To Pay or Not to Pay?

College athletes have never been paid or been allowed to make money off of themselves for playing sports at their schools.  In the months leading up to the start of this school year, I had to fill out many forms from the school and the NCAA proving that I have never taken money from a booster, been given special monetary accommodations from any youth teams, or used my name or image as a way to make money.  All of these forms are used to show that I had followed the NCAA rules and should be granted eligibility to play college athletics. This is all because of what I mentioned before. To be able to play you cannot have broken any of these rules. For example, I could not get paid from a business to endorse their product or whatever it is that they do. But in recent years, people have brought up the idea that college athletes should be able to make money from the school or from endorsements that use the athletes name, image, or likeness.  Being a student-athlete here at UC Davis I find this topic interesting and care about it because I have gotten to witness first hand what it takes to be a student-athlete while also dealing with the rigorous demands of being a student also. I also find it interesting that some people believe that we should get paid for doing what we do on top of other things we receive.  

Dan Walker, a writer for the USA Today, writes about the upcoming NCAA Convention that will be taking place in California.  Walker states the irony behind this years’ convention being held in the state that has recently passed a bill “Fair Pay to Play Act.”  This bill makes it “illegal for schools in the state to prevent college athletes from being compensated for the use of their name, image and likeness by 2023.”  This bill would also allow NCAA athletes to be able to profit off of their names, images, and likeness. With the current NCAA rules, doing any of these things would result in a possible loss of eligibility.  I feel one of the problems that arises is when you are only talking about a small percentage of college athletes that actually bring in the millions of dollars that are discussed with this issue.  What about the “average” college athlete that goes to a school that doesn’t have the money making programs with big basketball or football programs? 

Consequently, several other states are attempting to follow Califonias’s example.  According to azcentral.com, “17 states including Arizona have filed or pre-filed NIL bills with 15 more planning to do so.”  I was very surprised to see that there could possibly be 32 states to allow this. I think that it will be interesting to see if all of them actually follow through and follow California’s lead.

 College athletic administrators meet at the NCAA convention to vote on and discuss policy changes needed for collegiate athletics.  This year’s discussion will most likely revolve around student-athletes being able to be paid outside of their scholarship. The NCAA president Mark Emmert, told USA Today, “it’s difficult to give schools guidance about what to do or where this is all going given the differences in the various state legislative bills that have been proposed and the potential for federal legislation, which may or may not happen given both the historical slowness of Congress and the political inertia of the election year.”  Emmert said bills going into effect during 2020 would be “very, very disruptive to college sports.” I agree with this statement about it being disruptive. I believe that it would be wise for both parties to take their time and make sure that they think this through without jumping to something that destroys college athletics. College sports are very popular in our country and it would not be productive to rush something like this that could possibly have a negative impact on the sport. However, I do agree that some changes need to take place in order to help scholarship-athletes like myself, who do not receive “full” scholarships, get their education fully funded because it feels as if I have two full-time jobs; one a full time student and second, a full time athlete.  It is literally impossible for me to have another job that actually pays me an actual salary.  

Walker goes on to state that the NCAA has been dragging its feet when it comes to this issue.  Questions NCAA must consider, according to Walker, include; what kind of regulations would be in place regarding athletes accepting endorsements, how can everyone profit equally, and how would any payments be distributed.  President Emmert appears to be concerned that moving towards paying athletes moves away from the collegiate model which has given student-athletes a great opportunity up to this point. He also agrees there is a need to “modernize and make some changes” but stresses this must be done with caution and well thought out thinking.  This statement agrees with what I had to say earlier. I think that it would be wise to take a more cautious approach to this subject. There are questions and concerns that need to be answered and if this idea were to really take shape it would need to do so in a way that still keeps the spirit of what college sports are about.  These athletes aren’t professionals and in some people’s minds, should not be treated like they are. I don’t believe college athletes should be handed thousands of dollars in compensation but consideration needs to be taken for the fact that athletes are not able to have money making jobs due to the time commitment of playing a sport, and scholarships do not cover all college costs for athletes.  My hope is that this discussion will see both sides of the issue and come up with a compromise that benefits all involved, while keeping the integrity of college athletics.