Research Blog #9: Argument and Counter-Argument

My argument is that players in collegiate sports are being unlawfully exploited by the NCAA and universities. The practices which the NCAA disregards a players right of publicity (the right to their image) by forcing them to sign this right over. Also that they act as a cartel by limiting what players can earn and thus putting a cap on trade. Anthony Miller in his article "NCAA Division I Athletics: Amateurism and Exploitation", gives good examples as to why athletes should not be payed. His first argument is that only football and basketball make money which means that all the other sports the school sponsors, like women's volleyball and even baseball, do not. He asks if it would be fair to pay those in men's basketball more than women playing the same sport even though they practice the same amount. Many of the counter arguments follow the line of reasoning where big football and basketball programs generate money for other sports and many programs which never make money and that paying athletes would deprive these other activities of funding. The argument is always framed as "think of the other sports" and tend to disregard the issues that those in football and basketball must deal with. The article "The Case For Paying College Athletes" by Sanderson and Siegfried completely disregards the point made above. For articles who argue payment for players, they all tend to argue for the individual players and their rights while those opposed to paying these athletes tend to focus on where the money that players don't get is spent on things which support other students.

Literature Review #5

John J. Siegfried 

Allen R. Sanderson                                              

Citation:

Sanderson, Allen R., and John J. Siegfried. "The Case For Paying College Athletes." Journal Of Economic Perspectives 29.1 (2015): 115-138.Business Source Premier. Web. 14 Apr. 2015.

Summary:

This article discusses the how all those involved in college athletics are making huge amounts of money, except the players. It shows how television and licensing deals have been increasing and how the enterprise is becoming more focused on money. It argues that price fixing the players creates an unfair environment where the NCAA can control output. It goes on to provide some ways to compensate players beyond the current tuition, room, board and fees that players are currently given under the NCAA.

About the Authors:

Allen R. Sanderson is a professor at the University of Chicago in the Economics Department and has written many articles concerning economics. John J. Siegfried is a Professor Emeritus at Vanderbilt University who has studied various economic topics over the course of his career. These two men give good insight into the issues which collegiate athletes face with regards to compensation. They also give great insight into how compensation for these players could be carried out in a fair way so that everyone makes money. 

Key Terms:

Grants-in-aid:  education a grant provided by the central government or local education authority to ensure consistent standards in buildings and other facilities

Intercollegiate sports: a sport played at the collegiate level for which eligibility requirements for participation by a student athlete are established by a national association for the promotion or regulation of collegiate athletics

Quotes:

"Television ratings and media dollars have never been higher, owing largely to the popularity of two major revenue sports (football and men’s basketball)" Page 115

"Because few viewers record games and delete advertisements before watching and live games retain the uncertainty of outcome that recorded games lack, the demand for live sports content commands substantial broadcast rights fees, which in turn generate premium advertising rates" Page 119-120

"...participation in and success at intercollegiate athletics might attract larger appropriations from state legislators concerned about their constituents’ perceptions of the public universities in their states, especially considering the fact that the median voter in virtually every state is not a college graduate and might be more interested in the flagship state university’s football team than its library."

Page 121

"...university athletics may increase private donations. More than a dozen studies have investigated the effects of commercialized intercollegiate athletics on private contributions to colleges and universities: some find no effect, while others report a modest positive effect." Page 121

Value:

The article explores some ways which the athletic departments gain money for the college which is helpful when discussing if players should be given more compensation. It shows how colleges receive lots of money from athletic departs through many more ways than I previously considered, such as donations and favorable laws form law makers. It also gives some ideas for how to compensate them such as guaranteed, multi-year scholarships so that players have more security, which some schools have already begun doing.

Research Blog #8: Interview

Interview Between Larry King (Interviewer), Ed O'Bannon and Michael Hausfeld.

"...athletes are amateurs and as amateurs, in a paternalistic way, the university and the athletic departments have to protect these young people from exploitation from others; when in fact the very people that are exploiting them are the athletic departments themselves." -Michael Hausfeld

"the athletes have no voice in the enterprise as a whole as to how long they practice, when they practice, how much the games and practices interfere with their ability to study as well as denying them the compensation for injuries and leaving them as student-athletes without any ability to cover situations where they may suffer from concussions or becoming paraplegic." -Michael Hausfeld

"..it's all about control, it is all about being able to put their [the NCAA's] thumb on your neck and you can only come up for air when we say you can, that's my personal opinion." -Ed O'Bannon

"...it is a paternalistic system that runs almost like a plantation mentality. This is the most massive group of workers who are being exploited in the modern history [...] and they have absolutely no voice in the enterprise which returns for the enterprise billions of dollars a year." -Michael Hausfeld

Citation
O’Bannon vs. NCAA: The Payment of College Athletes. Prod. Allison Marsh and Jason Rovou. Perf. Larry King, Ed O'Bannon and Michael Hausfeld. Ora TV. Ora TV, 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 12 Apr. 2015.

Research Blog #7: Case

The case which I am looking closely at is the case of O'Bannon v. NCAA which was filed in 2009 and temporarily resolved by a district judge in 2014, which the NCAA will likely appeal. In this case, O'Bannon saw that in one of the NCAA basketball video games there was a player who was identical to him in every single way possible (skin tone, height, weight, left handed). He took EA, the creator of the game, and the NCAA, the organization who licensed the game, to court arguing his likeness was being used without compensation. The case later expanded from this to include all uses of a players likeness such as player names used in commercials and jersey sales. Its main idea is that players should get compensation for the NCAA's use of the players likeness upon the players graduation. It states that the NCAA violates his right of publicity.

This case gives credit to the idea I am writing about that the NCAA is illegally using players' likenesses for money and that they deserve to be compensated in some way. The fact that the judge ruled in favor of O'Bannon is a good indicator that what the NCAA is doing in fact illegal.

Usefull Links

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25106422/obannon-vs-ncaa-a-cheat-sheet-for-ncaas-appeal-of-paying-players
This link gives a good overview of the case.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2014/08/08/ed-obannon-antitrust-lawsuit-vs-ncaa/13801277/
This link gives the ruling of the decision made in 2014.

Research Blog #6: Visual

http://www.statista.com/chart/1014/tv-ad-revenue-during-postseason-sports-in-the-us/

http://www.businessinsider.com/sports-chart-of-the-day-sec-schools-fall-behind-when-it-comes-to-tv-revenue-2012-5

http://academeblog.org/2015/03/28/some-revealing-graphs-about-the-revenues-generated-by-the-ncaa-mens-college-
basketball-tournament/

The graphs above paint a very bleak picture for collegiate athletes as they are generating a ton of money and getting nothing in return. What the graphs show is that the NCAA and its members together generate billions of dollars which students do not get any piece of even though they do most of the work. These graphs demonstrate why collegiate athletes deserve compensation beyond scholarships.