AirTalk for April 3, 2013

College sports are big business, but should college athletes be paid?

Carl Hall No. 22 of the Wichita State Shockers dunks the ball in the first half while taking on the Gonzaga Bulldogs during the third round of the NCAA men's basketball tournament in Salt Lake City Saturday.

Streeter Lecka/Getty Images

Carl Hall No. 22 of the Wichita State Shockers dunks the ball in the first half while taking on the Gonzaga Bulldogs during the third round of the NCAA men's basketball tournament in Salt Lake City.

As we watch the Final Four of both men’s and women’s NCAA basketball this weekend, during commercial breaks we can debate whether student athletes should be paid or if they should play for the pure love of the game and their school.

Former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon and others who’ve joined him in what could end up being a class-action lawsuit know how they feel on the topic. With all the money being made from their talents and their likenesses, they feel like athletes deserve a cut of the money schools get from the NCAA. O’Bannon isn’t alone. Many experts and fans think that, as lawyer and Assistant Dean for Graduate Programs in the Carroll School of Management at Boston College Warren Zola writes, “NCAA amateurism is an illusion, and quite likely an antitrust violation.”

Do you think college athletes should get a cut of the money they help bring into schools? Or should scholarships, opportunities, and love of university be enough?

Guests:
Warren Zola, lawyer and Assistant Dean for Graduate Programs in the Carroll School of Management at Boston College

Andrew Zimbalist, Robert A. Woods Professor of economics at Smith College and author of  “Unpaid Professionals: Commercialism and Conflict in Big-Time College Sports” (Princeton University Press, 1999)


blog comments powered by Disqus