College players should not be paid to play ball

by Jordan Blum

To cope with the poor quality of play and rapidly dwindling profit margins, NBA Commissioner David Stern said top college basketball prospects should be paid a yearly sum to persuade them to stay in school. This is wrong on so many different levels.

With too many teams, too few marquee players, too little depth and too many young players with no polish, it’s painfully obvious that something needs to be done with the NBA.

Stern’s plan consists of paying these future NBA players sums of $20,000 for both their junior and senior seasons so they will have comfortable incomes and not have to rush to the exorbitant professional salaries.

Let’s discuss this from a business perspective. Why would college players be content with a mere $20,000 and suffer through two more years of those annoying classes when they can sign their name on a contract and have a $3.5 million signing bonus immediately placed in their accounts? Not to mention, they’d be earning (maybe receiving is a better word) a similar amount during the course of that year.

One has to observe the reality of college basketball programs as well. At major programs, top players are often regularly given under-the-table “donations” from wealthy alumni that tally about $20,000 a year. Many players from poor backgrounds also mysteriously seem to make $30,000 SUV’s appear out of thin air.

If players aren’t staying in school with the perks they already have, why would they stay in school for a little longer? Let’s just completely ignore the fact that they already attend college free, so why not throw even more money at them for no reason?

Next is a question of fairness. Why should top prospects get paid when the other college players, with less talent who put forth twice the effort, receive nothing? Which players are top prospects? It’s obvious a line has to be drawn somewhere. If the top 30 prospects get paid, it seems a little unfair for number 31 to get nothing.

There have been plenty of instances where players have fizzled out after their sophomore seasons and players who don’t even break out until their senior seasons. Under Stern’s proposal, the player who fizzles out would get paid and the late-bloomer would get ripped off. If college basketball players begin to get paid, a ripple effect will undeniably begin, causing even college lacrosse players to pick up paychecks.

There’s also the issue of ethics, which seems to get brushed underneath the carpet more often each year. I don’t believe college players have done anything to get paid beyond their scholarships. One has to wonder what these players will do with this extra money when they already have free tuition and free housing.

After a while, it becomes obvious that there are too many loopholes and flaws with Stern’s plan. For the solution, the NBA should look to their sister league, the WNBA. Since its infancy, the WNBA has had a minimum age requirement of 22. If the NBA issued an age minimum requirement of 21, all would be solved. Sure, college and high school players won’t be happy, but they won’t have a choice. This will vastly improve the college game, and saving the NBA.

Jordan Blum is a sophomore broadcast journalism major from New Orleans.
He can be reached at (j.d.blum@student.tcu.edu).