Illustration of a Nebraska Cornhuskers football player published on a 1904 Yearbook
College athletics in the United States or college sports in the United States refers primarily to sports and athletic training and competition organized and funded by institutions of tertiary education (universities and colleges) in a two-tiered system.[1]
Unlike in the rest of the world, in the contemporary United States, many college sports are extremely popular on both regional and national scales, even competing with professional championships for prime-time broadcast, print coverage and for the top athletes. The average university sponsors at least twenty different sports and offers a wide variety of intramural sports as well. In 2002, in total, about 400,000 men and women student athletes participated in sanctioned athletics each year.[2] The largest collegiate sanctioning organization is the NCAA, and the sport that most schools participate in is basketball, with 2,197 men's and women's basketball teams at all levels.[3] A close second is cross country (with 2,065 NCAA teams) and baseball/softball is third (1,952).[3]
Principles for intercollegiate athletics include "gender equity, sportsmanship, and ethical conduct, sound academic standards, nondiscrimination, diversity within governance, rules compliance, amateurism, competitive equity, recruiting, eligibility, financial aid, playing and practice seasons, postseason competition and contests sponsored by noncollegiate organizations, and the economy of athletic program operations to ensure fair play and equality throughout all college athletic programs and associations."
Beginnings
Humorous sculpture depicting a "academics vs. sports" (represented by a graduate and a football player respectively) fight. The sculpture is located at The Eating Clubs of Princeton University
The first organized college sports club was formed in 1843 when Yale University created a boat club.[4]Harvard University then followed in their footsteps, creating a similar boat club a year later. These boat clubs participated in rowing races called Regattas.[5] The creation of these organizations set the stage for the first intercollegiate sporting event in the U.S. This event took place in 1852, when the rowing team from Yale competed against the rowing team from Harvard at Lake Winnipesaukee, New Hampshire.[4] This marked the beginning of intercollegiate competition and followed by the creation of numerous college athletic organizations. This historic race sparked the venerable rivalry between the two schools, and the Yale-Harvard Regatta is considered the cornerstone of intercollegiate athletic competition in the United States.[6]
In the late 2010s, bat and ball games had started to become highly known and the sport of baseball was starting to become an establishment at U.S. universities. The first intercollegiate baseball game took place in 1859 between Amherst College and Williams College.[7] The popularity of collegiate baseball increased from this point, and by 1870, college teams were playing extensive schedules. In 1879, the first official intercollegiate baseball league was formed. The first intercollegiate cricket match took place in 1860 between Franklin & Marshall College and Millersville State Normal School.[8] Track and field also grew in popularity during this time, and the first intercollegiate track and field event occurred in 1873. This competition featured a two-mile race between athletes from Amherst College, Cornell University, and McGill University of Montreal, Quebec, Canada.[7] The first intercollegiate soccer match in the U.S. took place on November 6, 1869, in New Brunswick, New Jersey, when clubs from Princeton and Rutgers played under rules modified from those of association football.[9] The first intercollegiate rugby game took place on May 15, 1874, at Cambridge, Massachusetts, when Harvard played against McGill University. The first intercollegiate football game between teams from Rutgers College (now Rutgers University) and the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University) took place on November 6, 1869, at College Field (now the site of the College Avenue Gymnasium at Rutgers University) in New Brunswick, New Jersey.[10]
Organization
In addition to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), there are other collegiate multi-sport athletic organizations, some of which also have hundreds of member schools. These include:
From 1992 to 2020, the NAIA was organized into Divisions I and II for men's and women's basketball only, distinguished from one another by scholarship policies (D-I schools had a higher limit on basketball scholarships, with some D-II schools awarding fewer scholarships ). In the final season of the divisional split (2019–20), roughly two-thirds of NAIA members were D-I. NAIA basketball returned to a single-division format after that season.
During the early 1840s, student-athletes contributed actively to all phases of administration and control.[14] Student athletes were involved in the sporting process, made athletic procedures and regulations for universities and also played an important role in determining which sporting events would and would not happen on universities. Today, the kind of involvement on the part of the athlete is virtually unheard of, with the only remnants of student participation in athlete administration being programs in which student governments have some control over the distribution of free allocations to athletics.[14] Furthermore, this movement today focuses on the role of intercollegiate sports in the United States rather than the contributions of the student athlete.[citation needed]
Academic curriculum and requirements affect student athletes:
"When academic and athletic departments have conflicting aims, problems arise that affect the entire institution. American society values the elitism of academics and athletics in a manner that provokes conflict for participants in both domains. At various colleges, it is believed that academic elitism can be constructed on athletic elitism: Athletic teams aspire to be national champions, while their affiliate academic institutions seek national rankings. However, the means by which coaches and faculty achieve national reputations can create conflict for student athletes attempting to exist in both environments. Although both aspire to excel, the different measures of excellence for academics and athletics necessitates compromise by those who are placed in both settings." This policy, attempted by a large number of colleges, works for only a few.[citation needed]
College administrators have the challenge of balancing university values while maximizing the revenue generated by their athletic department. To maintain financial sustainability, several athletic directors have stated that the elimination of men's nonrevenue programs is the only way to balance their athletic budgets.[citation needed] Men's nonrevenue sport teams will likely be facing declining financial support in future generations.[15]
"Division I institutions are required to have seven athletic teams for men and seven for women (or six for men and eighth for women). As well, there must be two team sports for each gender, and each gender must have a team in each of the three season (i. e., Fall, Winter, Spring). Excluding basketball and football, teams must play 100% of their minimum number of games against Division 1 opponents, and 50% of games above the minimum number must be played against Division I teams. Men's and women's basketball teams must play all but two of their contests against Division 1 opponents, and men must play at least one third of their games in their home arena. In Division I, football is further sectioned into FBS (NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision), and FCS (Football Championship Subdivision). FBS schools must play at least 60% of their games against other FBS opponents, and demonstrate their ability to attract a high level of spectatorship."[16] Additionally, college football bowl eligibility rules mandate that only one win over an FCS team can be counted toward the six required for eligibility; this in turn means that FBS teams typically schedule at most one game against an FCS team in a given season.
