Kyle Matthies
Amature competition or professional sport?
August 4, 2009 -
The video game industry in the United States has been growing rapidly in the past five years, largely defying the current economic conditions. Reaching $21.3 billion in 2008, according to NPD sales data, the industry has reinvented home entertainment. The success of the industry has in no small part lead to the recent lawsuit filed by former University of Arizona and Nebraska quarterback Sam Keller alleging that the NCAA and EA Sports are profiting off the likeness of current and former collegiate athletes without sharing the profits.
Although EA Sports, the publisher behind the number one NCAA College Football video game franchise, does not use player names in their game, there are overwhelming parallels between the virtual players and their real-world counterparts. CNBC's Darren Rovell found that “Every single one of the top 10 college players was within two inches of their real height and 10 pounds of their real weight in the game,” with four players maintaining their real height and weight. Given the similarities, it is difficult to say that EA Sports and the NCAA are not profiting off of these high profile players, regardless of whether their names are used.
But do the players have the right to demand compensation?
The NCAA’s mission, according to their website, is to promote amateur athletic competition while balancing academic and social pursuits. The NCAA has remained focused on drawing a distinction between professional and amateur athletes. In 2004, the organization ruled Jeremy Bloom, a world champion and Olympic freestyle skier, ineligible to play football because he had accepted endorsements as a professional skier. Having nothing to do with the sport of football, the NCAA ruled Mr. Bloom a ‘professional’ and therefore ineligible to participate in collegiate sports, this despite the fact that he was a full-time student at the University of Colorado.
Collegiate sports represent a rapidly growing multi-billion dollar industry in the United States. According to the Washington Post, the University of Texas’ athletic programs generated over $105 million revenue for the school in 2007 which represents 87% growth from 1999. In addition, many top programs spend over $100,000 per year on student athletes, along side large staff salaries and facility maintenance which can exceed $100 million per year.
While athletes earn scholarships for their contributions, some feel the risks don’t outweigh the rewards. College football in particular represents significant risks to the players. Each game, players face the possibility of serious injury which can affect the rest of their life regardless of whether they intend to play professionally. Many promising collegiate athletes have faced career-ending injuries on the field, while generating significant revenues for their universities, entertainment companies such as Electronic Arts, and media corporations such as the Walt Disney Company (ESPN), without receiving fair compensation.
So, should college athletes be compensated?
I for one believe that they should not. I say that with the qualification that the profits from college sports should be funneled back into the institutions that earn them. Whether for research, attracting high value professors, scholarships, or other such activities, the primary goal of a successful sports program should be to enrich the campus as a whole.
If the NCAA is going to continue to maintain their stance on amateur competition, they should also place restrictions on what universities can do with the profits that student athletes generate. Compulsory investment into academic and social programs should be required of any member institution.
For the glory