March Madness
Two semi-final games of the NCAA basketball championships will be held this Saturday. Interestingly, the players — that is to say, the performing artists — are paid virtually nothing for their efforts.
Sixty-eight amateur college basketball teams face each other in the National Collegiate Athletic Association playoffs. It's one of the major sporting events in the United States. During the entire month of March, millions of sports fans remain glued to their television screens. U.S. broadcaster CBS was prepared to pay $10 million for broadcast rights to the series over the next 10 years. Additionally, several hundred million dollars will also be taken in through sales, advertising and sponsorships. Sports at the college level in the United States are a billion-dollar business. It's therefore not surprising that coaches and trainers at the most successful schools — like Duke, Syracuse and Ohio State — are paid tens of millions of dollars. Interestingly, however, the players — that is to say, the performing artists — are paid virtually nothing for their efforts.
While we here in Germany argue about whether it's justifiable that soccer player Lionel Messi is paid more than Volkswagen Chairman of the Board Martin Winterkorn, in the United States they're arguing over whether African-American college basketball players are really the modern-day equivalent of athletic slaves.
One side argues that in predominantly white universities, more than half the basketball players come from poor African-American neighborhoods. Despite the fact that the universities earn a great deal of money because of their basketball players and despite the fact that sports success is an important student recruiting tool, the players themselves don't receive sufficient financial support. The other side argues that most scholar-athletes receive full scholarships. That means they not only receive full financial support over their four-year course of study, they have the added benefit of getting an academic degree from a prestigious school.
The concept of the “student athlete” — i.e., someone who is both a full-time student in addition to being a full-time athlete — sounds good, but in reality it's illusory to think that athletes put the same amount of emphasis on their academic activities as they do on their sport. They do not do so because millions of dollars is at stake, so academic studies naturally get pushed somewhat into the background. These students have largely been oriented toward athletic pursuits ever since their primary school days. Coaches, sponsors and of course their own families are hoping someday to get money, success and influence from their child's talents.
Because of this early professionalization, education generally is left by the wayside. At the university level, athletes are usually enrolled in deceptively simple courses such as sports management or physiotherapy. Tutors are assigned to assist with homework and attendance requirements are often circumvented because of training schedules and game schedules.
After graduation, very few players ever make it to the professional athletic level. They all have a college degree (although some don't even get that far) but they often find it of little practical help in getting a job. Whether college athletes are modern day slaves is debatable. The NCAA argument that an academic education is its highest priority and that, therefore, payment for athletic performance is unnecessary is completely irrelevant. Monetary payment to athletes is actually forbidden. Recently, Kansas State basketball player Jamar Samuels was barred from playing in a game because one of his ex-coaches gave him $200 so he could buy groceries.
In my opinion, there are only two solutions to this problem: A portion of the money a college earns through its athletic programs should either be set aside for athletes to be paid to them after they leave school, or those responsible should be required to ensure that the education received by athletes is relevant and useful.
Sixty-eight amateur college basketball teams face each other in the National Collegiate Athletic Association playoffs. It's one of the major sporting events in the United States. During the entire month of March, millions of sports fans remain glued to their television screens. U.S. broadcaster CBS was prepared to pay $10 million for broadcast rights to the series over the next 10 years. Additionally, several hundred million dollars will also be taken in through sales, advertising and sponsorships. Sports at the college level in the United States are a billion-dollar business. It's therefore not surprising that coaches and trainers at the most successful schools — like Duke, Syracuse and Ohio State — are paid tens of millions of dollars. Interestingly, however, the players — that is to say, the performing artists — are paid virtually nothing for their efforts.
While we here in Germany argue about whether it's justifiable that soccer player Lionel Messi is paid more than Volkswagen Chairman of the Board Martin Winterkorn, in the United States they're arguing over whether African-American college basketball players are really the modern-day equivalent of athletic slaves.
One side argues that in predominantly white universities, more than half the basketball players come from poor African-American neighborhoods. Despite the fact that the universities earn a great deal of money because of their basketball players and despite the fact that sports success is an important student recruiting tool, the players themselves don't receive sufficient financial support. The other side argues that most scholar-athletes receive full scholarships. That means they not only receive full financial support over their four-year course of study, they have the added benefit of getting an academic degree from a prestigious school.
The concept of the “student athlete” — i.e., someone who is both a full-time student in addition to being a full-time athlete — sounds good, but in reality it's illusory to think that athletes put the same amount of emphasis on their academic activities as they do on their sport. They do not do so because millions of dollars is at stake, so academic studies naturally get pushed somewhat into the background. These students have largely been oriented toward athletic pursuits ever since their primary school days. Coaches, sponsors and of course their own families are hoping someday to get money, success and influence from their child's talents.
Because of this early professionalization, education generally is left by the wayside. At the university level, athletes are usually enrolled in deceptively simple courses such as sports management or physiotherapy. Tutors are assigned to assist with homework and attendance requirements are often circumvented because of training schedules and game schedules.
After graduation, very few players ever make it to the professional athletic level. They all have a college degree (although some don't even get that far) but they often find it of little practical help in getting a job. Whether college athletes are modern day slaves is debatable. The NCAA argument that an academic education is its highest priority and that, therefore, payment for athletic performance is unnecessary is completely irrelevant. Monetary payment to athletes is actually forbidden. Recently, Kansas State basketball player Jamar Samuels was barred from playing in a game because one of his ex-coaches gave him $200 so he could buy groceries.
In my opinion, there are only two solutions to this problem: A portion of the money a college earns through its athletic programs should either be set aside for athletes to be paid to them after they leave school, or those responsible should be required to ensure that the education received by athletes is relevant and useful.