Mason Million

Annotated Bibliography

B., S. "Division I Institutions Divided on Athlete Perks." University Business, vol. 18, no. 11, 2015, pp.

14.

This article addresses the possibilities of what would happen if athletes received stipends. It says that

spending money on the stipends could result in the decimation of smaller, less funded sports. It also

explains how stipends could be used and their rules.

Spending more money on stipends for certain high-profile sports could lead to pressures to eliminate

other varsity sports on campus, this would be detrimental to many students that worked so hard to get

there. In theory, an athletics department could create rules about how and where athletes could spend

money, this seems like it could possibly work but most likely not.

I will use this article for my third perspective of my paper about stipends. This will be the in-between

argument to satisfy both sides of the debate.

Bush, Joel. "Student or Professional Athlete - Tax Implications in the United States If College Athletes

Were to Be Classified as Paid Employees." Labor Law Journal. CCH, Inc. 2017.

This source explains the extreme taxation implications that would occur if colleges in the United States

started paying their student-athletes. It claims that athletes would be considered employees and, therefore,

scholarships would be subject to taxes as well.

Turning now to the practical side of the student-athlete classification debate, if student-athletes were to

be classified as employees of their university for their work as athletes (or more specifically, if the

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or a state tax agency were to determine that a student-athlete (of group

thereof) was an employee of their university), there would be a number of tax issues in play for both for
the university and the student-athlete. This quote sets the basis for the source and how many tax

implications would be put into play. In February 16, 2016 the U.S. District Court ruled that the three

student-athletes were not employees of the University of Pennsylvania, shows that currently the legal

system will not allow the payment of athletes in the near future.

I plan to incorporate this into my paper by using the court cases to strengthen my argument and provide

the legal view.

Cooper, Kenneth J. "Should College Athletes be Paid to Play?" Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, vol.

28, no. 10, 2011, pp. 12-13.

This article was written to bring about the debate on whether collegiate sports are viewed as jobs or

simply extracurricular activities. It provides multiple points of view on this question such as athletes and

coaches. In one case, the person was a college athlete and later a college coach.

Cooper uses the quote "I never felt like I was an employee of Duke University," from Tommy Amaker, to

show that some athletes felt it was a privilege and not a job. The quote "The right of control is the biggest

one," was used to show that some people believe coaches have too much control over athletes to not be

paid.

This will relate to my paper because I can use both of these arguments to portray two different points of

view within it.

Science Monitor, 2016, pp. N.PAG.

This article talks about and explains what occurred during the OBannon case in 2009. It includes the

decision and how it could lead to the paying of college athletes in the future. It questions whether this will

benefit or harm consumers.

The NCAA has fought all attempts to pay student athletes for their performance proves that the NCAA

does not want to change their rules at all. The NCAA Claiming that amateurism is foundational

to college sports, allows them to continue keeping paychecks out of the question.

I plan to incorporate this into my paper by using it as an example of why college athletes might be paid.

This will strengthen this side of the argument because it gives solid evidence.

Edelman, Marc, From Student-Athletes to Employee-Athletes: Why a 'Pay for Play' Model of College

Sports Would Not Necessarily Make Educational Scholarships Taxable (February 22, 2017).

Boston College Law Review, Vol. 58, 2017.

This source presents the economic side of the argument by providing real-time numbers. The author also

presents three different approaches to how the problem of whether college athletes should be paid or not.

At present, over fifty U.S. colleges generate upwards of seventy million dollars per year in athletic

revenues. This is used to argue colleges make enough to pay athletes. In these sports, the star athletes

devote upwards of forty hours per week to team travel, play, and practice. This is referring to football

and mens basketball and how they are almost like full time jobs.

I plan to use this source in my paper to present multiple different options on how student-athletes can be

paid.
Kirk, Jason. SEC Schools Averaged $130M in Revenue. SBNation.com, SBNation.com, 6 July 2017,

www.sbnation.com/2017/7/6/15930008/college-sports-revenue-athletic-department-money-

rankings-2017.

