College and University Athletes Should Have a Salary for What They Work For

Whether college and university athletes should have a salary for what they work for? The question is: if the NCAA did not conspire against them, would they have a payroll? The answer is: yes, they would. And the mere fact that the NCAA strongly opposes forcing a rule that prevents anyone from being paid for their work, is a sign that if the rule were not there, they would be paid. 

Everyone should have the right to earn the money they are worth, at least have the opportunity to ask about it, and if they are not worth much then they do not pay much. The second argument is that it does not make sense that a player is not paid for what they play but the university invests that money in indirect benefits in the form of the beautiful costumes, the jacuzzi with waterfall, the hydrotherapy room ... and, especially, the exorbitant salary of the head coach. It is a system where the player's pay is illegal and the way that universities have to compete for talent is to pay more and more coaches to recruit good talent. This generates an imbalance because the programs with more money get the best technicians. 

In addition, it is something untouchable because in the '90 there was an attempt to put a kind of salary cap to college head coaches and, as it is a free labor market, they took it to the courts where they won. The dollars that the universities should use in the players invest in facilities and coaches. To highlight this fact, a college football coach can win twice that of an NFL and a college basketball up to seven times that of an NBA. While in the professional leagues the growth of the income goes, in greater part, to the players, in the university leagues the programs can multiply their value at the cost of the gratuitous work of their athletes. It is inconsistent, in economic terms, not to pay college athletes for the work they do. Separate chapter is the social consequences. And it does not seem like the NCAA top executives apply this overwhelming logic. 

The progressive wings see badly and immorally the process of rewards with payrolls for sport and non-academic reasons within the structure of the university. While the conservative wings of entry are already resistant to factory change and, by way of addition, do not see with good eyes the powerful structure of union that would be formed if there were salaries.