Student athletes: Compensation for competition

[Editor's note: This is part two of a series that began last week.]

Last week, I kicked off a series of columns on the debate over payment of college athletes by detailing the opinions of professional members of the sports world. For this column, I looked to the student body for their thoughts, with a delightful mix of reader opinion and my own coming after break. This is what I found.

Most of the online comments centered around this question voiced by "Ringo": "Don't athletes get paid in the form of scholarships?"

The authors of many posts said they had worked full-time to pay for school. Understandably, they were reluctant to advocate the payment of individuals whose tuition, room and board had already been taken care of in most cases. One commented that "if playing sports for a full scholarship is so difficult, maybe they should quit playing and focus on school and pay their own tuition" through a regular job ("Rob"). Sound appealing, athletes? Giving up your sport to work at McDonald's?

Other students were upset not about the scholarships that many athletes receive, but about the extras: private dining halls for football, tutoring, Under Armour gear, first choice of classes, compensation for away games and for staying over breaks and so on. More moderate responders agreed that while athletes deserve the scholarships and most perks (after all, tutoring keeps them eligible despite a hectic schedule, and early class selection is necessary for accommodating practice), they "don't necessarily believe that these athletes need to get paid" ("Mo," who identified him or herself as a former Terrapin athlete).

Others went so far as to agree with royalties for jersey sales, especially for popular players such as men's basketball guard Greivis Vasquez, but went on to say "all athletes getting paid is ridiculous" ("PP30").

Then we have commenter "Nick": "Pay them. The amount should be reflective of their performance. Starters should get more than backups, and stars should get the most. ... Years of sacrifice and dedication go into becoming a division I athlete ... . They are ‘selling' the university to donors and future students and should be paid accordingly."

Is the suggestion here, though, that students at the university for academic rather than physical merit made no sacrifices, have no dedication and make no meaningful contribution?

An irate commenter, "K": "Last time I checked, none of the athletes on this campus are playing their sport with a gun to their head. You CHOSE to be an athlete, so stop whining about not getting paid for something you wanted to do in the first place. And as for your comment about the ‘average student,' what do you know about the average student and what they do? ... Of course, the athletes bring in money for the school blah, blah, blah...but there are also 36,000 students paying a minimum of about $20,000 a year, more than $35,000 if they're out of state. I would say that's a bit of a contribution, too." Whoa there, "K." Spoken by a true out-of-state student.

I was surprised by the number of people who identified as athletes and commented against getting paid, saying they were "thankful to receive the opportunity to play at that level," to get better and to receive an education they might not have been eligible for or able to finance. One commenter who is not from this university, "D," went so far as to call the prospect "frightening," stating that "as a scholarship D1 athlete I do not believe that I should be paid for what I do on the field for my school."

For my school — isn't that what it's all about?

Bethany Offutt is a sophomore criminology and criminal justice and psychology major. She can be reached at offutt at umdbk dot com.