Zak Holliday

English 1201

Professor Michael White

April 7, 2018

Pay the Players

Can you imagine someone making millions of dollars using your name or image without

you receiving any benefit? In Ed O'Bannon’s novel Court Justice: The Inside Story of My Battle

Against the NCAA, he discusses a time after his college basketball career that he visited a

friend’s house where the kids were playing the NCAA March Madness 09 video game. As he

watched a boy playing the game, and he heard the game announcer, it was clear that one of the

players depicted in the game was him. “And then, there I was, in the starting lineup. Number 31.

Six feet, eight inches. Two hundred and twenty-two pounds. Power forward. Left -handed shot.”

(Prologue). They used O’Bannon’s digital avatar image to make money on video game without

compensating him at all or even notifying him about it. He had heard of NFL or NBA video

games where the players depicted in the game are compensated for the use of their names and

images. The fact that it was not the same for a college player puzzled and frustrated O’Bannon.

This is just one example of how the NCAA, universities and private companies have taken

advantage of athletes for their personal gain. College athletes should share in the revenue that

they produce for the universities because they are the work force behind a multi-billion-dollar

industry, it would lower the corruption currently permeating college sports, and because the

athletes put their bodies at great risk every time they play.
 2

Fig. 1. Ed O’Bannon’s digital avatar image in NCAA March Madness 09 video game
(“High-Stakes Games: Critical Step for Suit Seeking Payment for College Athletes”).

Where did it all go wrong? Maybe it was when institutions of higher learning decided to

add athletics to their programs. Historian Taylor Branch explains in his article, “The Shame of

College Sports,” that it was based on the idea of Mens sana in corpore sano – a sound mind in a

sound body (4). This meant that, to have the best men, it would require strength both physically

and mentally. These warnings that the intellectuals of that day gave about the men in America

becoming “soft” lead to variations of rugby being played at universities as the toughening

solution. A commemorate plaque still hangs in New Jersey that commemorates the first college

game, which took place on November 6, 1869, where Rutgers defeated Princeton 6-4 (4).

The football games that evolved from these original rugby games became so brutal and

corrupt, that President Roosevelt ordered reform, and representatives from 68 colleges formed

the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The NCAA had very little power for over

50 years, but in 1951 they hired Walter Byers as the executive director who, just a few years

after, created an infractions board after two college scandals of counterfeiting grades to keep
 3

players eligible and a point-shaving conspiracy to restore public support of the sports (Branch

11). This gave the NCAA office its first appearance of having authority which they used again in

the fight for televising college games. Byers stood by the 1951 NCAA convention vote that

outlawed televised games except for a chosen few licensed by the NCAA staff. He used hardball

negotiation tactics to not let the schools have individual television contracts. For example, when

Notre Dame and the University of Pennsylvania attempted to negotiate TV deals, Byers not only

threatened to punish those schools, but he also threatened the schools which would agree to play

Notre Dame and the University of Pennsylvania. Byers negotiated with the new television

networks on behalf of all the college teams, and successfully consolidated power and money into

the NCAA. The first deal with NBC in 1952 was for one-year, and it paid the NCAA $1.4

million for the football games. The first proceeds for the NCAA were used to rent a headquarters

in Kansas City (Branch 11).

Today the United States has half a million men and women who participate in

competitive college sports each year. A portion of those athletes attract tens of millions of

viewers on television, and millions more that come to the stadiums to watch them. College sports

has become such a large business and is no longer about balance between physical and mental

strength. Many argue that “student-athletes” should actually be referred to as “athlete-students”

because they are the work force behind the multi-billion-dollar industry, but they do not receive

any of the profits. Law professor and attorney, Marc Edelman, reports in his article “21 Reasons

Why Student -Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed to Unionize,” that “The typical

Division I college football player devotes 43.3 hours per week to his sport - -3.3 hours more than

the typical America work week.” (1). The focus has moved away from academics and less is

required of athletes in the academic arena. For example, students often are required to miss
 4

college classes for their sport. Edelman gives the examples such as the road to the NCAA men’s

basketball tournament which can require players to miss up to a quarter of their classes in the

spring semester, and the NCAA Division I football championship which is played on a Monday

night. The fact that student-athletes can miss so much school without the repercussions that

typical students would experience, shows that the players are the labor force behind the

universities.

Many of these athletes are admitted to the universities without having to meet the

required minimum academic standards that other students of the university must fulfill. The fact

that they come to the university often underqualified and ill-prepared to succeed on the academic

level of a university sets them up for failure. Often big-time college athletes come from low-

income families, and this is the only opportunity that they see to escape poverty and help provide

for their families. They quickly realize when they arrive in college that staying eligible is the

goal rather than trying to receive a meaningful education that will benefit them for the rest of

their lives. They take the easiest courses available and often graduate without a real education.

This minimizes the value of any scholarship that they receive. By paying the players, they might

stay in school longer to finish a real degree instead of declaring for a draft early due to financial

hardship.
 5

Fig. 2. Cartoonist on rationalizing unpaid talent (“UK, U of L Could Pay Players $500k Each,
STILL Make $13 Million Profit”).

