TAT: Making the Case Against Paying College Football Players

This article originally appeared in the August 26, 2013 issue of The Arkansas Traveler.

Seemingly every year something happens in college football to ignite the debate that has been going on for years: Should college football players get paid?

Reggie Bush at USC, Cam Newton at Auburn and now Johnny Manziel at Texas A&M have all been the subject of scandals involving them receiving improper benefits.

Each time these scandals hit the newsstand, high profile people such as Texas head coach Mack Brown and South Carolina head coach Steve Spurrier come out and say that paying college football players should be allowed by the NCAA.

However, in a poll done by The Traveler, 59.5 percent of the public still thinks they should not get paid.

Some UA students, such as biomedical engineering major Conner Veit, think college football players are already being compensated enough.

“Full scholarship and collegiate athletic training should be enough,” Veit said. “A lot of people say that the schools benefit off of the athlete’s names, but honestly, what would any athlete be without the school giving them a chance to play?

“The athletes benefit more from the university’s name, in my opinion.”

Another reason UA students think it’s a bad idea to pay college football players is because of the fear it will diminish the quality of the game.

“Passion and love of the game is what fuels college athletes now,” biology pre-dental major Evan Johnson said. “The second we replace their motives with money, the excitement of the game will vanish.”

It would also be logistically challenging. Paying only college football athletes would be a violation of Title XI, which promotes male and female equality.

The form and amount of payment are problems with no perfect solution, as well.

“I think it would add too many problems,” environmental, soil and water science major Lane Bolain said. “How much would each player get paid? It would take a lot of money and it would just bring out a lot of greed.”

Some students even compare student-athletes to themselves. Regular students attend college to better their skills and gain an education that will help them in the future.

“You go to college, improve your skills and then you can move on to the pros, where you get paid real money,” history major Trenton Yeakley said. “Why should football be different?”

In an anonymous poll done by The Traveler, 68.2 percent of the 44 current and former student-athletes that were asked said they think college football players should not be paid.

Many of the athletes’ opinions mirrored those of the general public.

In their eyes, they are just regular students that happen to play a sport to pay for their education.

“Football players put in the work like any non-athlete college student working their way through school. The only difference is football is the work and education is the pay,” said a female athlete at another SEC school. “What more can one ask for?”

One Razorback athlete doesn’t want college football players to be paid because it would become more like the NFL.

“(Student-athletes) are still playing for their team and the love of the game, while in the pros, it’s all about what’s best for themselves and what makes the money,” the Razorback athlete said.

College football players have played without receiving legal compensation since 1869, so ultimately, something drastic would have to occur for a change to be made, and as seen by these polls, most of the public would be opposed to it.

To hear the other side of the argument, click here.