Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Brendan Barrett
UWRT 1104
6 April 2017
Wednesday February 1st, 2017. On this special day, members of the 2017 recruiting class signed
their national letters of intent and, legally, became college football student-athletes. Highly
recruited athletes saw this day was filled with media exposure and crazy fans. For others, they
were embraced by only their closest friends and family. This day has been seen through
thousands of different lenses, but these athletes all saw the same sheet presented in front of them.
The National Collegiate Athletic Associations Form 08-3a, also known as the Student-Athlete
form. Athletes see this as their way to fame and fortune, but with their signature, prospects sign
away their rights to their names and image. Unlike their fellow students, athletes are restricted
from making any money from their performance. While these athletes will never see a single
cent for their college careers, their coaches will continue to rake in millions.
The NCAA runs an extremely lucrative industry and manages to consistently get away with it.
The March Madness tournament from this year alone generated 10.4 million viewers per game
and an all-time best 93.5 million live video streams up to the Final Four. The Final Four National
Semifinal games averaged 16.8 million viewers, making it the second most-watched Final Four
Barrett 2
in 19 years (Dachman). With those staggering numbers the question comes about; how much
money did they make from the tournament? Although the numbers from this year have yet to be
released, last year the NCAA brought in a record $1 billion in revenue from their media rights,
ticket sales, corporate sponsors, and television ads during the three-week long tournament. They
also have a deal with CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting System for 10.8 billion dollars, yes
billion, to broadcast the tournament from 2011-2025. (Investopedia). The NCAA isnt the only
group cashing in on these games; every game that a school participates in will earn their
conference of around $1.7 million. This money is paid over the next 6 years and is known as the
basketball fund'; Its how the NCAA distributes some of the profits they make back to the
schools. March Madness generates the most revenue for the NCAA due to its length and
relevance (Kesselring). The amount of money generated during this tournament is insane, but so
are the coaches salaries! While their players make nothing, theyre making millions of dollars.
Rick Pitino made 7.7 million dollars, John Calipari made 7.4 million dollars, and Mike
Krzyzewski made 5.5 million dollars in just this past year! (Berkowitz) College basketball is
probably the most exploited collegiate sport due to the amount of games and exposure that the
athletes experience, but it certainly is not the only one. The College Football Playoff was instated
in 2014, and teams that are fortunate enough to make it there bring in $6 million dollars for their
conference. Whether they play in the National title game or not, they still reap the benefits. Also,
every conference with a team playing in the playoff will be paid an additional $2.16 million to
cover travel and other expenses. Its no surprise that the schools were paid well, the
championship game drew in over 26 million viewers making it the sixth-most watched cable
Barrett 3
broadcast in history. ESPN also pays $600 million annually to broadcast the game, and charges
$1 million dollars for a 30-second advertisement. The coaches in this sport are paid a little bit
more graciously. Last year, Jim Harbaugh made $9 million, Nick Saban made $7 million and
How can the NCAA allow the coaches and schools to be paid but not the athletes themselves?
They do this by coining the athletes as amateurs. This amateur status limits the athlete from:
salary for participating in athletics, receiving gifts, and does not permit them to have any
endorsements (NCAA). Underneath the conditions that college athletes are held to, they are
technically employees and should be able to negotiate wages. With constant practices, workouts,
games, and other physical demands they are working 20+ hours per week and should have the
opportunity to reap the benefits (Cooper). The NCAA claims that if student athletes had the
opportunity to accept money from anyone that they may be exploited, and that taking money out
of the equation allows the athletes to focus on academics. All the while, athletes can compete on
national television just like professionals but arent able to see the same benefits. The Olympics
held up the amateur title until 1988, but it was obvious that Communist nations were paying their
athletes to train full-time, and other countries were paying athletes through endorsements.
College sports draw in some of the largest audiences yet are the only industry to maintain this
The reason for the uproar about this debate is that athletes are the only students discriminated
against with the amateur title. Musicians and Actors can freely make money from their craft with
Barrett 4
no limits, but student-athletes are held to a different standard. Colleges should extend the title of
amateur to these other students or just abolish the term completely; a policy that only applies
to certain students certainly isnt fair (Zimbalist). It especially isnt fair because an athletes
career window is entirely different from a musician or actors. Athletes have a small window for
their peak performance level, which emphasizes their need to earn money while they are at the
collegiate level. Most college athletes overestimate their skill level when the clear majority will
never have the opportunity to play professionally. In fact, less than 2% of college athletes make
it professionally (New).
Athletes are not only restricted from being compensated for their performance but they are also
restricted from profiting from their own name. The NCAA claims that this prevents them from
becoming celebrities and avoids the media unlike professional stars but, millions tune in to
watch the NCAA tournament and College Football Playoff. Not to mention, the regular season
games and coverage on ESPN over these collegiate teams. The media surrounds these athletes
constantly so the claim that amateurism protects them from this is just plain wrong. In fact, the
NCAA claims to not profit off the names or images of college athletes. A couple of years ago,
Jay Bilas went on a twitter rant on the official NCAA shop. When he searched names like
Manziel or Clowney, their jerseys would pop-up. Although they didnt technically have their
names on the jerseys, the players corresponding jersey numbers would appear with their college.
This means that fans could search their favorite players name, and be linked directly to their
jersey. The NCAA has dodged copyright laws for years by simply using the schools name and
Barrett 5
number but failing to use the athletes last name. Although, when someone is wearing a #2 Texas
A&M jersey its most likely not because their favorite number is 2.
The NCAA needs to reconsider their identification of college athletes as amateurs and
compensate them appropriately. It simply doesnt make sense that advertisers and coaches are
making all of the money off of these athletes. If the conclusion is that college athletes are being
paid in scholarships and other extremities, then the NCAA shouldnt compensate them directly.
Rather allow the athletes to make money off their own name instead of using paternal control
over them.
Barrett 6
"Amateurism." NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA. N.p., 24 Apr. 2014. Web. 06 Apr.
2017.
Berkowitz, Steve . "USA TODAY Sports." USA Today. Gannett Satellite Information Network,
Cooper, Kenneth J. "Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?" Diverse: Issues in Higher
Dachman, Jason. "March Madness Ratings Roundup: Final Four Averages 16.8M Viewers, Up
Kesselring, Colt. "How Much Money Each NCAA Tournament Team Earned for their
Parker, Tim. "How Much Does the NCAA Make off March Madness?" Investopedia. N.p., 13