Pay for Play is Fine -- But Not in College Sports

Let's be clear.

There is nothing wrong with paying athletes to play sports. Professional sports is big business in America. The athletes, as a labor force, are rightly paid what the market will bear. That's the professional model.

But it isn't the right approach for the collegiate model of sports.

For the professional model, the bottom line is...well...the bottom line. For the collegiate model, the bottom line is education. In the professional model, the athletes are commodities who can be traded to meet market needs. In the collegiate model, the athletes are students.

For the last couple of weeks, I've written about the two reasons most people give for why student-athletes should be paid.

The first one is the capitalism argument. Big-time college sports, especially football and men's basketball, is big business. Student-athletes are a significant part of that capitalism machine and are generating the revenue. As labor, as with their professional counterpart, they have a right to share in the money they help bring in.

Story continues below

advertisement

It's an appealing argument, but it doesn't hold up. Neither higher education, of which college sports is only a small part, nor intercollegiate athletics is truly capitalistic. They do not generate revenue to make a profit; they generate revenue to fulfill a purpose, to meet the mission of higher education. If they were models of capitalism, many academic programs and nearly all sports other than football and men's basketball would be dropped because they are too costly and do not generate enough revenue to pay their own way.

In fact, based on that model a large number -- 30 to 40 percent in Division I -- of the football and men's basketball programs would shut down because they fail even to cover their own costs.

The second argument is that it just isn't fair. Everyone else gets paid -- some of the coaches get paid millions. Why shouldn't student-athletes?

Another appealing argument, but as flawed as the first. While it is true that student-athletes are the only amateurs in amateur college sports, the collegiate model has never been otherwise. Like every other human resource on campus, coaches, athletics directors, trainers, and all the other personnel in an athletics department are paid based on the demands of the market. We can argue, fairly in my opinion, that the market for coaches at the highest levels is artificially inflated by professional sports and may be damaging to the propriety of higher education as a whole.

But the idea that a market should be created for the employment of students to play sports because it is only fair would benefit only a few individuals in only a couple of sports on only a handful of campuses where revenues exceed expenses. Such a market would disadvantage all other student-athletes who would unquestionably be deprived of opportunities to participate so that revenues could be reallocated to compensate the lucky few.

Nothing fair about that.

These arguments, as appealing as they are around the water cooler or in the sports bar, miss the point. College sports has survived as a component of campus for a century and a half now for two reasons: 1) Those who play are students, and 2) Intercollegiate athletics shares in the driving purpose of higher education -- to educate students.

I know. That collective groan I hear rising is the chorus of cynics singing in unison, "Come on, Brand, give us a break."

To be sure, there are athletes playing college sports who have little or no intention of being a student. After 40 years in the classroom, as a philosophy professor, I can tell you that lack of sincerity isn't confined to athletes. You will find it all over campus. And, clearly, there are coaches who care much more about X's and O's than about A's and B's.

There are abuses and abusers.

But the majority of student-athletes -- including those in the sports of football and men's basketball -- would be or would want to be in college whether they are athletes or not. Some have the opportunity to be students only because of athletics, including young men and women from low-income families. The driving purpose of higher education all over campus, including athletics, is to educate. And on average, more student-athletes earn their degree than all the other students. Ten years after enrollment, 88 percent of all student-athletes earn their degrees!

It requires professionals and lots of money to carry out the higher education mission. We understand that.

But somehow, the obvious and even noble acquiring of money to finance the mission of higher education is characterized as little more than a ravenous greed for filthy lucre when it comes to financing the mission of intercollegiate athletics.

Intercollegiate athletics is not the entertainment division of the higher education business; it enhances the educational experience of student-athletes. Student-athletes are not a human resource in the great business machine of intercollegiate athletics; they are the object of intercollegiate athletics.

Professional athletes are paid because playing sports is their job. Playing sports is not the job of student-athletes.

They are amateurs at it.

Comments

[Chbronze]

I like that part about the "noble aquiring of money", maybe you you read that enough Mr. Brand you will start to believe it. As for me, I know better.

[Chbronze]

Boy, Brand doesn't have an axe to grind. I guess athletes are like grad students, let's pay them little or nothing, use them as often as we can, and accept the benefits derived. Sounds like capitalism to me. I'm not for players getting paid, but I would like to see the statistics of injured athletes who graduate. That would tell the true educational interests of these universities.

[dadumdee]

Where are you getting the idea that making profit and providing an education are mutually exclusive? Colleges exist to do both. You could be a f-cking genius, but if you show up to class without your tuition paid, you will quickly find out the limits of that purpose of meeting the mission of higher education.

Student atheletes should at least get an hourly wage for the amount of hours put in to practices, meetings, and games. I've known atheletes that didnt have money to do their laundry. If you pay them a decent hourly wage, you could eliminate financial distractions and keep tabs of the amounts of time students are spending on sports. They also should receive a full scholarship for all four years (and don't bring up cost because colleges are all about the mission of higer education, remember)

[barko]

Interesting editorial -- but one huge question pops out: if Brand is so concerned with college athletics NOT being part of the larger capitalist system, why does he allow EVERY other aspect of them to be run that way? Huge television contracts, memorabilia sales, stadium luxury boxes, and outrageous coach salaries are all becoming standard. Why not control those the same way you control the student athletes capitalist interest? It would be easy: regulate salaries, stadiums, and television contracts. But that will never happen, right Brand? Because -- unlike your attitude toward the actual revenue producers (the athletes) -- you have a vested interest in making sure everyone ELSE gets rich. Sad.

