Wednesday, April 1, 2020

Literature Review 4



Picture of NCAA headquarters and hall of champions.

Watkins, Boyce. “A Scholarship Is Nice, but College Athletes Should Still Be Paid.” Bleacher
            Report, Bleacher Report, 2 Oct. 2017, bleacherreport.com/articles/36519-a-scholarship-
            is-nice-but-college-athletes-should-still-be-paid.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is essentially responding to an article written by Michael Collins, who thinks a scholarship is enough for a student-athlete. Watkins believes student-athletes should be paid and that the NCAA is a money hungry and corrupt organization. The article presents us with some arguments made by the NCAA on why they cannot or will not pay student-athletes. Not being able to afford paying student-athletes and protecting them and their families are just two of many arguments mentioned. Watkins is a finance professor at Syracuse University, and he is a faculty member at the College Sports Research Institute at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. He is an advocate for student-athlete rights and has voiced his opinion on paying student-athletes on media channels such as CNN, ESPN, and CBS Sports.

Two terms from the article.
1. Open market system - is an economic system with no barriers to free-market activity. Anyone can participate in an open market, which is characterized by the absence of tariffs, taxes, licensing requirements, subsidies, unionization, and any other regulations or practices that interfere with naturally functioning operations.
2. Title IX - a federal civil rights law passed as part of the Education Amendments of 1972. This law protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance. 
        With more research, I looked on to the NCAA website and found from the source how Title IX applies to student-athletes. It reads as followed, 
"Athletics programs are considered educational programs and activities. There are three basic parts of Title IX as it applies to athletics:
        
Participation: Title IX requires that women and men be provided equitable opportunities to participate in sports. Title IX does not require institutions to offer identical sports but an equal opportunity to play;
         
Scholarships: Title IX requires that female and male student-athletes receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation; and

Other benefits: Title IX requires the equal treatment of female and male student-athletes in the provisions of: (a) equipment and supplies; (b) scheduling of games and practice times; (c) travel and daily allowance/per diem; (d) access to tutoring; (e) coaching, (f) locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; (g) medical and training facilities and services; (h) housing and dining facilities and services; (i) publicity and promotions; (j) support services and (k) recruitment of student-athletes."

Three quotes from the article.
1. “Commentators and even the NCAA president earn millions from holding games in which they don’t even participate.”
2. “The truth of the matter is that the system is a carefully-designed web of laws and rules that constrain one group and force them to serve another group’s financial interests – not unlike a Chinese sweatshop”
3. “The fact that one set of operating rules exists for coaches and another exists for players implies that the system is structured and legislated to allow one group to profit handsomely from the labor of another.”
The material helps me dig deeper into arguments I have already came across along with new view points. This was the first time coming across the Title IX and cross-campus subsidization argument and it could be the counter argument in my final paper. 

Literature Review 3



Sanderson, Allen R., and John J. Siegfried. 2015. "The Case for Paying College
            Athletes." Journal of Economic Perspectives29 (1): 115-38.

Allen R. Sanderson talks about the revenue made yearly by the NCAA and the universities within its control. It goes into detail providing charts and “Disclosures of lucrative financial dealings for the NCAA (pg 116).” The article does a great job and underlining the “restrictions” put on student-athletes along with a bases of how they all eventually became to play a big part in saving them a fortune because they limit how much the student-athlete can gain. Lastly it brings up some reasons why the NCAA does not want to change their policies regarding paying student-athletes which I will discuss further in my paper. Sanderson is a senior economics professor at the university of Chicago and has been said to be an authority on sports economics issues by the university. John J. Siegfried, also a professor in economics at the university of Vanderbilt. One of his specialties is sports economics. Both authors are highly qualified experts on my topic and are highly respected by their universities, and the sports media world.  

Two key terms.

Student-athlete which is a person who in enrolled and plays a sport at a university. The other is monopsony power and this exists when a single buyer or an association of buyers can dictate the prices they pay to suppliers or control other aspects of the relationship that exists between themselves and their suppliers.
Three quotes.
“The median head football coach among the 126 Football Bowl Subdivision institutions earned $1.9 million in 2013; the comparable head basketball coach’s salary was $1.2 million” pg 115
“In 2013, the median annual revenue generated at the 126 largest (Football Bowl Subdivision) programs from football was $20.3 million and from men’s basketball $5.6 million” pg 118

“But the NCAA and its members collectively fix college athletes’ wages. Student-athletes appear to be the only category on a campus where an outside organization (the NCAA) is granted power to dictate compensation and hours of work” pg 124
The material helped dive into the root of the issue of paying student-athletes which is money. It breaks down how much is made, the restrictions put in place, and the possible outcome if 
student-athletes were paid. It also gives statistics which will contribute to making my paper better.

Tuesday, March 31, 2020

Literature Review 2


Branch, Taylor. “The Shame of College Sports.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 30 Aug. 2019, www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/.

