There are cogent arguments to be made for paying student athletes and creative proposals for doing so. Unfortunately, errors in fact and assumption get in the way of Hung Vu's argument in favor of paying football and basketball players "for their efforts and for the revenue they bring" ("Money madness," April 6).
First, a clarification: CBS is reported to have paid $6 billion for 11 years of March Madness rights, not $11 billion for six years, as stated in the article.
As to assumptions, Vu asserts that athletes "are here for the short term, in order to raise money for the academic departments." The NCAA reports that in 2008 (the most recent year analyzed) only 25 of 333 Division I athletic programs realized positive net generated revenues. Further, 72 percent of all revenue was so-called "allocated revenue" received from student fees, university transfers and government sources. Far from contributing financially to academics, in over 90 percent of cases, athletics are heavily subsidized by the university.
Next Vu argues in favor of paying "those who earn," that is, football and basketball players. Unfortunately, these "money-making machines" are not generating nearly the windfall that Vu perceives. Although 50 to 60 percent of Football Bowl Subdivision football and men's basketball programs turn an operating profit, according to the NCAA, only two to four percent of Football Championship Schools do the same. And taken together, just a quarter of Division I men's basketball programs are self-sustaining.
Vu's opinion is that universities should, "pay those who earn, even at the expense of other programs." Putting aside whether there are even a significant number of athletes earning more than their programs cost, paying them "at the expense" of non-revenue sports would almost surely result in Title IX violations, which could, in turn, result in pulled federal funding, including that for student aid. Certainly that is not "better than nothing."
Athletics are an important - and fun - part of a university's culture, and the NCAA could certainly stand for a measure of reform, perhaps to include compensating college athletes directly. That said, a "solution" based on a misunderstanding of the economic realities of big-time college athletics does little to advance the discussion.
Megan Moyer\nCLAS
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 5 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | April 25, 2024Instead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
