Sports and Universities The Special Relationship

How Universities Benefit From College Athletes

Introduction

College sports is practically an industry all by itself: it rakes in more than $11 billion in revenues annually—which is more than professional sports (Edelman). Universities thus make a great deal of money off college athletes, who, in return, get nothing more than an athletic scholarship (sometimes) to attend the university and its classes for free. They receive no payment (indeed, paying college athletes for playing is against the law—which is why the FBI is currently investigating several high profile colleges, like Louisville, for violating this law) (Hobson). When coaches break the law, it gives universities a black eye—but when athletes win trophies for the college, it increases the university’s brand image and value exponentially. Thus, college athletes not only enable universities to make money off their services directly, but these athletes also enable universities to develop their college brand and attract a following. More following means more attendance, which brings up the final way in which universities benefit from college athletes: successful sports program lead to higher enrollment in the college, which means more prestige and income for the school. This paper will show why these three benefits that colleges receive from college athletes are good for schools—but ultimately bad for the athletes themselves.

Background/History

Sports have long been a part of colleges and universities. They bring students and faculty together along with members of the community to cheer on athletes who are in the prime of their youth and want to engage in an extracurricular activity to further develop themselves as well-rounded human beings. Sports were never conceived as the whole reason for going to college. They were ancillary: they augmented the experience and made it fuller. But along the way, that relationship began to change. As the industry of television emerged and advertising become a lucrative revenue stream for content providers, sports suddenly took on a whole new dimension as far as colleges were concerned. Thanks to broadcasting rights (which could be sold for huge sums), advertising, marketing, and branding, universities now saw a way to exploit and benefit from that hallmark of youthful energy—athletics—and make great sums of money doing so. As the industry of college sports grew, universities working arm and arm, hand in hand, with advertisers and broadcasters developed ways to benefit from college athletes in unheard of ways. Suddenly going to college became less about the education and more about the sports. Sports brought in big bucks for big schools who could win big trophies. Sports became the reason for being: sports paid—they just didn’t pay if you were college athlete.

How Colleges Benefit (and Athletes Don’t)

The first way in which universities benefit from college athletes is through direct revenue. College athletes play in nationally televised games that win large ad contracts from advertisers—money which goes into the pockets of the universities. For example, a “2008 analysis conducted by ESPN noted just how profitable programs are to some schools: the University of Alabama athletic department raked in nearly $124 million, thanks in large part to the storied reputation of its Crimson Tide football program” (Emma). Where does that revenue come from? It comes from multiple places, for instance, “the school saw revenue of more than $13 million from media and branding rights, almost $30 million in donations and $28 million in ticket sales” (Emma). It also sells merchandise—caps, jackets, sweaters, shirts, jerseys, banners, posters, books, magazines, videos, DVDs, and more—to collect revenue generated from college athletes, none of whom see a dime in return for their hard work, which can amount to more than 40 hours per week during the season (Hartnett). That means, college athletes are working overtime (full-time jobs plus some) during the sports season so that the university can make millions. This type of labor used to be known as slave labor—today, it’s known as college athletics.

The second way in which universities benefit from college athletes is through branding. The brand is what gives the college its value: stakeholders see and recognize the brand in the public arena; they take pride in it; they want to spread it around, show that they are part of it, show that they contribute to and receive something from it. The brand allows them to enjoy social status, expand or increase their human and social capital, and be part of an organization that means something to hundreds of thousands of fans across the nation. Whether they are students, community members, administrators, business partners, athletes or sports viewers—they all want to take pride in the brand and see the school do well. Scandals bring shame to the school and devalue its brand and image (see Penn State for an example of how a university’s brand can suffer when a scandal like that under Joe Paterno erupts into the public sphere) (CBS News). So enhancing the brand at all times and making it shine for stakeholders is very important to a university. College athletes do more than anyone else in the public eye to bring attention to the brand. If they are winning games and playing for trophies at the end of the year, they enhance the college’s brand like no other. A great brand gives a university value and longevity, which means it will have legs to go the distance far into the future as an institution of importance—and college athletes get little to nothing in return for their services.

The third way in which universities benefit from college athletes is through higher enrollment. College athletes, if they are good, increase the school’s visibility: they bring attention to the university and attract the national spotlight. The more eyes that are on the school (in a favorable way) the more likely its enrollment is to go up. As researchers at UCLA found, “40 percent of students chose their college partly for its social life and 30 percent planned on playing intramural sports. Schools with large athletic programs are also meccas of social activity. Most students not only want a college education -- they want the college experience” (Emma). College athletes help to give the impression that the social experience will be quite enjoyable at a university where an athletics program is highly recognized. Games will be held that will attract attention, viewers and students and that means the social experience will be possible. For students who want that experience, they will enroll at colleges that offer it—and athletes serve that purpose (even though they are not monetarily compensated for boosting enrollment at their university).

Counter-Argument

The counter-argument is that universities don’t actually benefit from college athletes but rather that college athletes benefit from universities and all they do for the athlete. For example, the colleges give the athlete the opportunity to perform and excel at the national level. They allow the athlete to develop, to train under some of the finest coaches, and to get the opportunity of potentially attracting attention from a professional team and going pro in the future. Without universities to allow them to showcase their skills on the national stage, college athletes would be far less likely to succeed, to be motivated, or to win that lucrative sports contract down the road with a professional organization. Thus, colleges actually allow their athletes to benefit in the long-term and all the money, investment, time, effort, energy, marketing, and tickets they sell actually goes in to enhancing the brand and image and visibility of the athlete—not the college. The athlete is the one who is followed by fans for the rest of his or her career. The university’s reputation can go down in flames at any moment (again, see Penn State), but the athlete alone is responsible for his or her own reputation and can manage it independently of the university. The rebuttal to this argument is that in spite of a potential long term benefit that the athlete may or may not receive, the university’s revenue, brand, and enrollment are still nonetheless supported by the athlete’s success at the university—and yet the athlete is not monetarily rewarded or compensated or given a cut of the earnings. The athlete has to look for a professional sports organization for that—the university keeps everything for itself.