Should College Athletes be paid?

Student’s name: Cheanel Nolden

Instructor: Jewell Winn

Date: February 15, 2018

Literature review

Abstract

Discussions on college athletes being paid or not have generated a lot of opinions amongst both students and institutions. A college athlete is always assumed to have it all, but this seems to be misguided.

The argument revolves around the fact that already the student gets benefits such as scholarships and that should cover the payment while universities benefit from the funds that they create from the different sports activities. This literature review explores how the two parties benefit from one another, what would be the effect of paying and not paying the athletes and how the institutions use the income generated from the sports activities.

Introduction

Most universities have reported very high income from the athletes.The University of Texas at Austin which reported $165million. (USA today 2014b). This has given rise to arguments on the matter. On the other hand, the athletes are compensated with benefits and scholarships. Many wonder how much the universities make, how it is used and why the athletes should not be paid.

According to Neil Buchanan an economist and scholar, he stated that the problem was that in contrast to what many people think the students are reimbursed through scholarships. (Tyson Barnette, 2013) argued that a scholarship doesn’t amount to cash that the player is worth and that the college athletes are broke no matter what type of scholarship they have.

The questions that must be answered are;

· How the athletes and universities benefit from one another,

· What are the main reasons for and against paying college student-athletes?

· How the institutions use the income generated from the sports activities.

How athletes and universities benefit from one another

The athletes receive benefits such as free rooms, meals and tuition and other varied expenses instead of receiving a salary. (Mondello, Piquero, Piquero, Gertz & Bratton, 2013) says the majority of students get scholarships and even though not all get the full scholarships, getting benefits and expenses catered for is also a form of payment. An advantage to the athletes is that they are able to finish education with less debt. They also receive free coaching.

The colleges benefit a lot from athletes especially the coaches who earn high salaries. They have been able to build better facilities from the revenue. The sports also earn the colleges thousands of dollars.

In a survey should student’s athletes be paid (2014), 18 people were asked whether athletes should be paid. When asked if athletes should be paid 10 responded no, 8 responded yes. Of the 18, 9 were female 7 of who said yes, 2 said no. The remaining nine who were male were more divided, 3 said no while 6 said yes. This survey showed that most people think athletes should not be paid.

What are the main reasons for and against paying college student-athletes?

Some advantages of paying athletes would be, they may play longer, they may also support their families at a younger age, it may also limit external influences, and it's their right to receive what they have worked for. Some disadvantages would be most players would be irresponsible due to their young and they may never be interested in studies.

However, (Dorfman, 2013) says that increasing pay to student-athletes could mean tuition increase at many universities. Non-athletic students would bear an extra cost to cater for athletes who already earn other benefits. Some colleges would afford to pay while others wouldn’t especially those that do non-profit athletics.

How the colleges use the funds they generate from the sports programs

Most of the revenue generated in the sports even is thought to be a lot. It is used to cover the cost of hosting the events. Some colleges operate at a loss at times. Some of the revenue is also used to keep non-profit sports at bay. The funds are also used to build and upgrade sports facilities and pay football coaches. The expenses seem to be higher than the revenue in most universities. (Peale, 2013) noted that NCAA data showed that only a small percentage of the spending on student aid. The remainder goes to pay salaries and facilitate game expenses.

Conclusion

The subject of paying college athletes is still under great argument and controversy. The argument can be broken down into aspects like how the income is generated, what impact paying or not paying would have on the athletes, how universities and athletes mutually benefit from each other. The above discussion helps us to understand both aspects and also help to provide an answer to the puzzle. This topic is still under debate, but the majority have been seen to support that college athlete should not be paid.

References

Amateurism, P., Creativity, C., & Athletics, I. Should College Athletes Be Paid?

Edleman, M. (2013). A short treatise on amateurism and antitrust law: Why the NCAA's no-pay rules violate section 1 of the Sherman Act. Case W. Res. L. Rev., 64, 61.

Gregory, S. (2013). It’s Time to Pay College Athletes. Time Magazine.

Mondello, M., Piquero, A. R., Piquero, N. L., Gertz, M., & Bratton, J. (2013). Public perceptions of paying student-athletes. Sport in Society, 16(1), 106-119.

Sanderson, A. R., & Siegfried, J. J. (2015). The case for paying college athletes. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(1), 115-38.