By now, most of you are aware of SB 206, the California bill which allows college athletes in that state to profit off THEIR image without risking losing their scholarships or eligibility. Foreseeably, the entire NCAA industrial complex opposed this and insist a protracted fight, likely to the Supreme Court. The defenders of the current NCAA model always go into their Chicken Little act when anything is remotely suggested to bring about a more just system. I call them Chicken Little because their response is very similar to those who resist raising the minimum wage with baseless scare tactics.
The following are their most common fear-mongering tropes and why they are ridiculous:
THEY GET PAID IN THE FORM OF A SCHOLARSHIP
First of all, the data has been clear for years and indicates that a college degree is declining in value. More college graduates are unemployed than at any other time in American history. It just is not what it once was, but even if it were, this response implies as if it is largess on the part of the college. Let’s be clear; be it community college, division 2 or 3, or the big-time revenue-generating programs, being a college athlete is a job that requires, between practice, games, and travel, in excess of 40 hours per week. As college athletic advisers, I can tell you that we would NEVER advise a full-time student to work that much and yet the defenders pat themselves on the back as if the scholarship is a handout for which the athletes should be grateful. They earned their scholarship and more.
IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO OTHER COLLEGE STUDENTS
Why? Does the college marching band generate millions for the college? How about the gaming team? If they do and have commercial appeal, they should not be hindered either. But the honest truth is that neither gaming, though growing very fast, nor the marching band are generating the kind of revenue that big-time football and basketball generate. In fact, the revenues generated by football and basketball routinely fund the entire athletic department.
IT WOULD UNDERMINE TITLE 9
Title 9 is the 1972 amendment that requires gender equity on college campuses and is often used as a scapegoat by reactionary defenders of the status quo, to pit the genders against one another. Payment would come from what athletes can independently negotiate. College-based budgets would not be affected at all. In fact, female athletes with commercial appeal could profit off their likeness, just as the males could. The great WNBA star and former UConn Huskie, Diana Taurasi, talks about how her alma mater still makes money off her and she has been gone for 15 years now.
IF THEY ARE PAID, THEY WON’T BE MOTIVATED TO STUDY AND ARE MORE LIKELY TO DROP OUT OF COLLEGE
BS! The data is clear. The number one reason students drop out of school is not a lack of motivation and it is certainly not having too much money. To the contrary, the number one reason students drop out is cost. So, how is paying them going to dull their interests? The student athlete who only came to make it to the pros is unlikely to graduate whether he/she is paid or not. And still yet, he/she will be enhanced by merely being exposed to the college environment.
Of course the ultimate issue is the non-profit industrial complex of college athletics. Like big time organized religion, it is structured in such a way that allows it to have the protection of being tax exempt while raking in millions of dollars. It is a thinly veiled derivative of the capitalist model and thus inherently prone to such exploitation. Until that is replaced, college athletes ought to be able to do what those who endorse the “free market” system say they believe in, which is to profit off their talents. College sports in America generates revenues in excess of $1 billion annually. The charade of amateurism will no longer be allowed to keep a portion of those revenues away from the primary generators of them, which are the athletic labor.
The cries of the status quo defenders are falling on deaf ears. The reality will soon be that the 5-star football recruit pondering Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, or USC will likely go to sunny Southern Cal, but not just for the sun. That basketball recruit pondering Kentucky, Duke, Carolina, or UCLA will do the same. They won’t be able to beat them so they will have to join them. If they need a nudge, it may come in the way of federal legislation, which is already being crafted by former Ohio State and NFL receiver Anthony Gonzales, who is now an Ohio Congressmen.
This victory did not happen in a vacuum. It is a result of a movement all around the country from graduate students to Walmart and fast food employees to unite against an increasingly oppressive work place. The sleeping giant of exploited labor is waking up. For college athletics as well as other aspects of the the dying capitalist model, the message is clear: the gig is up!
