Riffell 1

Josh Riffell

Prof. Goeller

ENG 1101

25 Feb. 2020

Should Collegiate Athletes be Paid?

Collegiate athletics brings in an annual revenue of over one billion dollars, however, the

athletes in these events are not paid a single penny. Currently, money is made from the talent and

athleticism these young athletes exhibit. These athletes are not allowed to profit from their own

brand, which consists of their name, image, and likeness. By allowing this to continue, the

exploitation of these athletes will not cease. These athletes put their blood, sweat, and time into

their athletic programs, and their dedication remains unrewarded. If college athletes were to be

rewarded financially, they would be more incentivized to remain in college until their degree was

completed. If colleges and the organizations that govern these athletes do not give in to

compensating these young athletes, they may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

Paying college athletes would positively benefit the National Collegiate Athletic Association

(NCAA), the university in which the athlete attends, and the players.

The NCAA governs amateur athletics. Like other organizations, one of its main goals is

to generate revenue (Sow 13). Star athletes increase the NCAA’s profit. The NCAA is a

billion-dollar industry whose star athletes remain unpaid. Paying college athletes would benefit

the NCAA. Talented athletes would be more likely to remain as a collegiate athlete if they were

compensated. The NCAA has lost the interest of many top high school prospects. These players

are going overseas, or pursuing minor leagues to be compensated for their talent. (Sow 7). These
 Riffell 2

athletes represent lost opportunities for the NCAA to generate money and grow their fan base.

Game-day matchups would be more competitive than ever if these top athletes were not forgoing

college. Securing star recruits brings attention, fans, and money to the NCAA and their respected

universities.

Financially, rewarding players would be a positive outcome for both the NCAA and the

universities. Universities would financially benefit from top athletes staying in their programs

longer. Athletic programs are growing at an exponential rate with some programs bringing in

20-30 million dollars annually (Sow 14). Universities that miss out on talented recruits are

hurting themselves in the end. Ultimately, universities, their students, and alumni want the most

talented recruits to represent their institutions. Surveys have shown that students at the

universities polled believe players should be rewarded for the sacrifice they make to their

programs. One of these surveys says, “About 77% of all students said they favor or strongly

favor that policy and 81% of athletes said the same” (Hess par. 9). Despite this staggering

student support, not everyone is in favor of compensating these athletes.

Some arguments being made against paying college athletes are that it will destroy the

amateurism in college sports. Historically, amateur athletes have not been allowed to receive

financial compensation because this was reserved for only professional athletes. Another

argument is if​ amateur athletes were paid it would emphasize athletics over obtaining an

education​. “It fails, first of all, to recognize the value of sports as part of education” (Yankah par.

5). Also, a common argument is that athletes are compensated by receiving athletic scholarships

which help reduce the financial cost of attending college. These athletic scholarships are viewed

as a form of compensation for their contribution to their universities. These are valid arguments;
 Riffell 3

however, the evolution of college sports has precipitated change. A top collegiate athlete's brand

could be worth far more than the cost of a degree. Also, if college athletes were paid they would

have more incentive to remain in the NCAA and complete their degrees. Education is important

but there is also an argument to be made that these athletes are also risking an injury. An injured

athlete may never have the chance to capitalize on their brand. The NCAA’s policy that prevents

amateur athletes from profiting while they participate in college sports seems unfair to the

athlete. Newly designed athletic facilities, along with mounting coaches’ salaries, and

billion-dollar pay-outs for the NCAA are all reasons why amateurism should be reconsidered.

There are many who profit from these amateur athletes except the athletes themselves.

Universities know that athletes are major assets to their programs. Consequently, they deserve to

be rewarded for their contributions. Athletes in major programs such as football and basketball

come from mainly poor and deprived backgrounds (Yankah par. 4). Many elite athletes go to

college and leave early for huge paydays. Athletes that choose to leave college early or forgo it

all together in pursuit of monetary compensation for their athleticism are looking for earnable

income from their present-day athleticism.

The NCAA profits from star athletes while the star athlete and their families remain

impoverished in many cases. Much of the revenue made by the NCAA outside of athletic venues

are from memorabilia. All of the memorabilia and apparel can be personalized to represent the

university and the athlete’s number, but the athlete’s name is purposefully omitted. College

athletes should be able to profit off of their own names and brand they have built for themselves.

Consequently, steps are already being taken to allow college athletes to benefit from their own

brand.
 Riffell 4

Recently with new legislation in California called the “Fair Pay to Play Act”, the NCAA

is recognizing its own need to accept change. This bill essentially empowers athletes to earn

money from their own brand (“College Athletes” ). The NCAA acknowledges these laws need to

be put on a federal level so that all competition and recruitment remain fair (Murphy 2).

Collegiate athletics is a billion-dollar industry, yet the players that make this a billion-dollar

industry don’t receive any payment for their own names and services in which they provide the

universities and the NCAA. This needs to be addressed quickly. If you believe that collegiate

athletes should be paid then contact your State Representative or start a petition urging the

NCAA to bring about change to this policy. Everyone in the billion-dollar collegiate athletics

industry has profited but the athletes. However, without the student-athletes, the NCAA would

cease to exist. It is time to reward these athletes that are the heart and soul of the National

Collegiate Athletic Association.

 Riffell 5

Works Cited

“College Athletes In California Can Now Be Paid Under Fair Pay To Play Act.” ​College Athletes

In California Can Now Be Paid Under Fair Pay To Play Act​, National Public Radio, Inc,

30 Sept. 2019. ​Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/A601980135/OVIC?u=dayt30401&si

d=OVIC&xid=19d080e1. Accessed 6 Feb. 2020.

Hess, Abigail. “Majority of College Students Say Student-Athletes Should Be Paid, Survey

Finds.” ​CNBC​, CNBC, 11 Sept. 2019,

www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/student-athletes-should-get-paid-college-students-say.html​.

Accessed 6 Feb. 2020.

Murphy, Dan. “Congressman to Propose Federal Legislation for Paying College Athletes.”

ESPN,​ ESPN Internet Ventures, 2 Oct. 2019,

www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/27751454/congressman-propose-federal-legislat

ion-paying-college-athletes​. Accessed 6 Feb. 2020.

Sow, Abdoulaye. "Should College Athletes Receive Compensation?" (2019). ​Kinesiology, Sport

Studies, and Physical Education Synthesis Projects​. 77.

https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pes_synthesis/77​. ​Accessed 6 Feb. 2020.

Yankah, Ekow N. "The Call to Pay College Athletes Misdiagnoses the Problem." ​Gale Opposing

Viewpoints Online Collection​, Gale, 2020. ​Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints​,

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/DOPDKK665950770/OVIC?u=dayt3
 Riffell 6

0401&sid=OVIC&xid=37130565. Accessed 6 Feb. 2020. Originally published as "Why

NCAA Athletes Shouldn’t Be Paid," ​The New Yorker​, 14 Oct. 2015.