The Student-Athlete: Unpaid Labor?
Rhett Bomar, erstwhile Oklahoma Sooners QB, was recently dismissed from the team for accepting full time pay from a car dealership where he worked... well, considerably less than full time. Sounds like Bomar would hop over to the dealership on his way to practice to clock in, then go play some football, come back and clock out.
At the end of the day, very little about this story surprises me, other than the unfortunate fact that Bomar and his roommate (starting guard JD Quinn) got caught. The fact is, NCAA rules violations like this happen all the time and usually nothing comes of them. With so many schools to deal with and so many "student"-athletes to monitor, there's no way the governing body could successfully keep tabs on even just the players in the two majors (basketball and football) much less all college sports participants.
What the story did do is make me retread an argument I've had with myself countless times over the last several years. Specifically, whether college athletes should be compensated for playing - by their schools, not illegally at a car dealership. And it continues to be an interesting and many-faceted issue.
Some facets: (Pro A) The NCAA and its schools make money - boatloads of it - from the exploits of their "student"-athletes, so why should the athletes not reap some of these benefits? (Pro B) Perhaps a yearly stipend for athletic participation would discourage folks like Bomar from accepting money they don't deserve. (Con A) You think Title IX inspires controversy? Just wait until 'Bama pays each football player ten times as much as the entire women's soccer team. (Con B) Paying these kids would rob college athletics of the "purity" that makes it so appealing to many fans - though that purity is sullied more and more with every Rhett Bomar and JD Quinn.
Some would say that scholarships are the greatest form of payment a "student"-athlete can receive, and obviously the scholarship system is firmly in place. It's hard for me to see that as salary, though - simply put, the average football or basketball scholarship student has no interest whatsoever in academics, so the scholarship money is tantamount to a ticket for approximately three study-free years on campus.
Frankly, though I truly believe college athletes deserve some further compensation, it's difficult to conceive of a way to do it properly. I've toyed with some theories - attach earning potential to grades, give every D-1 college athlete an NCAA-designated amount, determine "salary" by the revenue a particular sport generates, etc. - but each has significant and serious problems.
In the end, I guess I'm saying no to compensating college athletes for their services. Too bad more college athletes can't say no to those who offer it illegally.
At the end of the day, very little about this story surprises me, other than the unfortunate fact that Bomar and his roommate (starting guard JD Quinn) got caught. The fact is, NCAA rules violations like this happen all the time and usually nothing comes of them. With so many schools to deal with and so many "student"-athletes to monitor, there's no way the governing body could successfully keep tabs on even just the players in the two majors (basketball and football) much less all college sports participants.
What the story did do is make me retread an argument I've had with myself countless times over the last several years. Specifically, whether college athletes should be compensated for playing - by their schools, not illegally at a car dealership. And it continues to be an interesting and many-faceted issue.
Some facets: (Pro A) The NCAA and its schools make money - boatloads of it - from the exploits of their "student"-athletes, so why should the athletes not reap some of these benefits? (Pro B) Perhaps a yearly stipend for athletic participation would discourage folks like Bomar from accepting money they don't deserve. (Con A) You think Title IX inspires controversy? Just wait until 'Bama pays each football player ten times as much as the entire women's soccer team. (Con B) Paying these kids would rob college athletics of the "purity" that makes it so appealing to many fans - though that purity is sullied more and more with every Rhett Bomar and JD Quinn.
Some would say that scholarships are the greatest form of payment a "student"-athlete can receive, and obviously the scholarship system is firmly in place. It's hard for me to see that as salary, though - simply put, the average football or basketball scholarship student has no interest whatsoever in academics, so the scholarship money is tantamount to a ticket for approximately three study-free years on campus.
Frankly, though I truly believe college athletes deserve some further compensation, it's difficult to conceive of a way to do it properly. I've toyed with some theories - attach earning potential to grades, give every D-1 college athlete an NCAA-designated amount, determine "salary" by the revenue a particular sport generates, etc. - but each has significant and serious problems.
In the end, I guess I'm saying no to compensating college athletes for their services. Too bad more college athletes can't say no to those who offer it illegally.
posted by Kolsky @ 10:13 PM
1 Comments:
At 5:32 PM,
OGWiseman said…
Kolsky, Kolsky, Kolsky,
I like the fact that you brought up this issue, but it seems like a no-brainer to me. First, Your Pro A: By that same logic, shouldn't Olympic Atheletes be compensated for their participation? Since the LA games the Olympics have been insanely profitable, so why shouldn't the atheletes be paid? For that matter, what about HS atheletes. Oak Hill Academy and other top schools have some games get coverage on ESPN, so should the PLAYERS get a cut of the Ad money? Come on. The profitability argument is no argument at all.
As to your Pro B: Is the fact that people break the rules a reason to change them? I hardly need list the string of other violations in society this logic should scarcely be applied to. Rewarding these atheletes for casually breaking the rules sends entirely the wrong message on a variety of levels.
Also, I take issue with your discussion of scholarships. You write "the average football or basketball scholarship student has no interest whatsoever in academics." This is patently untrue. There are thousands of college basketball players playing for scholarships, well under a hundred of them enter the NBA each year. If you want to count those that play overseas, fine, I will place the number at an incredibly generous 10%. That means that 90% of those students with scholarships are using them for NOTHING BUT the academic opportunities they offer.
I feel the same thing you feel. But to my mind, that feeling springs from our awareness of the incredible financial rewards available at the next level of competition. That is no real argument either. So until and unless you have some fresh arguments for me, I would consider this a dead issue. NCAA Student-Atheletes should not be paid, and those that are caught should be punished.
Post a Comment
<< Home