1. Should College Athletes Be Paid To Play?:
Why Compensating Collegiate Athletes Is A Bad Idea
JAKE HELLER
Baker University
SA 496 | Fall 2014

2. Abstract
Over the course of history in college athletics, there have been plenty of disputes as to
whether the college athlete is being truly compensated for his or her time as a part of their
respective institution. There have been many cases in recent history that have exploited both
sides of the argument and created opposing opinions. The effects that payment of student-
athletes could have are both good and bad, and entertain a further look into this heated subject.
On one hand, we see that the NCAA and college institutions make immense amounts of money
off of their athletes, essentially exploiting them and removing all of their rights and power. On
the other hand, though, it can be seen that schools provide scholarship and other benefits to their
athletes that can be more than enough of a trade for the education that they are providing.
Restructuring college athletics and paying players would be a major change, and doing so would
have a massive effect on the future of collegiate sports.

3. Introduction
Over the course of history in college athletics, there have been plenty of disputes as to
whether the college athlete is being truly compensated for his or her time as part of their
respective institution. College athletics is "big business", so to speak, and generates hundreds of
millions of dollars in revenue each year. The entirety of this revenue is then fed back to the
college or university without the athlete seeing anything more than what his or her scholarship is
worth. Between ticket sales, merchandise, television contracts, and a plethora of other sources of
income, college athletes are responsible for the majority of an institution's financial successes.
Over time, especially in most recent history, it has come to the attention of players, fans, and
other stakeholders that athletes should most likely see a monetary share of what they bring in for
their programs and schools.
Within the last year, athletes such as Johnny Manziel of Texas A&M and Jameis Winston
of Florida State have been scrutinized for using their likeness to their advantage. As the rule
book is written now, student-athletes are not to receive compensation from any form of booster
or in advantage to their name or likeness. These cases, and others that are similar, have caught
the public’s eye and caused much controversy in collegiate athletics. The most prominent
example and recent current event on this topic is the formation of a union on the Northwestern
University football team. The players have unionized, forming the College Athletes Players
Association (CAPA), as an act of lashing out against their university for lack of compensation,
stirring much controversy in all of collegiate athletics. Kain Coulter, the former Northwestern
quarterback and leader of CAPA tweeted after the approval of the union:

4. "So proud of my teammates...and supporters around the nation! This is a HUGE win for
ALL college athletes!..." The NCAA, not happy with the ruling, lashed back with a tweet of
their own:
"Re union ruling: No need to completely throw away a system that has helped millions of
students attend college:...", including a link to a summary of the ruling. (Gaio) This is obviously
a burning controversy all over college athletics.
With the idea of paying student-athletes comes a multitude of other problems that would
possibly arise if payments did occur. The grandest dilemma is attempting to weigh the good and
the bad, the pros and cons, to ultimately decide what is best for athletes, institutions, and college
athletics as a whole.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the multiple effects, benefits, and downfalls of
paying college athletes, and the power that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)
has. This ongoing discussion of student-athlete compensation has become a heated topic among
all levels of collegiate athletics. Such compensation could greatly change and effect all
collegiate institutions nationwide, as well as the general makeup and economics of college
athletics.
Effects of Paying Athletes
One of the biggest issues regarding payment of college athletes lies within arguments
between revenue generating and non-revenue generating sports. At most institutions, football
and men’s basketball are the only two major revenue generating programs. This means that most
of the other programs are costing the institutions money to sustain. If players of all teams were
paid equally, which would most likely be required, the majority of programs would put their

5. programs and departments further into the red. Also, programs that do draw a profit would
minimize their earnings, as a percentage would be funneled to the athletes. This would
especially hurt football programs, where rosters typically consist of more than one hundred
student-athletes.
Within the previous issue lies another major problem: Title IX. Title IX requires that
men’s and women’s sports are to be equals regarding funding, facilities, apparel, and multiple
other benefits. (Schott) Even though women’s programs generally do not draw profits, they still
must be treated as equals at all institutions. With no profits, it is easy to value women’s
programs and men’s non-revenue generating programs as less important. Paying these athletes
would be harder to do when their sports are already costing the institution money.
Payment of players releases the concept of amateurism in collegiate sports. In most
cases, this concept is revered and idealized as it has been determined that college athletes are not
yet professionals, and therefore should not yet be treated as such. (Potuto)
The last effect that compensating athletes would have is a skew of graduation rates.
Overall, division one football and men’s basketball programs, which are also the highest revenue
generating sports, tend to have significantly lower graduation rates. Football and men's
basketball players have a 17.7% and 34.3% lesser graduation rate, respectively. (Fram) If
players were to be paid, this would alter their outlook on their role, making them believe that
their monetary value is worth more than finishing their education.
Reasons for Compensating Student-Athletes
There are multiple reasons for people to encourage the payment of collegiate athletes.
First and foremost, many see that it is unfair that institutions, conferences, and the NCAA make
hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars off of their athletes. Between ticket sales,