Many of the athletes entering the university are hoping that college will be their big break

to going professional in their sport. The Pulitzer Prize winner writer, Joe Nocera, points out in

his article “Let’s Start Paying College Athletes” that “we had 5,500 Division I men’s basketball

players last year, and only 50 went to the N.B.A.” (9). Providing additional time to complete

their education would give athletes an opportunity to take fewer courses during their athletic

eligibility and the ability to take classes that may have interfered with their practice schedules.

Nocera also suggests that, “Legitimizing relations between agents and college athletes would be

another huge improvement, because players could get advice about their professional prospects”

(Nocera 7). At this point, players risk losing their eligibility to play college sports if they even

speak to an agent.

That is just the beginning the hypocrisy and scandal that plagues the NCAA. Last fall the

U.S. Attorney’s Office announced charges of fraud and corruption in connection with at least

four NCAA Division I men’s basketball coaches, one sports agent, and an executive at Adidas
 6

(Edelman, 1). This example just shows the deep lines of corruption that are interwoven between

the universities and big business. This could all be averted if there just was a legitimate system in

place to pay the players. “The current systems just enable misconduct to flourish,” says Joe

Nocera (3). And the result is that the integrity of the university is compromised.

One of the more high-profile scandals included Reggie Bush, a running back from

University of Southern California, who received a wide range of gifts during his time at the

university. The “improper benefits” included a free home, car and travel expenses for Reggie and

his family to entice him to work with certain sports agents. This resulted in Reggie losing his

Heisman Trophy and USC having its national title taken away. Another scandal involved the

now-incarcerated booster from University of Miami who provided many players with cars,

money and even prostitutes. The University was put on a three-year probation, they lost 9

football scholarships and one basketball scholarship for three years. Ohio State University had to

fire Jim Tressel, the head football coach, when he knowingly let his athletes play in the Sugar

Bowl after they had traded memorabilia for tattoos. These examples just scratch the surface of

the corruption in college sports – all of which could have been avoided by simply paying the

players. The ideal of the NCAA of protecting amateurism only invites continued scandal in this

day and age.

While fans sit watching the College Football Playoffs or the March Madness basketball

tournament, the athletes are putting their bodies at extreme risk every time they step on the field.

This physical risk that college athletes experience is likened with professional sport participation

rather than just amateurism. Fans jump and cheer when a linebacker on the football field

absolutely obliterates an opposing player on the other team, but both athletes can be affected for

life. In his article, “Long-Term Outcome of Knee and Ankle Injuries in Elite Football”, E. Larsen
 7

depicts a study of former college athletes where 57% of the players had sustained knee injuries

during their career and 40% had an ankle injury (2). This shows that most of college athletes will

sustain a serious knee or ankle injury during their career. This dramatically decreases their

chance of playing professionally and earning a living after college. There are also many lasting

effects for all high-level athletes such as acute arthritis or concussions that will affect them later

in life or even shorten their lives. If athletes are willing to give up their short-term and long-term

health, they should be compensated for that. In Joe Nocera’s article “Let’s Start Paying College

Athletes” suggests that along with being fair paid for performing, athletes should receive lifetime

health care benefits so that they could work through their past injuries and address any future

health issues that arise due to the strain they put on their bodies during college (5). One of the

biggest reasons that athletes choose to turn pro instead of going to or finishing college is because

of not wanting to risk injury in college and wanting to be paid for their work.

The injuries are often very severe like that of Ray Dennison who was a football player for

the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies in Colorado in in the 1950’s. In his article, The Shame of College

Sports, Taylor Branch tells how Ray died from a head injury that he received while playing the

game, and his wife filed for workman’s-compensation death benefits. The Colorado Supreme

Court ruled that he was not eligible for benefits even though his friends who worked part-time as

a bookstore cashier would qualify. His fatal collision while on a football scholarship was not

considered a work-related incident since the university was “not in the football business” (15).

Anyone who has ever been to a big-time college football game might disagree with that

statement about which business in appears that the college really is in. Athletics seem to come

before the education in many large football and basketball programs.

 8

Coming up with a plan for how to pay players would be a logistical nightmare, but just

because it would be challenging, should not keep the NCAA from doing the right thing. Nocera

proposed one five-part plan to play players in his article. In his proposed plan, the first thing

would be that colleges would pay players a variable amount depending on their value to the

school. Ultimately, there could be a bidding war for high value athletes, but it would eliminate

the black market for recruiting players because they would sign a contract for a specific amount.

The second piece of Nocera’s plan is that there would be a relatively low salary cap for each

team, and there would be a minimum salary to each player. This would force universities to pay

most of their players the same amount while a few star athletes would get higher salaries. With

this, they would also reduce the number of football scholarships from 85 to 60 so that they could

afford to pay each payer the minimum salary. The next part of the plan would be that every

player that stays in school for four years would be entitled to an extra two years scholarship. This

would allow them to complete classes related to a credible bachelor’s degree or receive a

master’s degree. The fourth part is where all players would receive health care for their entire

lifetime. The last part is that organization would be formed to represent past and current athletes

similar to a player’s union. This would help with negotiations between the players and the

NCAA (Nocera 4). While Nocera’s plan is just one idea, it shows a format of how the NCAA

could make a plan to compensate players that would be fair.