Popularity and importance of intercollegiate athletics
College athletics has been popular since the 1920s and its popularity has increased as the games are being televised.[17] Also, college sports are important both culturally and economically. Intercollegiate athletics creates a culturally and racially diverse setting for academics and athletics.[18] Economically some schools are benefiting from their athletic programs through ticket sales, merchandise sales, and outside donations.[19]
College sports in the United States is measured by the large number of universities that participate in more than 24 different NCAA sports.[20] This allows more than 460,000 student-athletes, both male and female, to participate in those NCAA sports.[21] Even in the late 1980s, the average Division I program employed over 75 coaches, trainers, and administrative staff as full-time faculty to support their athletic programs.[22]
NCAA Division I, II and NAIA schools offer scholarships to well over 200,000 athletes. Every year these D-I, D-II, NAIA schools spend over $4billion in athletic-scholarships.[23] American college sports are popular worldwide with over 20,000 international athletes participating in college athletics.[24][25]
Another reason for the importance of college athletics in the U.S. is the important role it plays in the hierarchy of sport organizations. In his article about collegiate sports programs, Thomas Rosandich refers to a "performance pyramid", which shows the general progression of athletic organizations in the United States.[34] At the bottom of this pyramid is youth sports organizations, since these organizations have participation open to nearly everyone. As the pyramid progresses, the level of competition increases, while the number of competitors decreases until the highest level of organized sport, professional sports, is reached. In many respects, the intercollegiate sports level serves as a feeder system to the professional level, as the elite college athletes are chosen to compete at the next level. This system differs greatly from nearly all other countries in the world, which generally have government-funded sports organizations that serve as a feeder system for professional competition.[34]
History and growth of college sports
Before 1910 sports were not strictly regulated which caused a number of injuries to the athletes and in some severe cases death. President Roosevelt took action and formed the Intercollegiate Athletic Association (IAA) which is now known as the NCAA. The NCAA was put into place to create rules for intercollegiate sports. During the 1920s–1950s there was still not much regulation of sports and the NCAA created the Committee on Infractions to replace the Sanity Code in 1951. This committee was created to give some structure to the recruitment process. The NCAA also wanted to improve competition between schools, so it began dividing schools into divisions by competitive ability in 1956, placing the most competitive programs in the University Division and all others in the College Division. In 1973, the University Division was renamed Division I, and the College Division was split in two on the basis of scholarship policies. College Division schools that wished to continue offering athletic scholarships, or compete in all sports against such schools, were placed in Division II or in the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics. Schools that chose not to award athletic scholarships were placed in Division III. Throughout the 1980s and 90s college athletics grew along with the revenue because of the game being shown on television.[17] As of the 2017–18 school year, nearly 500,000 students participated in college athletics.[35]
Revenues and expenses
There are large amounts of money gained from Division I athletics, but only a small number of schools benefits from their programs.[36] During 2014 the NCAA earned $989million in revenue, with a profit around $80.5million.[37] Each year television, advertisements, and licensing revenue also adds to the NCAA profit, but donations, ticket sales, and merchandise sales goes to the school.[38] From marketing and television fees the NCAA gained nearly $753.5million in 2014.[37] In 2010, two of the most profitable college conferences—the Southeastern Conference (SEC) and the Big Ten—earned over $1billion and $905million, respectively.[39] The University of Texas' football program, which was the most valuable in college sports in the early 2010s, was estimated by Forbes to be worth over $133million in 2013, totaling over $1billion in the previous 10 years.[40] At that time Texas made, on average, $93million a year just from the football program. The two schools that followed Texas, Georgia and Penn State, each made around $70million a year.[41] Another prominent football program, Notre Dame, has a contract with NBC to televise its home football games for $15million a year through 2025.[42] The average revenue per conference in 1999 was $13.5million.[43]
Universities spend a very large amount of money on their college organizations in the facilities, coaches, equipment, and other aspects. In most states, the person with the highest taxpayer-provided base salary is a public college football or basketball coach. This figure does not include coaches at private colleges.[44]
By 2015, most Division I schools had established single-source contracts, which supply the university with apparel for all athletic programs, sometimes including cheerleading squads and dance teams, which compete outside the NCAA structure. The contract deal made college history when the University of Michigan and Nike made a 11-year contract deal for almost $200million.[45]
Many athletic programs do not make enough money to cover the cost to maintain those programs, so they use student fees to fund their programs.[36] This could cause some problems because of the increase in student debt and limited academic budgets.[36] As of 2016 only 23 out of 228 Division I programs earned enough money to make up for their extreme spending. Due to donations, 16 of the 23 schools were able to cover their expenses, so truly only 7 of the 228 universities broke even due to their athletic programs. For the other 203 schools that did not break even, they are partially funded by the state or student fees. Most of the money that is being spent is used to pay the coaching staff, for the games, and the top-of-the-line facilities. The amount spent on an athlete is seven times more than the average amount spent per student. At big Division I programs, the amount of money that is spent on a football player exceeds $90,000.[19]
Title IX
Title IX (of the Education Amendments of 1972) — which requires gender equity for boys and girls in every educational program that receives federal funding – has specifically made an impact on the distribution of college athletes by sex since its passing in 1972. The law states that:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance ...