6. merchandise, television deals, and video games, the athletes’ likeness is used, known, and
appreciated all over the United States. The use of the word 'amateurism' is becoming obsolete as
the world of collegiate athletics has become "big business". A 'scheme' is in place by the NCAA
to keep their tax-exempt status while still generating massive amounts of revenue. (Corgan)
Division one athletics brings in two billion dollars annually, giving nearly none of it back to the
athletes. (Pekron) The amount of money drawn by athletes does not reflect the work they put in.
Student-athletes have no power or say in how they are used or represented and lose the majority
of their rights.
The next reason student-athletes should be compensated is that they are not able to obtain
or sustain a job during the time with their institution. The majority of their time and efforts is
required to be towards academics and their sport, making it nearly impossible to add a third
aspect to their schedule and workload. Without jobs, some student-athletes that do not have
financial backing from parents or family cannot afford some of the basic necessities that a
student in college needs. If athletes were allowed employment, they could have access and
financial stability that is enough to tide them over during their time as a student-athlete. In a
study of 420 random households, it was found that African-American households support
payment twice as much as Caucasian households do, most likely generalizing that race and level
of education are factors on views. (Steinbach)
The last reason that athletes should be compensated is that participating in a sport limits
what the student can do as both a student and citizen. Other non-athlete students can use their
talents to start their own companies or develop their own ideas, while athletes are confined to
their school work and sport. Today, many schools with successful technology programs allow
their students to receive compensation for their advances in the field. The Bayh-Dole Act

7. requires that students receive a royalty for their inventions. It can be argued that student-athletes
should be held to the same standards, being compensated for their talents in their respective
fields.
Forms of Payment
If made possible, there are two forms that would be effective to pay student-athletes. The
first form would be to allow student-athletes to use their name and likeness to their advantage.
This would mean that they could sign autographs for money and receive royalties and benefits
from boosters. The money that they earn from this would be put into an account that they cannot
touch until after they have graduated and are no longer part of their respective institution.
(Schott) The biggest issue with this, though, is that those funds would be hard to track. Since
cash deals are non-traceable, most athletes would most likely try their hand at under-the-table
deals for the instant financial gratification. There would be obvious speed bumps to get over
with this form, but would be extremely appealing if perfected.
The second form of payment would be a stipend, given annually or monthly, that would
be deposited directly into the student-athletes' bank accounts. This would reduce illegal activity,
making under-the-table deals less appealing. (Schott) Once an amount and time(s) of delivery
were decided on, it would be turned over to the athlete, leaving it up to them to manage it. It
would be assumed that the student-athletes would be forced to learn how to effectively manage
their funds, but many of them most likely have not been taught how to do so yet. A monthly
stipend would be much more effective so that it ensures that the athlete does not diminish the
funds immediately or prematurely. If an annual stipend were chosen, it would be wise of
institutions to require a class or seminar on effective money management.
Reasons for Not Compensating Student-Athletes

8. The first part of the title 'student-athlete' explains what the person is at an institution to
do, giving priority to their academics over sport. When a student is on scholarship to be part of
an academic program, they are first there to get their education, then there to compete on the
field or court. To be there on scholarship means that they do not have to recover most of their
expenses during or after their career. Purdue athletic director supports that, "pay for play has no
part in the amateur setting," stating that, "the value of a full scholarship and direct support
services at Purdue has a value in excess of $250,000. Plus, student-athletes with full scholarship
have no loan to pay back, an expense that could run upwards of $200,000 at Purdue." (Steinbach)
As stated, this is an immense amount of money over time. Receiving an education that can be
used for the rest of one's life, at a heavily discounted rate, is something that cannot be
discredited. During their time on scholarship, student-athletes have access to what most general
students do not, such as free tutors, nutritionists, facilities, coaches, and multiple other benefits.
Many individuals would not even have the opportunity to be in school without a scholarship, so
it can be argued that the financial aid they receive is more than enough compensation. With this,
it is also argued that the chances of making it are so very slim, that the highest percentage of
athletes turning pro are baseball players at a mere two percent. (Manfred)
Another reason for not paying athletes, as stated before, is that most programs just cannot
afford to compensate every team member. Some institutions and programs would have no issue
doing so, but others would not survive if they had to pay their players. Most schools simply do
not have the funds to both uphold programs and compensate the athletes. Some programs could
no longer be subsidized and be forced to shut down, denying the dreams and ambitions of
thousand of college athletes. (Sutton) Within this reasoning lies another problem, as it could
force institutions and programs to put a value individual players. A major question that is asked

