One of the most talked about and debated topics of college sports the last decade has been whether or not collegiate athletes should be paid for their talents and revenue they generate for their universities.
This debate only drew further attention after Duke’s perennial all-star and projected NBA lottery draft pick Zion Williamson suffered a knee sprain injury late in the Blue Devils’ season, sidelining him for the time being.
The question people are now asking is whether or not he should finish out his collegiate season if he gets cleared to play. This is where the question “should collegiate athletes be paid” debate comes into heavy play.
Braedon Cain
There are multiple aspects that must be taken into account when considering this argument. The first being, how would the NCAA determine the fair payment of over 460,000 student athletes? Should a NCAA Division III athlete be paid as much as an NCAA Division I athlete? Should a player at Idaho make as much as a player at Washington State? If not, why do they deserve more or less money?
Another element to be considered in this argument is the definition of “professional” status. If collegiate players are paid, then they are no longer amateur athletes, but instead professional athletes. This takes away the value from professional sports leagues such as the NBA and NFL.
There is a reason players in those leagues have earned the title of “professional.” Paying collegiate athletes takes away that process of earning the “professional” title and making such process much easier to achieve.
Usually, when this argument is brought up, people are referencing collegiate athletes who play on Power 5 conference teams in the sports of football or basketball.
How come we never hear about collegiate volleyball players being paid? Or collegiate golfers? What about collegiate soccer athletes? Not every sport in the NCAA brings in tons of revenue or viewership for universities and television, so only paying players in two sports out of dozens makes it completely unfair for all of those athletes not in football or basketball who are going through the same process.
Another major topic in this argument is how receiving a paid tuition as a scholarship athlete is not a worthy incentive. Duke University is not telling Zion Williamson to play one year of college and then leave. Zion has the opportunity if he so chooses to stay at Duke and earn a degree.
A free four-year degree from Duke University is pretty valuable.
So maybe, if you’re a projected top 5 draft pick for the NBA then, yes, a scholarship might not be “good enough” for your specific talents, but was anyone forcing you to play college basketball and accept that scholarship?
Players with that much talent could just as easily go play basketball professionally overseas and make very good money at that young of an age, all while still maintaining the opportunity to play in the NBA down the road.
It is also incredibly annoying this argument usually only gets brought up when a well-known collegiate player either gets hurt or violates NCAA rules in terms of making money off of their name or likeness.
People act as if these collegiate players had no clue that they could get seriously injured playing their sport or that making money off of their own name was against the rules. They are fully aware of both of these things when they are accepting a scholarship to be a collegiate athlete.
So, next time your favorite collegiate athlete goes down with an injury, think of these things before you say he should be paid.
When you really look at all angles, you’ll realize how hard it would actually be to pull off.
Braedon Cain can be reached at [email protected]