Collegiate sports are a major business for many universities in this country. Schools generate billions of dollars each year from their sports programs, such as football, basketball, and baseball. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) prohibits payments that stems beyond educational scholarships to athletes that are responsible for producing such revenues. All though many people believe that this is wrong, I’m actually a little liberal with the rule.
Education for me is the most important thing that anyone can achieve and carry on with them throughout one’s life. Just to be able to go to college is a blessing in its self. Not everyone gets that opportunity, let alone have their entire education paid for because they are good at a particular sport. Participating in college athletics, being successful in school and having a job to support the extra needs of college such as clothing and trips home is almost entirely possible. Student athletes are considered to be amateurs and can’t be compensated with monetary value. That proposes a question, is free education enough?
Tuition at an average public university has increased 8.3% to $8,244 from last year. Including room and board, the average cost per year for a student is roughly about $21,500 per year at a four year college (College Board, 2012). Along with meals, books, and even tutoring, all of this is covered by scholarships. But due to some restrictions of athletic scholarships, student athletes still have to cover the deficit of about $3,000 on their own. Scholarship money can be taken away at even giving moment. An injury can have a career ending effect on a student athlete and where will that leave them if they don’t finish school.
Many schools athletic departments actually lose money every year trying to fund their programs. So how do they make up for that? They have to use the schools general funds that take away from many academic scholarships and professor salaries. The schools that actually make a profit from these programs, which is only about 12 division I schools in the nation, that money goes to support the other programs that fell into financial debt. So how will these schools be able to pay their athletes? Institutions like Ohio State and Stanford, which produce major revenue from their basketball and football programs, would be able to pay for players but what about the thousands of other universities that can’t?
In a recent study completed by the National College Players Association, they estimate that football players in Football Bowl Series institutions (Division 1 schools) have an average market value of $121,048. Schools sell jerseys’ of their star players each year. It can be argued that players do deserve some compensation for giving away their identities as marketable commodities. Shouldn’t they receive some of those royalties? Some people may seem to think so. An article in the NY Times made a very good proposal that the universities can and should have a salary cap and salary for each sport. It goes into stating that by reducing the number of scholarships, it frees up money to have a salary cap per team at $25,000 (which will allow coaches to pay for star players). It also would allow student athletes to put money in their pockets and participate in student life in a more normal way (Nocera, 2012). Does this mean that they won’t receive any scholarships and just be paid to play? Will this be enough to cover all expenses that a student will encompass?
Making money should not be a by-product of going to college. Many people can make the argument that it is extremely wrong that the athlete is deprived of the opportunity to benefit from that heavily commercialized enterprise beyond a scholarship, especially when others are getting wealthy off of it. “Players should be allowed to benefit from their names and likenesses in the marketplace, just like any other student, coach or administrator can. We are the reason that many schools become popular” (Hugie, 2012). This is a very good point. If you think about it, no coach or administrators for a school are working for room and board. They aren’t there simply for the chance that they will someday work for the NBA or the NFL. So why should the athletes be any different?
In conclusion, players are paid in a sense. They receive payment which is awarded by scholarship money. If we begin to pay athletes with monetary value, I believe the end result would be a decrease in the number of sports offered by schools and therefore a decrease in the number of opportunities available for student athletes.

College Board. (2012) School Tuition, Retrieved from http://www.collegeboard.org
Hugie, D. (2012, May 15). Interview by B Cunningham [Personal Interview]. Should athletes be paid?
Nocera, J. (2012, April 05). Business insider. Should student athletes be paid?, Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/joe-nocera-on-paying-student-athletes-2012