CALIFORNIA – May 17, 2018 – The college basketball mania of March Madness may be behind us for another year, but the usual debates surrounding collegiate sport still roll on. Every year, the debate of whether or not student sports stars should be paid resurfaces, with the NCAA’s “amateurism” principle, which limits payments to students to just covering attendance and cost of living, coming into question.
Chance, a California-based creator and supplier of unique sports balls, conducted a survey of American citizens, asking them five questions on the subject of paying collegiate athletes, and uncovered some fascinating results and statistics.
Most Against Paying Young People Big Salaries — Apart From Young People
71.2% of respondents felt that the current decision to not pay student sports stars was correct. The age group most in favor of the current system was, intriguingly, the group most likely to include professional sports players: 25-34. The only age group majoritively in favor of paying collegiate athletes, meanwhile, were those most likely to benefit from the change. 59.1% of 18-24 year-olds stated they would like to see a pay system introduced to NCAA sports and events.
The respondents were then asked four hypothetical questions for how any sort of pay system should be structured, if it were to be introduced. When asked if colleges or the NCAA should be responsible for paying athletes, 54.9% believed the NCAA should be paying up. The results were close, though, and the same can be said for responses to if students should be allowed to accept lucrative sponsorship deals. 56.9% were against the idea, only slightly outnumbering those in favor.
Equality was also a hot topic in the questions asked, and produced more unbalanced results. 82.3% were in favor of male and female athletes being paid equal salaries, whilst 79.6% wanted to see an equal salary cap introduced for all colleges as part of any pay system.
Do The Survey Results Suggest Change is Coming?
“This is always going to be a complex subject to talk about”, said Joyce Kao, Vice-President of Chance. “At Chance, we’re all about sport being an enabler for self-expression and enjoyment, and if players at any level are a part of a talented, lucrative organization, it makes sense to reward them.”
“At the same time, the potential issues with giving students ‘too much, too soon’ is well documented, and anything that further takes their focus away from education and graduation should be avoided. It would not be surprising at all to see the NCAA tweak its amateurism principle in the near-future to offer more financial rewards for stand-out collegiate athletes, that includes incentives for success academically as well as in the sporting world.”
For more information on Chance or this survey, please contact: