Despite CBS Sports and Turner paying over $1 billion a year for broadcasting the NCAA March Madness tournament up until 2023, the broadcasts’ sports stars themselves will not receive much of that sum (at least not directly). There is an ongoing debate about whether college athletes should be paid or not. The question arises primarily regarding football and basketball student-athletes, since they bring in most of the money. A recent lawsuit also raises questions about NCAA scholarships and what schools will be allowed to offer in terms of benefits to prospective recruits
Here are three arguments for and three arguments against it:
Three Reasons Why They Should Get Paid
The difficulty to implement is no excuse
An important argument coming from those who oppose paying college athletes is the expected difficulty involved with implementing such a far-reaching move. The following are just some of the questions that pinpoint the complexities: Who will pay for students (the NCAA or colleges)? How often will they receive pay? Will there be a salary cap? The main question regards the equitable application of paying college athletes, namely who will get paid and who won’t.
Since the debate was first sparked over the NCAA’s income from broadcasting, the answer is simple: The athletes to get paid are the ones playing the sports that bring in the big money, namely, men’s basketball and football players. Others won’t. College basketball and football players are the ones who provide a good time for fans who are willing to pay to watch the games, so they deserve to get paid. In contrast, players on college baseball, soccer, lacrosse, and other teams, won’t get anything. This is capitalism, and this is how it works in America. It might not be perfect, but it is better than how it is now.
Athletes risk their body and are exposed to permanent damage
One of the best aspects of college sports is the players’ enthusiasm. Their love and passion for their respective game is admirable and infectious. But, there is a downside to it; in their fervor to play their best, many college athletes suffer serious injuries that sometimes end their career.
Setting aside the disturbing fact that a career-ending injury will stop their scholarship, those athletes put their bodies at risk of permanent damage, without being paid. Hurting your knee might leave you limping for the rest of your life. Suffering concussions can cause dementia and depression, not to mention CTE. Those college athletes who put their bodies on the line for each training session and game they play deserve to be paid for the risk they are taking.
There’s big money involved in college sports anyway
It`s common to think paying college athletes can detract from the purity of the game and ruin that magic. But it won`t. The passion fans see on the court or field is attributed to the fact that there is no money involved.
However, that’s not exactly accurate. Big companies are profiting off of branding college athletes, namely, asking them to wear brand apparel during games without paying them to do so. As such, these players feel used. And rightly so. If we`re really concerned about preserving the purity of college sports, we should want athletes to be paid.
Three Reasons Why They Should Not Get Paid
The difference for college athletes is marginal in term of money
If salaries will replace scholarships in college sports, athletes won’t earn much more. In fact, an impressive $100,000-a-year salary for a college athlete will grant him only a few hundred dollars more per year than a scholarship. According to Time.com, a full athletic scholarship at an NCAA Division I university is about $65,000 a year. This includes tuition, room, board, and books (if you enroll at a college with high tuition). In contrast, a salary will be subjected to federal and state income taxes. Therefore, out of the $100,000, a net of $65,100 will remain for the student. The difference is marginal.
Earning big money too soon can be harmful
People argue that paying collage athletes will help create a sense of financial awareness for them. However, in reality, poor investments, trusting unethical financial advisors and lavish spending habits are some of the main reasons professional athletes find themselves broke after they retire, according to ESPN documentary, “Broke.” Without sound financial education, young college athletes may not be equipped to handle so much money.
Paying big money for college students miss the purpose of college
College is about preparing oneself for real life. It is supposed to provide tools and abilities to succeed after college. In that manner, college athletes are no different than other college students, who practice in hospitals, law firms or advertising agencies. They all work hard for little to no money, so why should athletes be any different?
A lot of young adults today are impatient and lack the ability to delay gratification. College can teach them a great life lesson: in real life, you have to work hard and wait for your chance. Paying big money to any college student, athlete or academic, is far from being the ideal preparation for life.
The Bottom Line: Paying big money to college athletes defeats the purpose of college as a preparatory lesson for life, especially when the monetary difference between a salary and a scholarship is marginal. On the other hand, not paying athletes who risk serious injuries is morally wrong. If you were in NCAA management, would you recommend changing the current practice?