In 1975, the final clause of Title IX was signed into law and included provisions prohibiting sex discrimination in athletics. The regulations pertaining to athletics require that an institution which sponsors interscholastic, intercollegiate, club or intramural athletics shall provide "equal athletic opportunity" for members of both sexes.[43]
Since the passing of Title IX, many NCAA institutions have had problems with the compliance of these regulations. To successfully comply with Title IX requirements, NCAA institutions must meet one of the requirements in the "three prong test" as follows:
Prong one – Provide athletic participation opportunities that are substantially proportionate to student enrollment. This part of the test is satisfied when participation opportunities for men and women are "substantially proportionate" to their respective undergraduate enrollment.[citation needed]
Prong two – Demonstrate a continual expansion of athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex. This part of the test is satisfied when an institution has a history and continuing practice of program expansion that is responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex (typically female).[citation needed]
Prong three – Full and effective accommodation of the interest and ability of underrepresented sex. This part of the test is satisfied when an institution is meeting the interests and abilities of its female students even where there are disproportionately fewer females than males participating in sports.[citation needed]
OCR (Office of Civil Rights) is one of the governing bodies that attempts to ensure that title IX is enforced. They have the power to pull federal funding from schools or organizations that are found to be noncompliant with title IX, although this power has never been exercised. The OCR will usually work with the school or organization that is noncompliant to set up a schedule or plan to follow to become compliant.[41]
Research concerning Title IX institutional compliance and gender equity issues has found that:
Division I nonfootball schools (formerly known as Division I-AAA) are more likely to comply with Title IX requirements than Division I FBS (formerly I-A) or Division I FCS (formerly I-AA) schools, which sponsor football.[47]
Smaller institutions are more likely than larger institutions to be in compliance with Title IX.[45]
Southern schools are less likely to comply with requirements.[47]
The attitudes of key individuals (i.e., university president or athletic director) are critical components in determining whether an institution's athletic program complies with Title IX.[47]
A college's reputation for academic integrity and for success in women's athletics suggests greater enthusiasm towards creating equal athletic opportunities for women.[48]
Title IX has had a considerable impact on college athletics. Since its passing, Title IX has allowed for female participation to almost double in college sports. Before the law was passed in 1972 fewer than 30,000 girls participated in college sports; as of 2011 more than 200,000 girls participated in college sports.[50] Title IX has been both credited with and blamed for a lot of things that have happened in college athletics since 1972.[51]
Studies on the gender equity of sports found on college campuses have provided an examination of how Title IX is perceived. Questions have been raised over the equity between male and female student athletes. Females, regardless of whether an administrator, coach, or athlete, thought there to be less equity than males when it comes to these five factors: program support, financial support, sports offerings, scheduling, and changes in the past two to three years.[52]
In regards to the concept of "pay-for-play," (see section below, "Debate over paying athletes") Title IX is generally seen as a substantial roadblock, only because of the differences between big-time men's sports (football/men's basketball) and women's sports, but also because of the gap between those "big two" sports' profit-producing programs and virtually all other collegiate sports, both male and female.[51] Depending on how one views "pay for play," this can be either a positive of negative effect of Title IX.
Increases in opportunities for male coaches, however, have resulted from Title IX legislation. Before Title IX, 90 percent of women's intercollegiate teams were coached by women.[53] By 1978, when all educational institutions were required to comply with Title IX, the percentage of same-sex coaching had plunged to 58 percent. Although the actual number of female coaches increased between 1979 and 1986, the percentage of female coaches continued to decline over that same period.[54] The all-time low of 47 percent of women coaching female sports was achieved in 1990. In addition, although men have broken into coaching female athletes, female coaches have not experienced the same opportunities to coach male athletes. In 1972, 99 percent of collegiate men's teams were coached by men, and the same is true today.[54]
Since the turn of the 21st century, a debate has arisen over whether college athletes should be paid.[55] Although the earliest of star athletes were known to have received a variety of types of compensation (including endorsement fees), benefits to college athletes outside of academic scholarships have largely been prohibited under NCAA governance. In the 21st century, the high, rising income paid to some colleges by the media for transmitting games to their television audiences, has led some people to complain that the athletes should share in the colleges income.[56]
There are arguments in favor of paying athletes.[57] A few schools benefit from owning their own networks. The University of Texas owns The Longhorn Network and Brigham Young University owns BYUtv.[58]
Paying college athletes would present several legal issues for the NCAA and its member institutions.[59] If paid, the athletes would lose their amateur status and become university employees.[59] As employees, these athletes would be entitled the National Labor Relations Act to form or join labor organizations and collectively bargain.[59] Advocacy groups for college players could certify as a union given the revenue involved in college athletics."[59] Collegiate sports is not a career or profession, paying college athletes would present issues under Title IX, which requires that institutions accepting federal funds offer equal opportunities to men and women."[59]
About one in ten college teams help to generate a large net amount of revenue for their school, but the athletes are not personally rewarded for their contribution. This money is spread through administrators, athletic directors, coaches, media outlets, and other parties. None is given directly to the players. Collegiate athletics entails time-consuming, intense commitment to practice and play.[60] Only some athletic scholarships are "full rides", and many student-athletes are not able to afford dining, entertainment, and even some educational expenses.[61] Outside of summertime, when work is permitted, student-athletes have no extra time for work in addition to practice, training, and classes.[61] Paying student-athletes would give the athletes an incentive to stay in school and complete their degree programs, rather than leave early for the professional leagues.[61] They would be much less tempted to earn money by taking illegal payments and shaving points.[61] By not paying their athletes, colleges avoid paying workmen's-compensation benefits to the "hundreds" of college athletes incapacitated by injuries each year.[56] Furthermore, if an athlete receives a serious injury while on the field, the scholarship does not pay for the bill of the surgery.
