The anguished cry was heard throughout the athletic world yesterday. \u201cIt\u2019s the death of amateurism, the end of College Athletics as we know it\u201d. And it might well be. The United States Supreme Court cracked open the NCAA monopoly on money in college athletics. The Court ruled that Universities cannot be restricted to offering only tuition and living expenses scholarships for athletes. The Court narrowly defined that those schools could also offer other academic expenses, and even provide for \u201cbonuses\u201d for better grades and graduation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The good news: for \u201crevenue sports\u201d athletes, the Court has narrowly opened the door that they should get a piece of the huge financial pie their efforts create. How big a pie is it? In the year before COVID, the Ohio State University grossed over $220 million in athletics revenues. $60 million of that was in ticket sales for football alone. Ryan Day, the head football coach at OSU, makes over $5.6 million a year. And that just puts him third in the Big Ten Conference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why shouldn\u2019t the athletes get more value? If the head coach is worth millions a year, why should the recruited athlete, the one scoring the touchdowns and risking the injuries, only get $53,000 if they\u2019re from out of state and $29,000 in-state?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are two kinds of sports in the NCAA, and it\u2019s not male and female. It\u2019s revenue, sports that produce enough money to cover all their costs and scholarships, and non-revenue. In simpler terms: it\u2019s men\u2019s football and basketball and a few women\u2019s basketball teams at a select twenty-five schools in the nation, and there\u2019s every other sport.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a high school athlete I participated in track, swimming and wrestling. All of those sports at the Division I level of the NCAA are \u201cnon-revenue\u201d. At the Ohio State University, all of those sports depend on the profits of the football program to continue in their present form. The NCAA threat: if they are forced give greater financial compensation to football and basketball players, then non-revenue sports may be cut to pay for it. So while it might be fair to those few \u201cpaid\u201d players, it may be the death-knell for the track and swimming and wrestling teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Division I is the \u201ctop\u201d level of NCAA competition in all sports. Division I schools offer limited scholarships in the sports they offer. While there are 85 scholarships on the football team, there are only 14 for women\u2019s soccer (only 9 for men\u2019s soccer). For \u201cmy\u201d sports: men\u2019s track, has 12.6 scholarships (18 for women); and swimming and wrestling have 9.9 ( There are 14 in women\u2019s swimming, women\u2019s wrestling is just getting started). <\/p>\n\n\n\n
And what about those NCAA schools not in the twenty-five money makers? Let\u2019s take Ohio University. When you look at their financials it seems that each of their sports, revenue and non-revenue, break-even. But that break-even amount includes a subsidy by the University; 55% of the total athletic budget. Only the \u201ctwenty-five\u201d big money schools can finance athletics without non-athletic funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sports don\u2019t have to be all about money. Athletics at the high school level, and at Division III colleges (my alma mater Denison University is one) doesn\u2019t have scholarships. Athletes truly meet the \u201camateur\u201d criteria, and while there is some limited revenue produced by athletics, most of the costs are covered as a \u201ccost of doing business\u201d by the University. Money is still important, but it isn\u2019t the driving force that the Division I schools face. Division III schools can allow as many on their teams as they want, without trying to balance scholarship costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And maybe that\u2019s how it should be. Three major professional \u201crevenue\u201d sports have models that allow younger athletes to develop and try to \u201cmake it\u201d outside of the collegiate ranks. Minor league hockey, baseball and basketball circuits all provide their own pathway to \u201cthe big leagues\u201d. Football is the one major sport that depends on the college ranks as their \u201cminor league\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, for non-revenue sports, there isn\u2019t really a pathway to the \u201ctop\u201d except through the college ranks. There is no \u201cminor league\u201d track and field circuit \u2013 if you\u2019re good enough to \u201cgo pro\u201d, you go, otherwise, it\u2019s a college team or out. College serves as the final developmental step for those athletes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The \u201cAmerican Way\u201d is about fairness. And it is only fair that the superb athlete at the college level have the opportunity to benefit financially from their talents. But it\u2019s not as simple as just basketball and football. It\u2019s about the role that athletics should play in our collegiate system, and the way we develop athletes in all sports. The NCAA can\u2019t have it both ways. They can\u2019t \u201claud\u201d the benefits of amateurism, while themselves benefitting from the incredible financial windfall of those amateurs\u2019 efforts. Whatever side of the \u201cpay athletes\u201d argument you’re on; that can\u2019t be fair.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"