If the issue of paying college athletes
was black and white, collegiate athletes deserve to be compensated.
After all, they are the driving force behind a multi-billion dollar
business, yet they receive only a scholarship to cover tuition, room
and board, and books. However, the issue becomes, how do you go about
paying college athletes. Like any sport, certain players have more
value, and in college sports, you have several different divisions. A
player such as Anthony Davis or Robert Griffin III were worth
millions of dollars for their universities, while Division III
athletes arguably are getting value just through free tuition. How
can the NCAA fairly determine whether to compensate all players
equally when clearly not all players have equal value. And if the
NCAA were to try to compensate players based on their value; how
would that be determined? It is extremely difficult to envision a
system that fairly compensates each player, when you have such a
disparity in incomes produced by certain sports (football and
basketball) and conference affiliations. Power conferences generate
much more revenue than mid-major conferences, so players in those
conferences would theoretically stand to earn more. In conclusion,
collegiate athletes deserve to be payed; but creating a fair and
balanced system remains a tall task.
Zach Stiffel
KIN 577