Colleges such as University of Connecticut (UConn), Syracuse University, and Kansas State University have some of the worst graduation rates in the country for their student-athletes. UConn had a 25% graduation rate until recently[when?] it rose to 50%. Yet, UConn still receives $1.4million competing in the NCAA tournament, despite the low number of graduates. Paying these athletes would give some incentive to stay and finish college.[62]
In 2013, Steve Spurrier, the head football coach of the South Carolina Gamecocks, said that all 28 men's football and basketball coaches in South Carolina's conference, the SEC, favored paying athletes up to $300 per game for football players and a little less for basketball players. It would cost the SEC about $280,000 per year.[63]
Jalen Rose has a similar view to Spurrier's, as he believes that student athletes should be given a stipend of $2500 per semester.[64]
The College Athletes Players Association (CAPA) focuses on the idea of giving compensation to football and basketball players. The CACA has not decided if this will affect sports that do not make money for schools. The NCAA has rejected the definition of student-athletes a "employees".[65]
A USA Today article takes issue with the critics because the terms had been drawn up by the colleges:
For college athletes to be held to the terms and conditions of a one-year scholarship that have been set by the very authorities who financially benefit the most and render the athletes involved voiceless in the process is a glaring conflict of interest. In an article by usa today they state "Players in the NCAA's top-tier Division I bowl subdivision say they devote more than 43 hours a week to the sport during the season, and those in a couple of other sports — baseball and men's basketball — approach that commitment, an NCAA study shows." (Wieberg, USA Today) ... The conditions of the athletic scholarship and transfer rules, prohibitions against agents, limits on due process, failure to deliver on the promise to educate, the unobstructed selling of athlete images, and the like are tools of exploitation that benefit college sport leaders while oppressing those who perform on the field.[66]
Because of their demanding schedules, most athletes have no time to make any additional money, making it difficult to help support needy family members. In 2010 ESPN published an article about Ohio State football players that had been sanctioned by the NCAA for accepting free tattoos and selling memorabilia they had earned.[67] However, there are many that argue that student athletes selling of personal and earned memorabilia is their right, with gray-areas where which the NCAA has a hard time justifying their punishments.[citation needed]
Court cases
After a number of efforts to go to trial against the NCAA's incoming revenue, a court date has been set. Former UCLA Bruin Ed O'Bannon along with Oscar Robertson and Bill Russell lead the lawsuit. The trial is scheduled to begin during the summer of 2014. Although the NCAA claims that their athletes have amateur status, the organization has made billions of dollars off of merchandise licenses. The NCAA has earned billions from broadcast revenues annually. By selling the image of their players, the NCAA is able to make money from each sport. O'Bannon has stated that some of this revenue should be spread out among the players who help bring in this cash to the NCAA.[68] ESPN analyst Jay Bilas showed how a person could search the NCAA website by player name and have the resulting school jersey appear.[69]
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit would find that Ed O'Bannon was right in his thesis that the NCAA is taking advantage of a players image. Though the court found this ruling, all that would come of it would be that schools would only have to cover the cost of attendance. This would scrap the injunction found by U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken that division one football and basketball players could receive up to five thousand dollars a year for playing. The Supreme Court would deny to hear the case on appeal, effectively stopping O'Bannon's fight.[70]
In a 2014 court case brought by a few Northwestern University football players against the NCAA, argued that the players should be able to unionize and bargain collectively. The court ruled in the players favor. The court's decision only applied to those football players at Northwestern on a scholarship. Required football practice and playing had reduced the time students could use to pursue their studies. Former player Kain Colter argued that athletic departments should decrease the maximum number of hours a player must participate in a sport to remain part of the team and retain a scholarship. As it stands, 50 hours a week is the maximum.[71]
On June 21, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the NCAA cannot bar relatively modest payments to student athletes.[72]
Arguments against paying college athletes
College athletes that receive a full scholarship to college already benefit from perks that the general student body does not receive. College athletes are able to take advantage of free room and board, the best dorm rooms on campus, free books and classes, and first choice of classes they want.[60] A college athlete can receive up to $120,000 in total scholarships; they already are being paid for their participation. Adding on to the monetary argument are the opinions that student-athletes could lose focus on their educational responsibilities.[73]
"The average fair market value of top-tier college football and men's basketball players is over $100,000 each. If college sports shared their revenues the way pro sports do, the average Football Bowl Subdivision player would be worth $121,000 per year, while the average basketball player at that level would be worth $265,000.[74] Out of 332 schools currently competing in the NCAA Division I, fewer than a dozen have athletic departments that are making a profit.[citation needed] 14 of the 120 programs that comprise the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) are profitable.[citation needed] 88% of the top football programs in the country are losing money.[citation needed] Most universities are unable to pay for these athletes, along with the coaches and renovations on stadiums, out of money earned from athletics.[62] Kenny Mossman of the University of Oklahoma (OU), estimated that the cost to OU would be $3.6 million a year if stipends were $1,000 a month.[75]