The Shame of College Sports discusses how universities are focused on their own financial agenda and how they use student-athletes to gain millions a year. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has made college sports a multi-million-dollar business and they do so by exploiting student-athletes. This has frustrated many student-athletes and has brought many lawsuits against the NCAA. The NCAA is a non-profit organization but they some how profit more than universities and the actual people bringing in this money, the amateur. By recognizing student-athletes as amateurs they cannot be paid for all their hard work and sacrifice.
The author Taylor Branch is well known author and public speaker. He seems very knowledgeable and respected so there is no reason to doubt his work. One term I picked is amateur, a person who engages in a pursuit, especially a sport, on an unpaid rather than a professional basis. The second term is restitution rule, which permits the NCAA to punish a university who permits an athlete to play during a court-ordered preliminary injunction that later gets reversed or vacated. This means that if a court were to enjoin a student-athlete's suspension pending the outcome of a lawsuit, the university risks significant punishment if it allows the student-athlete to play during the injunction. The following are three quotes I picked. These quotes help with my research paper because it shows different ways the NCAA continued to make rules so that student-athletes could not profit in the way that they did.

 “That money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contracts.

the NCAA in 1948 enacted a “Sanity Code,” which was supposed to prohibit all concealed and indirect benefits for college athletes; any money for athletes was to be limited to transparent scholarships awarded solely on financial need. Schools that violated this code would be expelled from NCAA membership and thus exiled from competitive sports

“Using the “student-athlete” defense, colleges have compiled a string of victories in liability cases.

Saturday, February 29, 2020

Literature Review #1



“Should Student-Athletes Be Paid?” Sports, Ethics and Philosophy, vol. 13, no. 2, 2019.


As it stands now the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) prohibits student-athletes from receiving payment from but not limited to the school they attend, Non-school-affiliates, sports agents, media appearances, and the list goes on. Student-athletes along with their schools are subject to a number or punishments if they are found to have violated these rules. Most punishments result in hefty fines or even suspension. This article challenges the policy enforced by the NCAA, arguing that student- athletes should be receiving more than the free tuition and other perks received for playing for a school.
Phillip Zema a graduate student at the University of Missouri, Columbia with a focus on philosophy published this article in 2019. No other information was found. Two terms picked from this article are “NCAA’s jurisdiction” what schools have to abide by these NCAA rules and “integrity of college sports” this one is interesting because with all the scandals in college sports and the many “lawsuits” claimed to be filed against the NCAA it seems the integrity of college sports Haas been compromised.
1.      “A basic purpose of this Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body and, by so doing, retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports.(pg. 199) ” Explains the role the NCAA regarding student-athletes and their schools.
2.      “receiving compensation or remuneration either from or entering into contracts with sports agents and various industries/companies, such as those that sell sports apparel (e.g., Nike and Reebok). (pg.201)”
3.      “receiving remuneration or compensation for advertising or endorsing products or employers (e.g., they cannot receive compensation for endorsing Nike products and supporting television programs or networks like ESPN). (201)”
I picked these three quotes because they are actual statements and rules enforced by the NCAA which prevent student athletes from benefiting from money they helped make.

Tuesday, February 25, 2020


My research paper topic has changed since my last blog post. My new topic will be about student athletes being paid during their collegiate career. A few research questions I have would include, why are student athletes not paid in college or can universities realistically afford to pay athletes while maintaining their budget? Another question, could paying athletes have more of a negative impact on them? Student athletes receive free clothing, accessories, and medical treatment their entire collegiate career. So, would paying them affect these amazing perks? Below are three academic sources that will help answer one if not all my research questions.




Work Cited
Bush, Joel. “Student or Professional Athlete - Tax Implications in the United States If College Athletes Were              to Be Classified as Paid Employees.” Labor Law Journal, vol. 68, no. 1, Spring 2017, pp. 58–63.                        EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsh&AN=121769969&site=ehost-live

Groves, Roger M. “A Solution for the Pay for Play Dilemma of College Athletes: A Novel                            Compensation Structure Tethered to Amateurism and Education.” Texas Review of 
          Entertainment & Sports Law, vol. 17, no. 2, Spring 2016, pp. 101–143. EBSCOhost, 
          search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=118306657&site=ehost-live.

Sanderson, Allen R., and John J. Siegfried. 2015. "The Case for Paying College Athletes." Journal of 
          Economic Perspectives29 (1): 115-38.

Tuesday, February 18, 2020


My research paper will focus on student athletes and academics. Online there are sources that say they perform well and some that say they do not. I found articles and case studies about student athletes and how well they perform academically in college. It seems that most sources think student athletes in college struggle academically. This was not my original idea with athletes, but after researching, I like where things are going. The links below are useful because they provide feedback from studies done on my topic. There is a small debate with my topic which I will be researching more to see for myself.





Tuesday, February 11, 2020

Final Topic

I want to do something with student athletes. I would maybe like to write about the everyday life or how they are treated in terms with injuries and medicine.