9. is whether you can pay a third string defensive lineman as much as you would your starting
quarterback. One is typically there to be a part of the practice squad, fulfilling a very minor role,
while the other is in the immediate spotlight and potentially earning your program a significantly
higher amount of money. It is not fair to put a value on each individual student-athlete, and
doing so would teach values that are not in line with most institutions' missions.
Power of the NCAA
The last reason that student-athletes cannot be paid lies within the power of both the
NCAA and IRS. If institutions do pay their athletes directly, they form an employer-employee
relationship, making them no longer tax-exempt. The NCAA is a non-profit organization, and
they would have to completely restructure how they do business, possibly running them out of
business. If athletes were to become employees, their respective schools would be required to
provide insurance and retirement plans, file for taxes, and provide other benefits. (Corgan)
Doing so would only further diminish revenues and drive some schools much further into debt.
Conclusion
In the end, it should be clear that the payment of college athletes is a bad idea for a
plethora of reasons. Amateurism is to be revered, and education is to be held to its highest value.
Without college athletic programs and scholarships, many athletes would not even have the
opportunity to attend a school and receive an education. While it may seem unfair that the
NCAA and the schools within it take in all of the revenue that their players generate, they are in-
turn giving those players the opportunity to advance themselves as athletes and people of society.
Major restructuring would have to be done to both the NCAA and individual institutions' budgets
for payment of players to work, and college athletics would turn into more of a business than it

10. already is, clearly making it unfair and unbalanced. In this controversial argument, it is clear that
student-athletes should not receive monetary compensation for their careers as competitors.

11. Annotated Bibliography
Gaio, Michael. "Athletes' Unionization Attempt Scores Major Victory - Athletic Business."
Athletes' Unionization Attempt Scores Major Victory - Athletic Business. 1 Mar. 2014.
Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Schott, Stephen. " ARTICLE: Give Them What They Deserve: Compensating the Student-
Athlete for Participation in Intercollegiate Athletics" Sports Lawyers Journal. 3 Sports
Law. J. 25. (Spring, 1996 ): LexisNexis. Web. Date Accessed: 2014/11/24.
Potuto, Josephine. "Article: What's in a name? The Collegiate Mark, the Collegiate Model, and
the Treatment of Student-Athletes" Oregon Law Review. 92 Or. L. Rev. 879. (2014 ):
LexisNexis. Web. Date Accessed: 2014/11/24.
Fram, Nicholas. " ARTICLE: A Union of Amateurs: A Legal Blueprint to Reshape Big-Time
College Athletics" Buffalo Law Review. 60 Buffalo L. Rev. 1003. (August, 2012 ):
LexisNexis. Web. Date Accessed: 2014/11/24.
Corgan, Michael. " comment: permitting student-athletes to accept endorsement deals "
Villanova Sports and Entertainment Law Jornal. 19 Vill. Sports & Ent. L.J. 371. (2012 ):
LexisNexis. Web. Date Accessed: 2014/11/24.
Pekron, Chad. "ARTICLE: The Professional Student-Athlete: Undermining Amateurism as an
Antitrust Defense in NCAA Compensation Challenges" Hamline Law Review. 24
Hamline L. Rev. 24. (Fall, 2000 ): LexisNexis. Web. Date Accessed: 2014/11/24.
Steinbach, Paul. "Study: Blacks More Likely to Favor College Athlete Pay - Athletic Business."
Study: Blacks More Likely to Favor College Athlete Pay - Athletic Business. 1 Oct. 2012.
Web. 25 Nov. 2014.

12. Steinbach, Paul. "College Athletics Officials Adamantly Against Pay for Play - Athletic
Business." College Athletics Officials Adamantly Against Pay for Play - Athletic
Business. 1 Sept. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Manfred, Tony. "Here Are The Odds That Your Kid Becomes A Professional Athlete (Hint:
They're Small)." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 10 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.
Sutton, Ben. "A Case for Amateurism in College Sports." - SportsBusiness Daily. 21 Apr. 2014.
Web. 25 Nov. 2014.