College athletes currently receive an enormous amount benefits when they step on campus. They are able to pick their classes before any other students. They also receive the best tutoring possible to ensure they will be eligible for their respective sport season. Many people make the argument today that they should be paid for all they do for the university. Some people also believe that they are already being paid. They are on the receiving end of more than a few benefits. Today, some schools can cost up $100,000 by the end of a students senior year. College athletes have the benefit of not having the burden of paying their college off after school. They receive one of the most important assets an individual can receive for little or no cost. The current system is working fine, and college athletes do not need to be paid.[76]
"The NCAA also is setting up a $17 million Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund that has no financial-need restrictions. It's to be used for "educational and developmental opportunities." [Nebraska Proposal, 2009]. This debate has caused certain elite colleges to take caution asking athletes to sign forms that prevent them from suing the college. The signed forms gives the college full imagery benefits, allowing them to use their names to sell team T-shirts and jerseys. Insurance wise – a plan proposed by William E. Kirwan, Ohio State University President, would insure athletes against injuries and mishaps during workouts, practices and games.[77]
Because of title IX, all college athletes would have to be paid, including athletes playing for teams that do not produce a lot of revenue.[citation needed] College sponsored sports would be cut to make a business case for paying athletes work economically.[citation needed] Colleges would still be able to field "club teams" for those sports. "Club team" players almost never receive scholarships and are truly amateur athletes in every sense of the word.
Nonrevenue sports would suffer. Over all the sports available to division one programs, only Football and Basketball actually make a profit, with the exception of Baseball in very few instances. The rest of the sports either break even or, more often than not, cost the school more than they contribute. Larger universities would be the only ones able to pay their football/basketball players while supporting smaller market sports and are very few colleges fall into this category.[78] The colleges that do happen to fall into this category are in five out of the 33 division one conferences. Nonrevenue sports likely will be thinned out, high school athletes will lose the chance to continue competing and a larger emphasis on collegiate competition will take place within the power five conferences.
Further examples of athletes being treated like royalty at their universities can be seen through the University of Oregon. The John E. Jaqua Academic Center for the varsity athletes at the University of Oregon is a 40,000 square foot facility to assist athletes with their education. The extravagant space contains an auditorium with 114 leather seats, dozens of tutoring rooms and academic and life-skill advising offices, a computer and graphics lab, library with study spaces, lounge with large flat-screen televisions and deluxe sofas, as well as a kitchen and café filled with food and new equipment. The staff, technology, and rooms inside the academic center are all reserved for the varsity athletes, who make up 2.5% of the student population at the school. In addition, the 1,700 private tutoring sessions per week are conveniently displayed on a massive screen similar to the screens that display flight information at an airport. Adding to the exclusive treatment the student-athletes receive, the academic center is surrounded by a moat. The athletic facility adds to the royal treatment of the student-athletes. The University of Oregon's football practice facility is 145,000 square feet and contains three indoor practice fields, a two-story weight room, countless whirlpools and medical tables, enormous lockers, and luxurious lounges containing gaming stations and flat-screen televisions. Other amenities at the practice facility include a cafeteria (players receive high quality, tailored, nutritious diets), multiple conference rooms and classrooms, a pool table and barbershop. The student-athletes have luxurious facilities at their disposal, and they are already getting paid in the form of their scholarships.[79]
If full ride scholarships to top universities is not suitable compensation for student-athletes, a college education and degree is being devalued.[80] Student-athletes may heavily invest their time into the sport they play, however, that does not change the worth of their academic degree. Every student-athlete is not going to become a professional athlete, but they are guaranteed a college education and degree to help them graduate with little or no debt via their scholarships.[80] If universities start paying student-athletes, the universities would not be focused on what the student-athletes are attending for, which is the education and degree they receive. An education in the long-run is very valuable, and with the scholarships the student-athletes get, they can take advantage of a great education at little to no cost.[81]
Universities offer students more than just the education and degree they receive. Lectures by prominent industry figures, concerts, movies, fitness facilities, student clubs are a few additional benefits that universities generally subsidize through fees added to tuition bills. This means that the full-scholarship athletes can attend these activities all for free. Universities also offer unique benefits to the student-athletes such as team-only workout facilities, top coaches, nutrition personnel, shiny gyms, lush fields, medical care, travel to away games, customized meal plans, free gear, and athletic attire. The university also offers the student-athletes the opportunity to play competitive games in large stadiums packed with committed fans, which allows student-athletes to garner media attention, and name recognition.[81]
Athletes are aware of what they are committing to when they sign their full-scholarship forms. The school will be in charge of paying the student-athletes' expenses, and the student-athlete has the opportunity to earn an education, take part in academic and social activities in college, and play their sport in a high-profile manner. The best schools in certain sports naturally will attract the best recruits, as evidenced by the fact that the championships in the major sports are usually won by the same small group of schools that have dominated the sport. If paying players becomes normal, the universities that have made money from their winning teams would have an even greater advantage in attracting recruits. These universities would be able to pay players more money, thus getting the best players.[81]
Title IX needs to be considered in the discussion regarding paying college athletes. Title IX prohibits excluding female athletes from education and financial benefit. If a university decides to pay the football team, other teams will need to be paid as well. Further, paying college football players will result in universities entering heated bidding wars while they are attracting recruits.[80]