There are many arguments against paying players. Most people just don’t want to see big

changes in the games and the amateur players that they love to watch. But the corruption and

unfairness to the players will eventually become more distasteful than the idea of change, and

that time may be just around the corner. Coming up with a plan for how to pay players will be a

logistical nightmare, but just because it is challenging, should not keep the NCAA from doing
 9

the right thing. Some argue that just because athletes perform, it does not entitle them to a

paycheck. Cooper quotes McCormick in “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play” who said,

“There are more demands put on these young men than any employee of the university” (1).

Since so much more is expected of them than average employees, they should be paid. Still

others point out that their scholarships with access to great facilities and training are

compensation enough. Many athletes have scholarships that do not cover their entire college

costs, and when they look on the sidelines to their coaches who are paid extravagantly, the gap

between their compensation is just not right. Another argument is that the players would not be

able to handle funds wisely if they were paid. This idea is a prejudice against minority athletes

who are just as capable as anyone else to decide how they use their own finances. The most

compelling argument against paying players was made by Jesse Washington, a Journalist of the

Year award winner, who said that “education should be the college athlete’s greatest

compensation” in his article “Big Time Athletes Should be Paid with Big-Time Educations” (3).

Education should be the focus. An even better scenario would be if we could have institutes of

higher learning focus just on learning and no athletics at all. But, when facing reality, scaling

back college athletics is unrealistic with all the money that is at stake. For that reason, paying the

players is the next best option.

An NPR interview with Tatishe Nteta, an associate professor of political science at the

University of Massachusetts Amhert, suggests that people’s opinion to not pay players may be

due to racial prejudice. The survey, discussed in “Out of Bounds: New Research On Race and

Paying College Athletes,” was created to measure negative attitudes towards African Americans.

The survey found that “race was the strongest opposition to pay for play…it’s based not on the

notion that blacks are biologically inferior but that they violate cherished values, values like hard
 10

work and meritocracy and respect for authority” (2). They determined that when a person

pictures who would benefit from pay for play policies, it would be African-American men since

there are far more black athletes in college football and basketball. Some people just do not want

African-Americans to receive the benefits. The NCAA has an obligation to the players to do

what is right for them and especially to not let racial discrimination play any part in their

decision regarding compensating players.

Developing a system to pay college athletes may be the only way for the NCAA to save

the sports that have become so popular in our country. Having guidelines for paying players

would make college sports honest again, and it could bring an end to the scandals that are

plaguing college athletics. College athletes would be more prepared for life outside of their sport

if they could complete a true college education and have their health concerns addressed. Change

is hard, especially in the sports that we love, but no one likes to watch a game that is played

unfairly. The NCAA needs to stop focusing on filling their own pocket and finally put the

players first.
 11

Works Cited

Bishop, Steve Eder and Greg. “High-Stakes Games: Critical Step for Suit Seeking Payment for

College Athletes.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 19 June 2013,

www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/sports/high-stakes-games-critical-step-for-suit-seeking-

payment-for-college-athletes.html

Branch, Taylor. “The Shame of College Sports.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 19 Feb.

2014, www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-

sports/308643/

Coomes, Mark. “UK, U of L Could Pay Players $500k Each, STILL Make $13 Million

Profit.” Insider Louisville, 21 Feb. 2014,

insiderlouisville.com/lifestyle_culture/sports/mark-coomes-5/

Cooper, Kenneth J. "Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?" Diverse: Issues in Higher

Education, vol. 28, no. 10, 23 June 2011, pp. 12-13. EBSCOhost,

sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db

=eric&AN=EJ931405&site=eds-live

Edelman, Marc. “21 Reasons Why Student-Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed To

Unionize.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 6 Jan. 2015,

www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2014/01/30/21-reasons-why-student-athletes-are-

employees-and-should-be-allowed-to-unionize/

Edelman, Marc. “Corruption Will Continue In NCAA College Basketball Until Schools Can

Openly Pay Their Players.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 27 Sept. 2017,

www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2017/09/27/corruption-will-continue-in-ncaa-

college-basketball/#6b6416d33150
 12

Garcia-Navarro, Lulu, and Tatishe Nteta. “Out Of Bounds: New Research On Race And Paying

College Athletes.” National Public Radio, NPR, 26 Mar. 2017.

Larsen, E., et al. "Long-Term Outcome of Knee and Ankle Injuries in Elite Football."

Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, vol. 9, no. 5, Oct. 1999, p. 285.

EBSCOhost,

sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db

=s3h&AN=9161507&site=eds-live.

Nocera, Joe. "Let's Start Paying College Athletes." The New York Times Magazine, 2011, p. 8.

EBSCOhost,

sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db

=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.277169718&site=eds-live

OBannon, Ed, et al. Court justice: the inside story of my battle against the NCAA. Diversion

Books, 2018

Washington, Jesse. “Big-Time College Athletes Should Be Paid With Big-Time Educations.”

The Undefeated, 7 Apr. 2017, theundefeated.com/features/big-time-college-athletes-

should-be-paid-with-big-time-educations/