Sunday, February 6, 2005

Paying College Athletes: Why Not Bring the Money Above the Table?



Skip at the Sports Economist comments on the Logan Young case and proposes a solution to the underhanded bribes that have become commonplace: pay the athletes. He points to some excellent evidence about how paying college athletes was once a common practice, before the NCAA stepped up its enforcement procedures. This is a solution that I have thought and written about and so I thought I would add my two cents.



I can think of many good arguments for paying players. For one, playing football and basketball at these "big" schools is a full-time job, and in doing this job, players are bringing in huge sums of money. The counter argument to this is that players already get a full scholarship, but even students on full rides (i.e., for academic reasons) are allowed to get part-time jobs while in school. Also, the payments happen anyway, so why not bring them above the table? I don't like this argument as much because it seems to have no bounds. Political bribes may be more common than many would like, but they should not be made legal.



So why not pay college athletes? The argument I have raised against the proposal is that it is just not feasible under Title IX. The additional money given to football and basketball players would have to be matched in female sports. Since most college athletic programs run in the red, this would mean cutting more male sports and male funding. Now, I agree that football and basketball should get less money (i.e., they don't need locker room palaces), but the reality is that those are the money sports that fund all others and so their funding will not be cut. The money will come by cutting male swim teams, wrestling teams, etc.



Some may see this more as a commentary on Title IX, or of the excess of major college football and basketball, and in fact, it is both. But since paying college athletes does not seem to be a workable solution in the near future, regulators should turn towards other ways of ensuring fairness. I am not a fan of the Logan Young suit, and think that it is a waste of judicial resources, but perhaps it is the best tool currently available. The job of those involved in "sports intellectualism" is to try and devise a better tool, one that reflects both reality and our hope for a better sports system.

0 comments:

Post a Comment