Mark Emmert, NCAA president is opposed to paying college athletes because it would encourage universities to bribe athletes. Emmert believes that if student-athletes were paid to play, there would be more pressure on boosters and agents to bribe student-athletes to play for a certain university and to financially support them while they are playing at the university. Emmert stands by the ideals that student-athletes are students first, and he backs up this ideal by noting student-athletes' graduation rate across all demographics is greater than the nonathletes. Emmert also stands behind the ideal that the money student-athletes receive through their scholarships is equal or greater than payments the proponents of pay-for-play advocate for.[82]
Licensing of likenesses
Due to the NCAA restrictions on compensation, college athletes cannot personally license their likenesses to third-parties for commercial gains.[83] In 2010, A. J. Green was suspended for four games by the NCAA for having sold a game-worn jersey from a bowl game to a former college player, whom the NCAA defined as an agent involved in marketing student-athletes. At the same time, however, the University of Georgia sold replica jerseys bearing Green's number for its own financial gain, and did not compensate him.[84] A journal published by the University of La Verne Law Review argued that the NCAA was exploiting college athletes by not allowing them to receive compensation beyond scholarships for their participation in collegiate sports, and allowing schools to profit from merchandise associated with players, but not the players themselves.[85] Furthermore, it was noted that television outlets pay conferences large sums of money for the rights to broadcast the events, which prominently feature the likenesses of players, yet the revenue from these rights fees cannot go to players.[85]
The NCAA had also been accused of suppressing financial compensation to players for future uses of likenesses after they graduate. In 2009, retired basketball player Ed O'Bannonsued the NCAA, the Collegiate Licensing Company, and Electronic Arts on behalf of Division I basketball and football players. Among other examples, such as a lack of residuals for the broadcast of encores of games that featured him, O'Bannon cited that an EA SportsNCAA March Madness video game had featured a portrayal of himself as a member of UCLA's 1995 championship team. As with all other players in EA's college sports games, the game did not refer to O'Bannon by name, but the portrayal matched his jersey number, physical appearance, and style of play. The NCAA objected to the notions presented in the suit, arguing that paying athletes conflicted with its policies of amateurism in sport.[86][87][88][89]
EA and the CLC agreed to a $40million settlement.[90][91] After the NCAA and other conferences withdrew their brand licenses with EA in response to the uncertainties, the company subsequently ceased the production of future college sports video games.[92][93] A judge ruled that the NCAA's policies on noncompensation of athletes were a violation of antitrust law, and argued that universities should be able to cover the costs of athletes attending, and provide a trust fund of at least $5,000 per-season to athletes. It was argued that the NCAA "[did] not provide credible evidence that demand for [its] product would decrease if student-athletes were permitted, under certain circumstances, to receive a limited share of the revenue generated from the use of their own names, images, and likenesses."[94]
On June 30, 2021, The NCAA finally agreed to the new NIL agreement that says that student athletes may use their name, image, and likeness to get paid. This is different than getting paid by the University. This is simply getting revenue strictly using your name, image, and likeness. This process is something student athletes themselves have to go out and do. Members of the NCAA got together and voted to make sure any athlete under the NCAA can profit using their name, image, and likeness.
The new NIL agreement allows student athletes to engage in the NIL, but they must follows the laws of that state that their University and/or college is located. Some of the guidelines NCAA provides that Michelle Hosick in 2021 wrote are, "College athletes who attend a school in a state without an NIL law can engage in this type of activity without violating NCAA rules related to name, image and likeness. Individuals can use a professional services provider for NIL activities. Student-athletes should report NIL activities consistent with state law or school and conference requirements to their school" (Hosick 2021).[95]
The policy of the new NIL agreement is the same for all three divisions within the NCAA. Many people were often confused about this agreement where they thought players were being paid to play, which in this situation is not the case. "The new policy preserves the fact college sports are not pay-for-play," said Division II presidents Council chair Sandra Jordan, chancellor at the University of South Carolina Aiken. "It also reinforces key principles of fairness and integrity across the NCAA and maintains rules prohibiting improper recruiting inducements. It's important any new rules maintain these principles" (Hosick 2021).[95]
Hosick, M. (2021, June 30). NCAA adopts interim name, image and likeness policy. NCAA.org – the official site of the NCAA. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-adopts-interim-name-image-and-likeness-policy.
Coach's Pay
The NCAA allows for the coaches to be both paid and allow them to reach outside the NCAA to find endorsements and sponsorships from outside sources. Endorsements with apparel and shoe companies, and even book deals.[96] The endorsement and sponsorship money was added with the coach's pay, which could reach up to $9million dollars.[97] Over 150 basketball and football coaches had a salary that broke $1million dollars and over 35 coaches had salaries that broke $4million dollars.[96] There have been times where NCAA coaches' are paid more than their professional counterparts.[98] Coaches don't have to follow the rules that student-athletes do. They are allowed to choose which school they coach for, even after leaving another school. They can choose to coach for one team their entire career or they could leave and coach the school that offers them the highest salary.[98] Student-Athletes, unlike their coaches, are prohibited from freely moving between teams.
Longest-running annual international sporting event
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is a nonprofit organization that regulates student athletics among about 1,100 schools in the United States, and one in Canada. It also organizes the athletic programs of colleges and helps over 500,000 college student athletes who compete annually in college sports. The headquarters is located in Indianapolis, Indiana.