This article displays which Division 1 conferences and public schools had the highest revenue during the

2015-2016 year. The conferences are ranked in order from highest average revenue to the least average

revenue. The article claims that the top schools are typically the best at sports, usually they are well off in

football and another sport or two.

The quote The rest of the top schools are exactly whom youd expect: big schools with generational fan

bases; schools that are often good at football and another sport or two proves that the majority of revenue

is collected through sports. Texas A&M ranks No. 1 for the second year in a row, after a slew of

donations toward Kyle Field renovations pushed the Aggies ahead of the total non-rival Longhorns last

year shows that schools even receive donations to improve sporting facilities.

I plan on incorporating the chart of the conference and public school revenues into my paper by using the

statistics to show how much colleges really make off of athletics.

Mahler, Jonathan. College Athletes Should Be Paid Exactly This Much. Bloomberg Businessweek,

Bloomberg, 14 Jan. 2014, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-02/how-much-should-

college-athletes-get-paid.

This article discusses the relatively new playoff system in college football and how the new system

generates far more money the BCS championship did back in 2013. The author uses this to support the

idea of paying college athletes. The main point is that the paying of college athletes is ultimately

inevitable, the question is in what way and how much?

$170 million for the BCS shows the unreal amount of money just a few football games can generate. If

a free market system were introduced at the collegiate level, wouldnt the biggest, richest athletic

departments simply buy all of the best college athletes? This is one of the main reasons the NCAA

outlaws compensation.

I plan to incorporate this article into my paper on both sides of the argument because it provides many

good points.

Miller, Anthony. 2013. NCAA Division I Athletics: Amateurism and Exploitation. Last updated 2013.

http://www.thesportsjournal.org

This article includes a study of 458 students opinions on whether athletes should be compensated for

their contributions to their school. The study revealed that a slight majority supported the paying of the

student-athletes. The article says that the biggest arguments in this debate are amateurism and

exploitation.

Miller says When it comes to debating whether or not college athletes should be paid, the two most often

used terms are amateurism and exploitation. This statement shows the two main arguments used. He also

refers to According to the NCAA, student-athletes participation in athletics is just another part of their

entire education, not the primary purpose for attending college. I agree with this argument.

I plan to incorporate this into my paper by using the study and different opinions to strengthen my

argument on why student-athletes should not be paid.

Weekly, vol. 5, no. 52, 27 Dec. 2013, p. 17.

This article was written with two different aspects of the argument involved. There are two sides of the

argument which are both portrayed within the article. Both sides of the argument use facts to support their

opinions on whether or not college student-athletes should be paid or not.

Mitchell says Student-athletes are amateurs who choose to participate in intercollegiate athletics as a part

of their educational experience, thus maintaining a distinction between student-athletes who participate in

the collegiate model and professional athletes who are also students. While Edelman uses the argument

A 2011 report entitled "The Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sport" confirms that 85 percent of

college athletes on scholarship live below the poverty line.

This will heavily relate to my paper as both sides of the argument will be thoroughly portrayed in the

paper. The presence of two opposing positions will strengthen my thesis.

Piasecki, Michelle K. 1. "Playing between the Lines: Are College Athletes Employees?" Insights on Law

& Society, vol. 16, no. 3, 2016, pp. 27-29.

This article talks about how the majority of college athletes will not go on to play professionals sports and

how their earning potential is highest in college. Most college athletes are unable to capitalize on this

because of lack of time due to athletics. The article also explains the Northwestern union case.

Piasecki claims that not having the opportunity to profit off of anything is essentially limiting their

earnings to the cost of an athletics scholarship. The quote The aforementioned cases provide mixed

results for student athletes hoping to make a stronger claim to the big money generated by college

athletics, goes to show that some athletes oppose the idea of getting paid in college while some are for it.
I will be using this in my paper to use an actual case to strengthen my argument. The two cases presented

will balance both sides of the debate.