Jim Tressel gets paid close to $1 million a year for trying to win as many football games as possible. His players, however, earn no salary for doing the same thing.
Although college athletes do get rewarded with scholarship money, there is a debate around the country as to whether that amount is enough compensation for all the work required of student athletes each year. Several Ohio State coaches were recently asked if they thought college athletes should be paid a salary, and their responses varied.
“I believe there is a big difference between paper money and real money, and the scholarships these kids get are only paper money,” said basketball coach Jim O’Brien. “They need to have some real money to walk around with that they can live off of.”
Student athletes are not allowed to work much under NCAA regulations, and those who are in favor of paying them often point to that rule as a reason college athletes need money. But that reason isn’t enough for all coaches to share O’Brien’s views toward paying student athletes.
Wrestling coach Russ Hellickson answered the same question: Should student athletes be paid? He came up with a very different response.
“No, but they should be able to get what, say, a Presidential Scholar gets,” he said in an e-mail. “This should be an educational experience.”
Presidential Scholars receive full in-state tuition, room and board, book allowances and miscellaneous expenses — a total that OSU media relations estimates to be $12,483 per year for in-state students. That is nearly $2,000 more than an in-state athlete receives, even if they are awarded a full scholarship.
Most of that $2,000 falls under the category of miscellaneous expenses, something athletes do not receive money for. The extra scholarship money is to be used for “athletic tickets, book costs, bus passes; anything that students need for living,” said Amy Murray, OSU spokeswoman.
Some coaches are in favor of keeping things exactly as they are, without raising scholarship levels.
Softball coach Linda Kalafatis said she did not feel well versed enough in the topic to know an answer to the question for sure, but she weighed in with her opinion on whether or not college athletes should get more for what they do.
“There are some good arguments out there for it, but I am against it,” she said. “The fact that our kids get scholarship opportunities and good exposure makes the experience good for them. But I know if you asked the kids, they’d want the money.”
One of the issues that may be a problem with paying college athletes is the difference in revenue that each sport brings in through television contracts and other sources. At OSU, football and basketball both bring in a large amount of money for the university every year, so some may argue that they deserve a percentage of that. But do football and basketball players deserve more than athletes who participate in non-revenue sports?
Some coaches chose not to comment on the issue because it is a delicate subject. Those who did respond felt strongly towards equality.
“If money is given, all tendered athletes should be the same,” Hellickson said. “This isn’t and shouldn’t be the pros. We have more class.”
Athletics Director Andy Geiger agreed, saying if a compensation plan ever went into effect, it would have to be equal for everybody.
“That’s the only way it works,” he said. “It would not work, for instance, if only football and basketball players were paid.”
Title IX calls for scholarship equality in college athletics, so if pay ever was given to student athletes, all sports would probably receive the same amount.
The plan that is the most likely to take place in the next few years is the one Geiger mentioned during his recent interview.
“I wouldn’t mind seeing a liberalization of the financial aid rules to allow athletic grants and aid to move closer to the cost of education,” he said. “As far as players actually getting salaries — no.”
Staying away from salaries for college athletes was the consensus of all coaches who chose to comment on the issue.
“I’m not in favor of salaries, but some sort of stipend would be beneficial,” O’Brien said.
When asked how much of a stipend he would like to see, O’Brien said that was something he did not know the answer to yet. He said it would have to be discussed at great length before he reached a decision.
Another topic that is worth considering when deciding whether or not to pay student athletes is the fact that not all university sports programs earn as much as OSU’s. Equality is the key factor in this issue as well. Should a college with high-revenue programs, like OSU, be able to pay more than smaller Division I colleges? Under Title IX, the answer has to be no.
“Since athletic budgets around the country aren’t all in as good shape as ours, I don’t really know how realistic a plan this is,” Kalafatis said.
O’Brien said he agreed. “When you start talking about every sport at every college across the country, that’s a lot of money. Every sport would need to receive the same amount, so right now this is not too realistic of an option.”
Hellickson thinks differently about the realism of the plan.
“Unfortunately, it will probably be driven through in the next five years by those who believe athletics is more important than education,” he said.
Regardless of whether or not anything will change in the next few years, one thing is for certain — the debate will continue.
“There are people on both sides of the argument,” O’Brien said. “I’m just someone who looks at this from an everyday standpoint and sees that these kids need some money to live off of.”
is a member of the 
43 comments
It's many ways that you can approach this, but what is the best way