The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) established in 1940, is a college athletics association for colleges and universities in North America. Most colleges and universities in the NAIA offer athletic scholarships to their student athletes. Around $1.3 billion in athletic scholarship financial aid is awarded to student athletes annually.
The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) was a college athletics organization in the United States, founded in 1971 to govern women's college competitions in the country and to administer national championships. It evolved out of the "Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics for Women" (CIAW), founded in 1967. The association was one of the biggest advancements for women's athletics on the collegiate level. Throughout the 1970s, the AIAW grew rapidly in membership and influence, in parallel with the national growth of women's sports following the enactment of Title IX.
The All-America designation is an annual honor bestowed on outstanding athletes in the United States who are considered to be among the best athletes in their respective sport. Individuals receiving this distinction are typically added to an All-America team for their sport. Some sports have multiple All-America teams, and list the honorees as members of a first team, second team, or third team.
NCAA Division III (D-III) is a division of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the United States. D-III consists of athletic programs at colleges and universities that choose not to offer athletic scholarships to their student-athletes.
NCAA Division II (D-II) is an intermediate-level division of competition in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). It offers an alternative to both the larger and better-funded Division I and to the scholarship-free environment offered in Division III.
An athletic scholarship is a form of scholarship to attend a college or university or a private high school awarded to an individual based predominantly on their ability to play in a sport. Athletic scholarships are common in the United States and to a certain extent in Canada, but in the vast majority of countries in the world they are rare or non-existent.
In college athletics in the United States, recruiting is the process in which college coaches add prospective student athletes to their roster each off-season. This process typically culminates in a coach extending an athletic scholarship offer to a player who is about to be a junior in high school or higher. There are instances, mostly at lower division universities, where no athletic scholarship can be awarded and where the player pays for tuition, housing, and textbook costs out of pocket or from financial aid. During this recruiting process, schools must comply with rules that define who may be involved in the recruiting process, when recruiting may occur and the conditions under which recruiting may be conducted. Recruiting rules seek, as much as possible, to control intrusions into the lives of prospective student-athletes. The NCAA defines recruiting as “any solicitation of prospective student-athletes or their parents by an institutional staff member or by a representative of the institution’s athletics interests for the purpose of securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment and ultimate participation in the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program."
The James Madison Dukes are the intercollegiate athletics teams that represent James Madison University (JMU), in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The name "Dukes" is derived from Samuel Page Duke, the university's second president. The Dukes play as members of the Sun Belt Conference (SBC), which sponsors sports at the NCAA Division I level. In football, JMU participates in the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) of Division I, formerly known as Division I-A. JMU was a charter member of the Colonial Athletic Association (CAA),. The Dukes officially left the CAA and joined the SBC in 2022, participating in Division I FBS football and other sports sponsored by the conference.
NYU Violets is the nickname of the sports teams and other competitive teams at New York University. The school colors are purple and white. Although officially known as the Violets, the school mascot is a bobcat. The Violets compete as a member of NCAA Division III in the University Athletic Association conference. The university sponsors 23 varsity sports, as well as club teams and intramural sports.
The Wichita State Shockers are the athletic teams that represent Wichita State University, located in Wichita, Kansas, in intercollegiate sports as a member of the NCAA Division I ranks, primarily competing in the American Athletic Conference since the 2017–18 academic year. The Shockers previously competed in the D-I Missouri Valley Conference (MVC) from 1945–46 to 2016–17; as an Independent from 1940–41 to 1944–45; in the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Conference (CIC) from 1923–24 to 1939–40; and in the Kansas Collegiate Athletic Conference (KIAC) of the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) from 1902–03 to 1922–23. As of the 2020s conference realignment, Wichita State is one of two full members of The American to have never been a member of Conference USA, although it became a single-sport member of that conference for bowling in 2024. They are also currently the only non-football-sponsoring institution that is a member of an FBS conference.
Christine Grant was an American athlete, coach, administrator, and advocate for women's college athletics. Dr. Grant served as the athletic director at the University of Iowa from 1973 until 2000. She was inducted into the University of Iowa Athletics Hall of Fame in 2006. Grant was also inducted into the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame in 2017.
Student athlete is a term used principally in universities in the United States and Canada to describe students enrolled at postsecondary educational institutions, principally colleges and universities, but also at secondary schools, who participate in an organized competitive sport sponsored by that educational institution or school. The term student-athlete was coined in 1964 by Walter Byers, the first executive director of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The term is also interchangeable with the synonymous term “varsity athlete”.
Edward Charles O'Bannon Jr. is an American former professional basketball player in the National Basketball Association (NBA). He was a power forward for the UCLA Bruins on their 1995 NCAA championship team. He was selected by the New Jersey Nets with the ninth overall pick of the 1995 NBA draft. After two seasons in the NBA, he continued his professional career for another eight years, mainly playing in Europe.
College club sports in the United States are any sports offered at a university or college in the United States that compete competitively with other universities, or colleges, but are not regulated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) or National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA), and do not have varsity status. Collegiate club sports can exist at schools that do have teams that are part of the NCAA or NAIA. Many times, club sports are student-run and receive little financial aid from the school. An estimated 2 million student athletes compete in club sports.
Judith Wilkins Rose is the former director of athletics for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte 49ers.
