College Athletes, Pay for Play?
...ge athletes.” (Schneider) Since fellow students agree to increase their own tuition, some say athletes are not the only individuals feeling this way and have the support needed to change the NCAA rule. What is going unnoticed is that only 24% are agreeing with athletes and receiving extra money. This means 76% of the students surveyed feel differently about the subject. Because 76% clearly is not the majority, there is not a strong argument present. (Schneider) One of the strongest arguments most individuals try to use, regarding payment for student athletes, involves how much money athletes produce for certain programs. For instance, football and men’s basketball have proven over the years to make the most money for most universities. The three major networks ABC, NBC, and CBS are constantly battling over rights to show college games. “The NCAA wanted $131, 750,000 from [ABC] for half of the college football over-the-air (as distinct from cable) television rights in a four year deal.” (Byers 266) This was the price ABC paid the NCAA from 1981-1984 to show the games. Prices for rights to games have only increased, and with these kinds of numbers produced by college athletes it is no wonder why many suggest they should receive a little back. It is said that a benefit of paying athletes includes the extinction of athletes receiving illegal money and they will not be exposed to potential risk later in life, such as Chris Webber. Chris Webber got caught up in receiving illegal money from a booster and is currently being prosecuted for his actions.(Whitlock) This claim is invalid because no matter what laws the NCAA passes, illegal money will always be present and athletes will not be sheltered from this special treatment. Passing a law to pay athletes and expecting all illegal money to cease is not going to happen. Contrary to all the arguments above, not paying division one athletes has much more support and seems to be more valid. There is a reason the NCAA has not passed a law saying athletes should be paid, and numerous reasons support this view. In the NCAA Division I manual it states “Subsequent to becoming a student-athlete, an individual shall not be eligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics if the individual: (a) Accepts any remuneration for or permits the use of his or her name or picture to advertise, recommend or promote directly the sale or use of a commercial product or service of any kind, or (b) Receives remuneration for endorsing a commercial product or service through the individual’s use of such product or service.” (NCAA 81) The NCAA recognizes all the problems that may occur later if athletes were to start receiving money and explains why they haven’t taken any major steps towards it. A major concern involves recruiting. Universities allowed to pay players would be able to buy recruits and this may persuade them to attend the school offering the most money. It is almost like a free agent in professional sports. Attending the school with the most to offer decreases the likelihood of a fair playing ground for all of college athletics. As a result certain schools would be major powerhouses and it would stay this way forever. They are called student-athletes, not athlete-students. An education is the most important asset to have when wanting to apply for a job and usually is the reason most student athletes choose the school they go to. For greed is what Jason Whitlock believes is driving this want for payment to athletes. For him being a former student-athlete he has seen the inner workings of the system. “As a former, low-level Division I football player, I can say with a clear conscience that college athletes are not getting ripped off. Now, they might be allowing themselves to get exploited by not taking advantage of their educational opportunity. But that's within their control.” The reason they choose the school they attend is because the institution will pay for their education. Well, when an athlete graduates they have the chance to make money in the future. In fact, a study related to paying student athletes showed, “…opponents of payment believed that student-athletes were already paid, and paid well through an athletic scholarship. DeShazier (2000) reported that in addition to an athletic scholarship, academic tut...