S HOOPS, RINKS & TURF
Why College Ballers Need to Get Paid By Torrie Jones, LA Valley College With the NCAA Men’s Final Four in the rearview mirror, and anticipation for the upcoming college football season increasing by the day, the elephant in the room grows larger. It grows larger in scale with the NCAA’s revenues as the popularity and profitability of college sports continues to balloon. The elephant in question—should college athletes competing in revenue generating sports get paid—is a question that the NCAA can no longer afford to ignore. The answer is “yes.” Let’s call it what it is. The NCAA exploits its college athletes under the guise of amateurism and an outdated “win one for the Gipper” notion of athletic purity. In reality, the money circulating around college football and men’s basketball each season is in the billions with a capital B. Average salaries for coaches in both sports is over $1 million per year, and the “non-profit” governing body themselves, the NCAA, rakes in tons of cash from TV rights, video games—which exploits the jersey numbers and physical likeness of each unpaid player— and merchandising. Starting in 2002, CBS paid the NCAA $6 billion for the exclusive rights to air March Madness for the next 11 years. That comes out to a $545 million yearly payoff for a three week event, not to mention numerous additional revenue streams—such as corporate sponsorship—which the NCAA enjoys during the lead up to the Final Four. Apparently, there is big league money to be made off of “amateur” athletics. Some would argue that covering tuition, room and board and other fees associated with going to school is compensation enough. According to the NCAA, a full ride at a major university for out of state students is worth $24,000 per year. Over the course of four years that comes out to nearly $100,000. In addition, scholarship athletes are given access to tutors, workout facilities, top notch dining halls and other perks of which the average student can only dream. To say a
28 ULMAGAZINE.COM
MAY 2009 / STAY CONNECTED. GET LINKED.
university education is not advantage enough would be false. But what does the university get back from its most prized athletes? In a report released by Cal State-San Marcos economics professor Robert Brown, University of North Carolina star forward Tyler Hansbrough was responsible for at least $1 million in revenue per year for his school. Granted, the majority of football and basketball players don’t enjoy as accomplished a career as Hansbrough, who just led the Tar Heels to a National Championship and is a three-time AP All-American, but UNC made at least $4 million off a $100,000 investment. That’s a profit margin that even Bernie Madoff couldn’t cook up with a straight face. Many of the same people who believe student-athletes shouldn’t be paid are also the same folks that become outraged when a transcendent talent leaves school early to become a pro. What they don’t realize is that if a payment system was implemented, many of these “one and done” athletes would remain in college long enough to graduate. This would enrich the quality of competition in both college leagues as well as the pros. Players would be given the opportunity to physically and mentally mature while gaining additional “on-the-job” training before jumping to the next level of athleticism. Admittedly, creating a business model such as this one, where players get paid, is a difficult proposition and would take years to refine. The system as it is currently constructed favors the power structure and was created long before the era of exclusive team shoe deals, 24-hour sports channels and in-stadium luxury suites. Fortunately, the NCAA is affiliated with higher learning, so it should make it easier to recruit the world’s most brilliant economic minds to find a solution. The money is out there, the NCAA simply needs to do the right thing and pay up.