By: Jake Marcus

There has been a lack of monetary compensation for student athletes since the founding of the NCAA. These students put in time after long days of practicing and studying and are worked an excessive amount for no financial compensation. In addition, NCAA rules do not allow for these athletes to make money off of their own names. This reluctance to pay student athletes has caused mixed reactions from people on both sides of this issue.

According to the Collegian, the NCAA generated over six billion dollars of revenue from men’s basketball and football. Currently, collegiate athletes get some sort of scholarship, whether it is a full ride or a reduced admission cost. However, student athletes have intense workloads in terms of practices, classes, and games, and many believe that they do not get compensated properly for their time and energy. According to TIME, about 60% of upcoming college football freshmen support the right to unionize.

Although the issue of student athlete compensation has existed throughout the NCAA’s history, the debate for compensation has grown with the advances of media journalism. College sports’ growth and increased revenue have increased the popularity of, and the money made from, college sports. In 1972, Title IX was introduced into college sports which ensures equal pay towards sports programs regardless of gender, but the players themselves make no money. Today, student athletics is being seen and broadcasted to a wider audience than ever, with no financial benefit for the players.

College athletes help universities generate millions of dollars a year through collegiate sports, with no personal monetary gain. These student athletes, and the successes they bring to their respective universities, also influence the decisions future student athletes make to join successful school sports programs. Student athletes influence the monetary decisions of fans to purchase merchandise which  also increases university revenue. Again, no money flows to the athlete.

Some would argue these athletes get fair compensation for the work they put in. Many are given full scholarships and the tools to succeed in school, such as athlete-only buildings for both educational and athletic purposes. Universities want to promote education, so paying student athletes might increase the possibility of some students paying less attention to their studies. Those opposed to paying student athletes also point out that doing so would create unbalance in compensation for athletes across different sports. The issue is a complicated one.