NCAA Cheating its Players?

Mark Emmert at an NCAA conference

There is an interesting topic in the college sports arena that has garnered a lot of attention in recent years: should college level athletes be financially reimbursed? According to the PBS Frontline documentary "Money and March Madness" (link below), there are two sides to the argument. The current scenario is that college students wishing to participate in college sports while earning their degree are required to sign a form that includes two things, one being a refusal to accept financial reimbursement for their athletic abilities; the second is that the NCAA is allowed to use their picture, name and likeness at any time.

Some such as former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon, and author Michael Lewis (author of Blind Side) feel that this isn't fair to the college students. The NCAA has turned 'college sports' into a professional business venture, bringing in billions of dollars every year. The NCAA pays the schools, and the schools pay their employees. After a season, and the extremely well marketed "March Madness", billions of dollars have changed hands, but no money has found its way into the hands of the actual players. Should the NCAA and people like Mark Emmert (pictured, top), earn money off the abilities and efforts of the players and not in any way reimburse them?The other side of the coin is that the college students are not employee's, and do not need to be paid. The availability of equipment alone at a large university costs the school billions. The services, such as training and cleaning, would cost the players in the hundreds of thousands. The players receive these for free as long as they play, and are showcased for possible future professional playing. The question is, is this fair?

Legally, yes it is. The students agreed to the trade, which is in simple words: "the college trains me as best as they can, and I play for free." In many cases, this is also true: "The college gives me a degree, and I play for free." The successful college student will earn a degree, highly specialized training, access to extremely expensive facilities, and a chance to get to the major league. There is nothing wrong with that, but some are asking whether or not this should be the way it is done. It is fair, but is a change a good idea? The negative is what about the smaller colleges? They don't make millions every season, and they are only surviving year to year off of government subsidies and grants. How can they be expected to pay their players?

The economics is another aspect that must be considered. Out of all the college students, if some of them were being financially compensated for their athletic performance, what would that do to their social aspects? In a dorm, even being paid 20 or 30 thousand a year (which is extremely small compared to major league salaries), it could possibly have detrimental effects on the campus as a whole. No other college student is being paid for their research and development, but the professor's are. No college athlete is being paid for their athletic ability, but their coaches are. It doesn't seem that the situation warrants a change.

Click here: www.pbs.org