[Paw1]

Let's be clear here. Schools make a fortune from intercollegiate sports. Rights fees, ticket sales, merch, bowl bonuses, you name it. This fortune is made on the backs of young men (mostly), who by and large will never see the inside of a pro stadium, other than as a spectator. Injuries, temptations and what naturally happens when thousands of athletes compete for a few dozen positions leaves the bulk of these so called student athletes out in the cold after college. And if you think a starter on a D1 team has time to learn anything after practices, games, training and travel, there a lovely bridge in Brooklyn with your name on it.

Let's cut the hypocritical nonsense and turn the collegiate sports experience into a true minor league, providing some compensation for all players, instead of the very lucky chosen few that win pro contracts. Maybe the typical athlete, under these conditions, can actually earn enough to better him or herself, instead of winding up with a useless college degree and broken dreams.

[LiberalBuzz]

Obviously there needs to be reform for student athletes who get injured or of whom they are forbidden from working or risk losing their scholarships (I don't understand that reasoning at all) so that they can continue to get all they need besides books and "free" classroom with boarding included.

Food vouchers for the campus or at least some sort of program to keep them well fed and healthy is a great necessity so I don't understand any school not taking complete care of their athletes, BUT if that is the case then reform needs to be front and center.

BUT paying college students to play?

I agree completely that that is not a good idea. It could quickly get out of hand at the detriment of other students.

What next?

Some colleges becoming strictly sports oriented with TV deals, endorsement deals, and not even schooling being required?

Those athletes who forgo their education after high school to go play in either Europe or wherever are missing one very important thing...what happens if you get too injured to play?

There you are 19 years old, no education, injured AND no scholarship possibilities anymore, so what now? Flippin' burgers? Join the local gang to support yourself?

Sorry but the system has worked just fine but maybe a few kinks could be worked out, but otherwise no pay for athletes.

[Veritas 1]

College athletes get a free education, free board, free food, free tutoring, celebrity status, and all kinds of other help. Those who care less about the education get what they truly desire: exposure and a chance to develop their game. If a few need some pocket change for food, why can't they take out a private student loan?

While it would be nice to give student athletes salaries, where would the slippery slope stop? Do you think high profile football or basketball stars would be satisfied with minimum wage? Would it prevent them from leaving early for a professional draft? Europe? Not likely.

[dadw5boys]

It is a form of Simple Respect for the people who actually bring in that income for the schools !
Colleges constantly abuse the athletes privacy rights by releasing their medial records or medical information. The only reason to have a disabled list at all is so GAMBLERS can fix the odds for a game.
They put their bodies on the line and if injuried now know they could lose the scolarship the free romm and board and the college fees. Some kind of Insurance policy should be carried to pick up those fees and allow and injuried player to finish college.

[drkazmd65]

Dear Dr. Brand,... as an IU Graduate (non-atheletic, Biology BS '87) I agree with you in principle. In theory, collegate atheletics is not entirely about the money.

But, when a University can manage to raise the capital to improve training facilities specifically to attract Blue-chip prospects (without regard to their actual academic ability), add luxury seats and press-boxes for the fat-cat alums and big-paying radio/TV networks, or spend hundreds of thousands of dollars / year to get a 'winning' coach,... but a player on scholarship can't have a part-time job or he/she risks losing their scholarship,... the system isn't fair.

When the big money teams (and yes,.. most don't make money) get all the capital investment, and the Univeristy Library has to scrape by to get subscriptions to journals and buy new books - what is the job of the University anyway?

I remember several years back, when Bobby Knight was coach of IU's Mens' Basketball team, he was one of the few (for all of Bobby's other personal failings) that regularly complained about games scheduled away from campus, late on weekdays, during the school year. The TV timeslots took prescidence over the needs of the scholar-athelete.

What would be wrong with giving the student-athleles a small salary, or letting them persue off-season employment?

[Sportswoman]

shame on Huffington Post for deleting my comments about the hypocracy of brand's statements. You are no better than Fox News. I worked in the sports world; I saw poor kids on college campuses without enough pocket money for food when campus food services closed down. I see those jerseys selling for thousands in college bookstores witht hat kid's name on the back selling that jersey. Ticket prices are through the roof. Yeah, the NCAA cares about education and not money, all right. That's why there is no playoff system? Why has the Reggie Bush investigation taken two years?

[UnknownSoldier]

College basketball has deteriorated over the last 20 years. Wth kid Brandon Jennings signing with a European team right out of High School, it appears that the hand writting is on the wall for College Basketball.

A star high school player can goto Europe play for 3 or 4 years get paid millions to work on his game for the NBA.

You will see slow unathletic middle class boys playing College Basketball from now on.

[dadw5boys]

Colleges rake in millions but can not even carry disability insurance policys on the players. They can pay millions to a coach but not the let a college player finish college if they lose a scolarship because they are injuried !!!!

[UnknownSoldier]

They don't even guarantee the scholarship for 4 years, the players are on year to year scholarships.