Redefining Amateur Athlete: A Case Against NCAA

The National Collegiate Athletic Association(NCAA) has a long standing, successful history defined by amateur student-athletes, who play simply for the love of the game. However, after profiting of young men and women for years without compensating a single athlete, it has come time for a change. The NCAA's greed and refusal to change their definition of an “amateur athlete” has lead to the denial of star student athletes from building their brand and raising their financial ceiling.
In the last decade universities such as the University of California Berkeley have went from spending zero on athletics buildings, to 23.4 million dollars, while the University of Wisconsin's annual maintenancing and spending on facilities increased from 10.5

million dollars to 38.2 million dollars(Hobson). Also during this time, Florida State’s, pay for athletics staffers jumped from 7.7 million dollars to 15.7 million dollars, not including coaching staffs(Hobson). Yet, with all this money being thrown around universities for athletics over the past decade, not a single dollar of it has went to the ones most responsible for earning the money, the student athletes. Alabama, Ohio State, and Texas generate more than 140 million dollars annually from its athletic departments, however NCAA President Mark Emmert believes schools lack the funds to pay student-athletes. “Any way you cut it, a very small portion of NCAA institutions are actually generating a profit,” said Emmert in 2014(Hobson).
The NCAA made 989 million dollars in total revenue in fiscal 2014, including 547.1 million dollars distributed to Division I schools and conferences, according to released financial statements(Berkowitz ”NCAA”). “There’s no shareholder demanding a dividend, there’s no one to take in profits, so they take in the money, and they spend it,” said Dan Rascher, a sports economist who testified against the NCAA. “I just wonder if these school officials who claim they can’t afford anything, if they actually believe what they’re saying(Hobson).”
It is fair to question whether it is simply just refusal to change tradition that is infringing upon the granting of likeness rights to athletes. If this is the case, the NCAA's actions are morally unjust and an abuse of power. “Nobody in America has to deal with the restrictions on income that the NCAA composes. Actors and musicians can go off to college, be on scholarship, and still make money off their talent. It's morally wrong, and un-American to prevent athletes from doing the same,” said Patrick Hruby(Graythen). Emerett, however argues on the side of history, saying, "People come to watch ... because it's college sports, with college athletes. Those beloved traditions go hand in hand with the model of amateurism, and if amateurism goes away, so will the games as we know them now.”
In July 2013 the NCAA announced it would no longer allow EA Sports to use its logo and license to produce college football and basketball games. This came in the midst of a lawsuit from former players who sued the NCAA for using their likeness to profit, without any of the athletes being compensated. Sam Keller, the former quarterback at Arizona State and Nebraska, filed the class-action suit in May 2009, claiming the NCAA unfairly deprived college players of revenue(Berkowitz “Payouts”). The case began to get national attention when former University of California Los Angeles basketball star Ed O’Bannon became involved after seeing a player that mirrored his image, wearing his jersey number, playing for UCLA on an NCAA basketball video game. His chance for a case came after he realized his friend had paid sixty dollars plus for the game, while O’Bannon had not received a penny. O’Bannon, a member of the 1995 National Championship winning team at UCLA, played in his final collegiate contest three years prior to the first EA Sports NCAA video game, was featured on EA Sports NCAA Basketball 2008, along with the rest of the 1995 Bruin squad. The lawsuit featured support from sports legends such as Bill Russell and Oscar Robertson. In July 2015, a Supreme Court judge ruled the NCAA had to pay 44.6 million dollars to players with justifiable claims, and another 20 million dollars in lawyer fees(AP). Of the nearly 29,000 athletes who filed claims in the EA Sports lawsuit, roughly 23,200 were valid. These athletes will receive anywhere from 1,000 dollars up to 7,200 dollars(Berkowitz “Payouts”).
The NCAA is denying student athletes who are talented enough to profit from their abilities from doing so. Such athletes have the potential to begin building a brand and make their name more recognizable before graduating, but are not allowed to do so. Jay Bilas, a current ESPN analyst, lawyer, and former college basketball player at Duke University, is one of the leaders in pushing for pay in college sports. Bilas spoke on the NCAA's lack of fairness, saying, “It is not immoral for the NCAA to make money off of athletics. But it is profoundly immoral for the NCAA to restrict athletes from receiving compensation while everyone else profits.(Wallsten)”
Jeremy Bloom was ruled ineligible to compete on the football team at the University of Colorado, due to endorsements received for being an Olympic skier and World Champion(Griffin). Bloom, who had started two seasons at Colorado prior to the ruling said, “it wasn't my ability that kept me from doing that, it was an organization... I thought that was really unfair(Griffin).”
Although Bloom was ruled in ineligible, the NCAA allows athletes to play professional baseball, while also competing on another sports team at a University. Super Bowl winning quarterback Russell Wilson, played his final season at Wisconsin, while also being signed to a minor league baseball contract with the Colorado Rockies. Wilson received a 200,000 dollar signing bonus as part of his deal with the organization, but was still allowed to compete collegiately(Durrett). This where the NCAA begins to look hypocritical with their amaetur athlete stance.
A large portion of professional bound student-athletes are African Americans from low means backgrounds where not much has been provided for them.

