College sports are a cultural phenomenon, enjoyed by millions of fans across the U.S. NCAA tournaments fill stadiums, draw in billions in television revenue, and bring invaluable branding and marketing exposure to universities. Yet, for all the fame and commercial success, the student-athletes at the heart of this spectacle remain significantly undercompensated.
The question of whether student-athletes should be paid is no longer just a debate among sports fans but a crucial ethical, economic, and educational issue that demands immediate attention. Here’s why the case for paying student-athletes is stronger than ever.
The Financial Disparity in College Athletics
College sports generate enormous revenue for schools, sponsors, and media networks. According to the NCAA, the organization earned an impressive $1.3 billion in revenue in 2023, with millions more flowing into individual universities through game attendance, merchandise, and sponsorship deals.
Despite this windfall, student-athletes generally see only a fraction of these profits, primarily through scholarships and minimal stipends. A report from the National Bureau of Economic Research highlights this disparity, revealing that only around 16% of NCAA revenue goes back to athletes via scholarships and medical support. This limited compensation stands in stark contrast to the massive financial gains made by universities and sponsors.
Further compounding the inequality, players from major revenue-generating sports such as football and basketball often come from lower-income households and minority communities. These athletes’ efforts not only sustain their teams but also subsidize other athletic programs that historically benefit students from higher-income backgrounds. A more balanced compensation model would address these systemic inequities.
The Demanding Role of a Student-Athlete
For student-athletes, sports are more than just extracurricular activities. Participating in NCAA sports requires a significant investment of time, with hours spent on practices, games, travel, and preparation. This commitment makes it nearly impossible for athletes to balance part-time jobs or fully participate in academic coursework, further limiting their earning potential and their ability to prepare for careers after graduation.
Additionally, the risk of injury is a harsh reality for these athletes. A career-ending injury can permanently derail both their athletic aspirations and financial stability. Allowing athletes to earn an income from their efforts would offset these opportunity costs, providing them with a financial safety net as they commit to their roles on the field.
Marketing Value and Exposure
Student-athletes are not just players; they’re invaluable marketing assets for universities. Their performances on the field often translate into broader benefits for their schools, from increased alumni donations to higher student enrollment. A phenomenon known as the “Flutie Effect”—named after Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie’s game-winning play that boosted his school’s applications—is an excellent example of how sports success can elevate a university’s brand.
For athletes, however, this exposure does not always translate into direct financial gain. Recent changes such as the NCAA’s interim Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) policy have allowed athletes to generate income through sponsorship deals and endorsements. While this is a step in the right direction, NIL opportunities are not enough. Only a limited number of athletes earn significant amounts through NIL, leaving countless others in limbo. Paying athletes directly would ensure broader compensation for all players, not just a select few.
Addressing Common Counterarguments
While critics argue against paying student-athletes, several of their points can be thoughtfully addressed.
1. “Athletes already receive scholarships.”
Scholarships do cover tuition and other academic expenses, but they fail to account for the full picture. Student-athletes often face out-of-pocket expenses for living costs, food, transportation, and more. Additionally, scholarships don’t provide the financial stability or the long-term wealth-building opportunities that salaries or stipends could offer.
2. “It would place financial strain on universities.”
This concern is valid, especially for smaller schools with lower revenue. However, revenue from top college sports programs, particularly football and basketball, far exceeds their expenses. By reallocating funds or introducing revenue-sharing models, schools can ensure athletes are compensated without jeopardizing their financial stability.
3. “Pay might disrupt team dynamics and amateurism.”
Paying athletes doesn’t have to undermine the spirit of college sports. Many systems, such as salary caps or equal base pay across teams, could be put in place to maintain fairness and cohesion. Importantly, such systems would also align NCAA rules with labor laws, ensuring students receive a fair share of the wealth they generate.
The Case for Immediate Change
The chorus of supporters calling for student-athlete compensation continues to grow. A 2023 poll by Sportico/Harris revealed that 67% of Americans are in favor of paying college athletes. This overwhelming public support underscores a shift in perception. Fans, legal experts, and lawmakers increasingly recognize the value these athletes bring to their schools and to the sports industry as a whole.
Court cases have also started to redefine the legal boundaries of compensating college athletes. For example, the NCAA reached a $2.8 billion settlement in 2024 aimed at resolving antitrust lawsuits. These lawsuits reflect frustrations with how athlete labor has historically been undervalued. If approved in 2025, this settlement could mark the beginning of a new era of equity in college sports.
Such changes challenge the outdated notion of “amateurism” in college sports and reflect the reality that these athletes are professionals in every sense, except in what they are allowed to earn.
A Path Forward
To build a sustainable future for college athletics, universities and governing bodies like the NCAA need to adopt a fairer compensation model. Here are a few potential solutions to explore:
- Revenue Sharing Models: Allocate a percentage of sports-generated revenue to the athletes who play them.
- Guaranteed Salaries or Stipends: Establish fixed pay for athletes, ensuring all players receive adequate compensation regardless of their sport’s revenue potential.
- Expanded NIL Opportunities: Provide greater resources and support for athletes to secure sponsorships and endorsements.
These initiatives should also aim to include safeguards for compliance with Title IX, ensuring fair opportunities and pay across male and female sports programs.
Why Student Athletes Should Be Paid
Compensating student-athletes is not about creating personal riches; it’s about fairness, equity, and acknowledging their critical role in driving the multibillion-dollar college sports industry. It’s time to move beyond the outdated structures that undervalue their contributions and explore new ways to support the athletes who give so much of themselves to their teams, schools, and fans.
For college sports fans, NCAA officials, and university administrators alike, the answer is clear. If colleges reap the rewards of the athletes’ efforts, it’s only fair that the athletes should, too.