O'Bannon v. NCAA, 802 F.3d 1049, was an antitrust class action lawsuit filed against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The lawsuit, which former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon filed on behalf of the NCAA's Division I football and men's basketball players, challenged the organization's use of the images and the likenesses of its former student athletes for commercial purposes. The suit argued that upon graduation, a former student athlete should become entitled to financial compensation for NCAA's commercial uses of their image. The NCAA maintained that paying its athletes would be a violation of its concept of amateurism in sports. At stake are "billions of dollars in television revenues and licensing fees."
The Iowa Hawkeyes field hockey team is the intercollegiate field hockey program representing the University of Iowa. The school competes in the Big Ten Conference in Division I of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The Iowa field hockey team plays its home games at Dr. Christine H.B. Grant Field on the university campus in Iowa City, Iowa. The Hawkeyes have won 16 conference championships, six Big Ten tournament titles, and the 1986 NCAA Championship, making it the first Midwestern university to win a national title. As of 2014, the team is coached by Lisa Cellucci.
The definition of amateurism within the context of collegiate sports has evolved since it was first pronounced by the NCAA upon its inception in 1906. In its early stages, changes in the NCAA's core beliefs in what a student-athlete should be rewarded and allowed to accept financially for their athletic talents had its effects on the definition of amateurism. Over the course of the 20th and early 21st century, regulatory changes, court claims, and the beliefs of NCAA authority about student-athlete compensation further developed what an amateur collegiate athlete is entitled to receive. This evolution is what impacted the evolving logistics of the NCAA Bylaw 12, which explains the current definition of amateurism and what it grants or restricts a collegiate athlete to be able to receive as compensation for their participation. These guidelines have been described to both benefit and unjustifiably limit the student-athlete and the success of institutions’ athletic performance. This debate has been a strong driver in court claims against the NCAA and the mainstream controversy about what student-athletes should have the right to receive financially.
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning the compensation of collegiate athletes within the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). It followed from a previous case, O'Bannon v. NCAA, in which it was found that the NCAA was profiting from the namesake and likenesses of college athletes. The case dealt with the NCAA's restrictions on providing college athletes with non-cash compensation for academic-related purposes, such as computers and internships, which the NCAA maintained was to prevent the appearance that the student athletes were being paid to play or treated as professional athletes. Lower courts had ruled that these restrictions were in violation of antitrust law, which the Supreme Court affirmed in a unanimous ruling in June 2021.
1 2 Peer Review Renick, Jobyan (October 1994). "The Use and Misuse of College Athletics". The Journal of Higher Education. 45 (7): 545–552. doi:10.2307/1980793. JSTOR1980793.
1 2 3 Cheslock, John J.; Knight, David B. (2015). "Diverging Revenues, Cascading Expenditures, and Ensuing Subsidies: The Unbalanced and Growing Financial Strain of Intercollegiate Athletics on Universities and Their Students". Journal of Higher Education. 86 (3): 417–447. doi:10.1080/00221546.2015.11777370. S2CID154274050.
↑ Rich, Bobby (March 9, 2018). "The 25 Highest-Paid College Coaches". The Quad. We focus solely on what universities pay their coaches as their base salary, and do not include bonuses or any outside income.
1 2 Sigelman, L.; Wahlback, P.J. (1999). "Gender proportionality in intercollegiate athletics: The mathematics of Title IX compliance". Social Science Quarterly. 80 (3).
1 2 3 Calkins, C.K. (2000). "Factors influencing Title IX compliance in college athletics". University of Colorado.
↑ Hooks, D.T. (1998). "Complying with Title IX: An examination of the effects on three NCAA Division III colleges in Pennsylvania and the difficulties the law's 104 interpretation has created for small colleges attempting to achieve gender equity". University of Pennsylvania.
↑ Buchanan, Maggie Jo Poertner. "Title IX Turns 40: A Brief History And Look Forward." Texas Review Of Entertainment & Sports Law 14.1 (2012): 91–93. SPORTDiscus with Full Text. Web. 25 Sept. 2013.
↑ Hull, R.A. (1993). "A comparison of the perceptions of NCAA Division III athletics administrators, coaches, and athletes regarding compliance with Title IX". Ball State University.
↑ Acosta, R.V.; Carpenter, L.J. (1992). "As the years go by: Coaching opportunities in the 1990s". Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 63 (3): 36–42. doi:10.1080/07303084.1992.10604132.
1 2 Cronk, Erin. "Unlawful Encroachment: Why the NCAA Must Compensate Student-Athletes for the Use of Their Names, Images, and Likenesses". University of la Verne Law Review. 34 (2012–2013): 135.
↑ Fainaru, Steve; Farrey, Tom (July 24, 2014). "Game Changer". ESPN.com. Archived from the original on May 10, 2016. Retrieved May 14, 2017.
1 2 Cole, Jens (2019). "A Critique of the NCAA – A Comparative Analysis of US Federal Law and California State Law in Criticism of NCAA Rules". SSRN3463503.
↑ Crowly, R, and Guinzburg, T: "West Point: Two Centuries of Honor and Tradition" ( ISBN0-446-53018-2), page 234. Warner Books, 2002.
↑ Some other international competitions predate the Army-RMC game, but have been interrupted for various reasons. For example, the Six Nations Championship in rugby union, previously known as the Home Nations and Five Nations, was first conducted in 1883 and has been an annual event since 1899, but was interrupted for both World Wars, and was started but not completed in 1972. West Point Weekend itself has not been continuous since 1923; only one Army–RMC game was played during World War II.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
