“Forbes” has run a great response to a recent “Times” cover story in which the magazine espoused paying NCAA athletes. In an article in “Forbes” by Tom Van Riper entitled “Sorry Time Magazine: Colleges Have No Reason To Pay Athletes,” Van Riper rips apart the arguments presented in the “Times” piece that strongly support changing the NCAA system so big-time college athletes can get paid. We at Ivy Coach happen to agree with a number of points that Van Riper Makes.
First of all, as the commercials so tell us, the vast majority of NCAA athletes go pro in professions other than sports (i.e., they become doctors and scientists and lawyers and architects, etc.). The vast majority of college football and basketball players don’t go pro. But indeed there are a select few who are talented enough to make it to the next level — pro sports. But it’s not as though these athletes aren’t receiving financial compensation for playing their sport at their university.
The vast majority of these athletes who will eventually turn pro are on full scholarships. They are receiving free educations! An education is worth something in this world — wouldn’t you say? As Van Riper asserts in the piece, “Most have to invest $100,000 to $200,000 to get that coveted college degree. A scholarship athlete doesn’t.” We would only like to add that college degrees at highly selective colleges can certainly run upwards of $200,000.
As the “Forbes” piece also points out, these NCAA athletes are also getting a unique opportunity to brand-build. They often get national television exposure. They get to showcase their talents and their personalities for the nation. That’s worth lots in our estimation! And they get to showcase their talents in association with pre-established brands like Notre Dame Football and Duke Basketball.
Anyhow, where do you stand on this issue? We’re curious to hear from our readers. Should NCAA athletes get paid?