Suddenly, they are stars on large campuses with agents pursuing them prior to their ameteur status ending, bringing 20 year olds to make heavy financial decisions. Some athletes decline, however, some feel they need the money or should profit just as the NCAA does. This was the case with three University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill football players prior to the 2010 season, when Marvin Austin, Greg Little, and Robert Quinn would all be ruled ineligible for the entire season due to an investigation that found up to 25,000 dollars being received between the three players from an agent, which is an NCAA rules violation(Browder). This lead to the Tar Heel football team being forced to vacate all wins from the 2008 and 2009 season, the firing of then head coach Butch Davis, a postseason ban in 2012, the loss of scholarships, and more investigations into the programs academics that continues currently(Browder). A university is severely punished for its athletes receiving benefits that are denied to them by the NCAA, while the organization continues to make millions of dollars annually.
Former number one overall NFL draft pick Jadeveon Clowney is a supporter of paying college athletes. “Having to take care of my family, it would have made a difference if I'd have gotten paid," Clowney said prior to being drafted, "If I would have

had the chance to take care of my family through college, I would have probably stayed in college." Clowney continued, saying, "They are selling our jerseys with our numbers and making money off of ticket sales, so I think college athletes should get paid(Jadeveon)."
There are those that argue the players are already being compensated, by being handed scholarships from universities. The NCAA defines a scholarship as a “grant restricted to room, board, tuition, fees, books, and a few other expenses.” However, the reality at most big time universities is that these student-athletes, are athletes first and students second. Athletes with professional aspirations will spend more time working out and competing, than in class. There is also the struggle of if the NCAA did pay athletes, how would the compensation be fair? The football and basketball programs in the SEC and ACC generate far more revenue than the women's gymnastics program at an Ivy League school. There would likely be no possible way for the NCAA to equally pay every student-athlete at every division in college sports. The solution has been evident to the NCAA all along, as the precedent was set long ago by the US Olympic committee: allow players to receive benefits from outside companies/organizations and generate revenue of their likeness. If a freshman on the University of Alabama football team is talented enough to be offered a contract from Gatorade or Nike, he should be permitted to do so. Players should be able to sell merchandise promoting their image, name, or brand, without fear of being suspended indefinitely and kicked out of the program. The NCAA would not have to write a single check, and all the conversation and bad publicity would disappear.
Not allowing college athletes to profit of their likeness and abilities while everyone else in a multi-million dollar per year organization does, is morally wrong, and has no financial benefit for the NCAA.

Players should not be penalized for being star athletes at younger ages, and denying individuals the right to profit of their name, is infringing upon rights granted to every other citizen. Athletes will be more willing to stay in college longer, gaining more experience athletically, mentally, and emotionally, while also creating revenue for themselves, and the

NCAA.