Tagged with: athletes education life sports
Athletes in revenue producing sports should be paid some of the revenue? That seems sensible enough, but for fun let’s tweak this statement. Student athletes in revenue producing sports should be paid some of the revenue! Controversy upon controversy begins.
Welcome to the problem which college and university athletics faces today, and welcome to this 3 part series on paying college athletes.
For this series, I’d like to address a few topics:
1) Defining the issue;
2) What are the pros and cons to paying players?
3) And finally, after April 25th, what are the implications of the Northwestern unionization vote.
Today’s post we’ll stick to Topic 1. For this series, the focus will be on major revenue sports. Like it or not, big time college football and men’s college basketball ARE DIFFERENT from other college sports. They bring in large audiences, big TV contracts, and BIG MONEY. This is all well and good. The NCAA has a product, people want that product, the NCAA and universities charge to provide the product, lots of people pay for the product, and the NCAA and universities can make some money (not all colleges are but big time college football and basketball are making money). The problem is that the product is the efforts of the student athletes who aren’t seeing the profit. Four major issues will be looked at through this series.
1) Should student athletes have to be amateurs?
2) Who has the rights to the student athletes’ image?
3) What should and should not be covered for the student athlete by the university?
4) How could all of this affect adapted sports? Check back next week for the break down on these four issues. Should student/athletes receive payments?