New version page

SC ENGL 102 - Issues in Ethics: The NCAA

This preview shows page 1-2-3 out of 9 pages.

View Full Document
View Full Document

End of preview. Want to read all 9 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a GradeBuddy member to access this document.

View Full Document
Unformatted text preview:

Hunter HartnettEnglish 10218 April 2014Researched Argumentative PaperIssues in Ethics: The NCAASeeing large organizations depicted as greedy and overpowering is far from uncommon. Almost daily, we hear accusations of unethical treatment and the resulting calls for improvement by unions. One organization that has been the subject of these accusations, however, may not be one you’d expect. The NCAA, the governing body of college athletics with in the United States, has received endless criticism regarding it’s questionable treatment of it’s athletes. As new implications are continuing to be brought to light daily, it is imperative that the NCAA looks into reforming it’s policies regarding the treatment of it’s student athletes.The National Collegiate Athletics Association, or the NCAA, is the largest collegiate athletics organization in the world. Formed on March 31, 1906 as the Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States (IAAUS), the association changed its name to it’s current title in 1910, and held its first national championship in 1921. The NCAA runs everyday operations out of it’s headquarters located in Indianapolis, Indiana, where it has been since it moved from Kansas City in 1999. Composed of over 1200 member institution in all 50 states as well as several provinces, over 440,000 athletes compete for one of the 89 national championships held yearly, according to the NCAA’s website. The organization has grown immensely since the mid-twentieth century, surpassing other collegiate organizations such as the NAIA and NJCAA (Junior College) due to the cult-like followings of it’s most popular sports, football and college basketball. The association has grown into a multi-hundred million dollar a year industry, and has only continued to grow under current president Mark Emmert.Financially, the NCAA is immense. With a revenue stream of $876.1 million in 2012, the NCAA sounds more like a Wall Street brokerage firm than a non-profit athleticsassociation regulating college sports. According to Steve Berkowitz of USA Today, “The NCAA recorded a nearly $71 million dollar surplus for it’s 2012 fiscal year…The surplus, an all-time best for the organization, increased it’s year-end net assets to more than $566 million” (Berkowitz). These financial figures are reaching staggering heights, especially for an organization that has been able to retain it’s tax-exempt status. The NCAA also manages it’s own investment fund, a $282 million dollar quasi-endowment fund that’s principle, unlike with a permanent endowment, can be spent. As these financial statements continue to be leaked to the media, more questions are arising regarding the NCAA’s strict restrictions on player benefits. The NCAA, known for it’s rigid regulations regarding player compensation and special treatment by schools, alumni donors, and third party interest groups, has been subject to accusations of unethical treatment of its “employee-athletes,” who aren’t seeing a dime of the money they are bringing in.Simplified, the initial scrutiny surrounding the NCAA can be summarized in threewords; it isn’t fair. It isn’t fair that the NCAA is generating hundreds of million of dollars at the expense of it’s athletes. It isn’t fair that universities are signing multi-billion dollartelevision contracts to promote their students on the national stage. It isn’t fair that, while the players are putting in all of the physical effort and sacrifice, coaches are walking away with millions of dollars in pay and bonuses. Obviously it is more complicated than this, and I in no way support reform based solely on these accusations. That’s not to say, however, that they are even remotely baseless. According to calculations performed by Nerd Wallet Finance contributor Sreekar Jasthi, “the average (including reserves) college basketball player on a team ranked in the top 25 is worth just over $475,000” (Jasthi). That isn’t it. “Michael Frazier II has the most win shares [how much of any influence a player had in his teams win, such as points and assists] for No. 1 ranked Florida and is, therefore, projected to have the highest player value on his team-just shy of $1.2 million” (Jasthi). In comparison, Billy Donovan, Florida’s men’s basketball head coach, “has signed a three-year contract extension that raises his average salary to $3.7 million over the next six years” (Fox/Associated Press). Both worth millions, only one is being fully compensated for his commitment. Frazier isn’t even at the top. Jabari Parker, Duke’s star freshman, was worth over $2.3 million this passed season. It begins to form into a basic ethical principle. Two who do the same should receive the same. According to Russ Shafer-Landau in The Fundamentals of Ethics “people who are alike in all relevant aspects should get similar treatment. When this fails to happen, something has gone wrong” (Shafer-Landau 6). The players sacrifice as much as the coaches, but are simultaneously snubbed of their share. That isn’t to say that the blame should be placed upon big money coaches. Often their views align with the players. At several SEC Football conventions, University of South Carolina’s head coach Steve Spurrier, amongothers, has addressed these issues, going as far as to say that he would be willing to pay his players a stipend out of his own pocket. The underlying, and often unnoticed, issue is that these high school graduates with dreams of the professional careers have no other routes available to play at a high level aside from the NCAA. According to Zach Gorwitz, in Money Madness from the Duke Political Review, “Economically defined, the NCAA is a monopsony…one buyer in a market of sellers…if I want to play college football, I’d have no choice but to seek employment from the NCAA” (Borowitz). Mark Emmert has been extremely vocal in denying these allegations. He stands adamant behind the concept that NCAA athletes are students first, and that if an individual wishes to prioritize athletics, he or she may go straight on to the professional leagues where that won’t be an issue. However, there are discrepancies in his philosophy. The National Basketball Association’s 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) restricts high school athletes from going straight to the league. Instead, a player must wait a year in-between, a policy that complements the NCAA. These players


View Full Document
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Issues in Ethics: The NCAA and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Issues in Ethics: The NCAA and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?