to-make-it-to-the-big-leagues. They know the worth of a college degree.

I knew guys in college who worked crab boats and pulled chain in lumber mills during the summers to pay for school. Sorry, hand-wringing about career-ending injuries doesn't carry much weight with me.

[northzax]

8. right, but the point is

that they can't work crab boats or lumber mills, they already have a full time job, (football) one that makes a hell of a lot of money for some schools. imagine having 80,000 people pay money to watch you do your work study job, and your employer sold $150 jerseys with your name on them, and sold your work to television networks, and you got $16,000 a year in room and board? imagine being told you have to wear Nikes, because coach has a million dollar a year contract to make you wear them.

and yes, they are de facto apprentice professionals.

[democracyindanger]

10. They've got their summers like everyone else.

I don't dispute that they make a lot of money for schools (Schools can't sell jerseys with names, BTW). I don't dispute that football takes up a lot of time (but I was in student government, and that ate up a bunch of time as well). And let me imagine wearing FREE Nikes for a second. Okay. Big deal.

But let's come at it this way: Say players are paid. What's the pay scale? Is it uniform throughout the NCAA? Will schools in expensive cities like Cal or Stanford get to pay more than schools in cities with low costs of living like Madison or Boulder? How will that *not* affect a recruit's choice? Will the pay be based on performance? If a player goes down with an injury and is unable to participate for a majority of a season, wouldn't it be appropriate to not pay him? What if he doesn't make grades? Or are you proposing dropping the facade altogether and doing away with any scholastic requirements? If so, what do state schools do? Wouldn't taxpayers have a say about whether or not a huge chunk of the school is invested in what amounts to a semi-pro football league?

[LisaM]

12. Scholarship students in academic fields get a free education too

and sometimes free room and board. Yet, they can also carry University jobs. Do you think that someone who has a scholarship in physics, for example, should also be denied the right to have a job?

[democracyindanger]

13. Are they getting jobs

from boosters where they don't have to show up and still get paid?

[jakefrep]

14. This is a problem?

If a booster is dumb enough (and athletic boosters aren't the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree) to pay someone for not working, that's his own fault, not the athlete's.

I don't believe it's right to impose restrictions on scholarship athletes that nobody would dream of putting on recipients of academic scholarships.

[democracyindanger]

16. See: Oklahoma, Bomar, Kia

[LisaM]

15. They get internships from companies who want to hire them

and sometimes don't even finish their education. And those companies often subsidize the universities and their research programs. Worse, some of the companies (pharmaceuticals) are funding studies through university resesarch that benefits the companies directly and they use students to do their research.

I agree that the booster issue is a huge problem, but I don't think it's right that an athlete, particularly in revenue producing sports, gets NOTHING. That's why I like my work-study model, which I think could extend to all scholarship athletes. I had a college scholarship, but I was allowed to work in my dormitory cafeteria.

[Captain Hilts]

4. YES. They're often poor kids who don't have time for jobs because of ...

sports. It's a farce they don't get paid something.

[bigwillq]

9. They do get everything paid for.

Room, board, tuition.....plus all the other perks of being a college athlete.

They play to make money for the school so they don't have to pay for anything. That IS their salary.

[1gobluedem]

7. The problem is they can't get part-time jobs in their sport

Without giving up their amateur status. People on full-ride music scholarships can work summers in their field just like academic scholarship kids. But athletes can't; they can't work camps, play on summer-league teams; they aren't allowed. That's what isn't fair.

[Phredicles]

11. Universities should not be in the big-time sports business

The educational mission and the goal of being competitive in intercollegiate sports conflict with one another often enough than one, too often the former, ends up being compromised. The result is corruption and a loss of credibility for educational institutions.

But since there is so much $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ involved, I can't see universities getting out of the sports biz. So I agree with democracyindanger. A university education costs some $150,000-$200,000 these days, but scholarship athletes have it available to them for free. Paying them on top of this is an insult to non-athletic students.

[LisaM]

17. Then universities also shouldn't be in the big-time pharma industry

which they are.

Be that as it may, what 1gobluedem said. If you don't want students on scholarship to work, extend it to students in all fields, not just those with athletic scholarships. She and I have both made this point, yet I don't see one single response to it. When I was in college, if a student had a full-time ride for, say, computer science, they could work for and get paid by the computer science department as work study.

[Lefty48197]

18. They get $25,000 per year in tuition and another 15K for room and board

They're already well paid.

[mark414]

19. no fuckin way

and the coaches should have to follow the same no-endorsement rules as their players

if they want to make money go pro, and open up a spot for someone going to college to learn