College Athletes: Underpaid Is an Understatement

Written By: John Butler

When I was a senior in college a friend of the family gave me $200 as a gift. He was proud of the fact that I was focused on getting an education and not settling for “easy money” in the streets. I blew the cash on clothes, beer and all the idiotic things college kids spend their money on in about a week. Seems like a pretty bland story, right? Except for the fact that collegiate athletes are punished on a regular basis for this very same occurrence. Big time college athletes across the country are held to higher standards than their peers, meanwhile the NCAA stands by and reaps the financial benefits of their abilities.

It’s mind boggling to think that the NCAA is one of the highest grossing sports organizations in the world, yet they do not have a single athlete being paid for their performance. Each team that makes the Final Four earns its conference $9.5 million. The University of Michigan has an eight-year; $66.5 million contract to wear Adidas. The University of Texas signed a TV deal worth $300 million. These are just a few of the lucrative deals that universities across the country have in place to make their millions. And what do the athletes get in return? Not a single piece of the multi-million dollar pie is attributed to the players who are the foundation of the NCAA.

Some argue that although these kids are not receiving a paycheck, they are receiving a free education That $40,000 a year scholarship is pennies compared to what a star player brings to the table by way of merchandise and ticket sales. How can we even think about considering education a legitimate compensation when intense practice schedules and games across the country minimize the amount of time student-athletes spend being “just students?” Even if players wanted to pick up part -time jobs to support themselves, the NCAA sanctions how many hours they are able to work. I’m not suggesting that these kids should be offered LeBron-like contracts. However, they do deserve a percentage of the profits from jerseys that only sell because their last names are plastered on them like walking billboards.

The NCAA is in a constant battle with professional sports to keep athletes in school as opposed to signing for millions in the league. For years the professional world has won the war. Basketball’s biggest college player this year, Anthony Davis, is going pro after just his freshman year of college. Perhaps there wouldn’t be such a rush to head to the professional ranks if players in Davis’ position had the ability to support themselves and their families while attending school. Players would be more willing to follow the rules of the NCAA if they gave them the opportunity to earn extra cash like any other student. But while the NCAA ponders ways to keep their talent, their athletes are discovering a way to get appropriate compensation.

So what’s the solution you ask? I do think that it’s a bit much for players to receive a direct check from a university for their performance. If you think it’s hard for mid-major schools to get talent now, it would only increase if a legal biding war went into effect. I could see the headlines now: “Sophomore Turns Down $60K from Drexel University for Record Setting $1 Million from Kentucky.”

So instead of handing these guys a bi-weekly check, lets give them the opportunity to earn money for themselves without the red tape. If you’re a future first round draft pick, why shouldn’t you be allowed to sell YOUR jersey for profit? Why shouldn’t these young adults be able to sign endorsement deals with the companies that use their likeness on everything from video games to trading cards? In return, any player who seeks this opportunity would forfeit scholarship earnings. (Sorry kids, but you can’t have your cake and eat it to.) The money the schools would save from the forfeited scholarships would be used to fund the college sports that are often cut for the age-old phrase, “lack of funding.”

The question remains, what’s in it for the NCAA big wigs? The answer is simple. Unlike the current system in which a player’s stock often declines the longer he stays, college athletes will have the ability to become more marketable as they matriculate. John Wall on a wining Kentucky team is more marketable than on the cellar dwelling Washington Wizards. More talented upper classman equals better competition, which equals more revenue for the NCAA as a whole.

Sure my solution may need some tweaking. (No one wants to see Andrew Luck doing a Weight Watchers commercial for a check) But lets face it something has to be done. How many more college kids have to be suspended for bending the pay-for-play rules before we address a serious problem? Sooner or later the powers that be will get it right. The only remaining question is how many billions will the NCAA pocket before they do?