Should College Athletes Be Paid (NIL Essay Example)
Mitch Trubisky's incredible talent and hard work on and off the field helped the University of North Carolina sell out games, resulting in a total net profit of $16,187,323 for the year. The controversy over whether or not college athletes should be paid has raged for a long time, and while many feel that universities should pay its players, the majority believe that it would be detrimental to institutions. College players should not be paid athletes because it may force institutions to discontinue minor sports, and college athletes already receive advantages from corporations such as royalties on their name, image, likeness.
Athletes are now able to advertise their names and make money through royalties, endorsements, and contracts, unlike in the past. Many institutions would be unable to finance lesser sports such as lacrosse if they were compelled to pay athletes, since they would be forced to eliminate sports that do not generate enough revenue to support themselves. The NCAA has taken steps to recognize this by enabling players to earn money from their N.I.L. (name,image,likeness) after June 21st, 2021.
The majority of institutions just do not have the funds to compensate student athletes. Colleges spend so much money on expenditures that compensating its athletes would be prohibitively expensive. “In 2012, only 23 out of 228 athletic departments at NCAA Division T public colleges made enough money to cover their expenses.” (Zissou,1)
This quotation demonstrates that many institutions must pay for expenses, yet the majority of athletic departments do not earn enough to cover their costs. Imagine if we had to pay college athletes. Colleges would have to decrease salaries for professors and eliminate sports that did not bring in a lot of money. According to Rick Burton, a sports management professor at Syracuse University in New York, many student players are already, Colleges should not pay for this. "Many elite players receive tuition, books, tutoring, housing, food, clothes, elite coaching, medical care, travel expenses, and career counseling, at some schools the value of those benefits during four years of college might exceed $250,000” This strengthens my case since it demonstrates how universities already provide athletes with $250,000 in rewards just for competing for their school, so why should they have to provide them with an annual salary on top of that? This demonstrates how universities just do not have enough money to pay student athletes, especially considering how much they currently pay student athletes.
On June 21, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision permitting athletes to benefit from their N.I.L. I agree with this verdict because it allows student athletes to receive money from third parties rather than directly from institutions. This is significant because athletes may now earn money while still in school to support themselves and their families. According to ESPN “the typical NCAA athlete could be able to earn anywhere from $75,000 to $100,000 annually from their NIL.” (Whitlock,2). This quotation demonstrates that athletes would earn a lot of money in order to sustain themselves and their family. This is significant since the major reason collegiate athletes sought to get paid by their schools was because they were having difficulty sustaining themselves and their families, but now that they can make money from their NIL, they can do so. Many people think that a student athlete is an employee of the school, however many states and the NCAA have said that this is not the case. As previously stated “it attempts to shelter schools from legal liability that could result from potential injury and disability claims of student-athletes and employment benefits that might need to be extended to students if they were deemed to be employees.”(Whitlock,2) This comment is significant because it demonstrates that if college athletes were considered employees, it would place schools in a difficult situation. That is why student athletes should be able to profit from their NIL without being considered employees of the college.
Giving college players the ability to generate money off of their NIL is critical since the majority of collegiate athletes live barely over the poverty level. Many athletes have a scholarship shortfall, which is all of their out-of-pocket payments. According to a research named “the Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sports” “shows that the average scholarship shortfall for each “full” scholarship was approximately $3222 per player during the 2010-2011 school year.” This is why it is critical for athletes to be able to earn money from their NIL since it allows them to pay for things with leftover money and not be so near to the poverty line. Many of the better institutions still have players who live on or near the poverty level.“Duke basketball players were valued at $1,025,656 while just living just $732 above the poverty line and a scholarship shortfall of $1,995.” this is just showing how even the best colleges with amazing athletes are living right above the poverty line. Now that college athletes are able to make money on their name, image, likeness (NIL), that problem would likely disappear. Thats why its so important that college athletes keep their rights to use their NIL to make income.
Many people may feel that colleges should pay its athletes. This is due to the fact that coaches and colleges both make millions of dollars, yet their athletes receive nothing. “Men’s basketball head coaches whose teams competed during March Madness in 2010 earned on average, approximately $1.4 million”What this argument fails to recognize is that if colleges paid athletes, they would have to pay all of their athletes, drop low-income sports, and give out fewer scholarships, which are often the only way for many athletes to attend college. Athletes may be able to profit from their NIL as of June 21st, 2021. Another point of contention is that collegiate athletes should not be allowed to profit from their NIL. This is due to the fact that certain athletes would be able to earn more than others and that if they want to make money playing sports, they need get professional. However, this argument ignores the fact that the vast majority of collegiate athletes live below the poverty line.
College athletes should not be paid because it may compel colleges to abolish minor sports, and college athletes already receive benefits from companies such as royalties on their name, image, and likeness. We must all allow college players to profit from their NIL and assist them in every manner we can.
