Kantner 1
Samuel Kantner
Dr. Bryant
Persuasive Essay—College Sports Have Become Too Commercialized
College athletics have existed for a long time, since the 1800s, in fact. Back then, sports
were certainly popular, but they did not exert the dominating force over society that they do
today. As a result of the advent of technology and sports broadcasting, college athletics have
experienced a growing presence in society. With ESPN, CBS, ABC, and FOX broadcasting
athletic events, it has become nearly impossible to ignore the entity that is college sports.
Surveys have shown that one in four adults regularly follow college sports (Silver). If I named
schools such as the University of Michigan, University of Oregon, University of Alabama, and
University of Florida, would you initially think of their academic prowess, or would you think of
their highly-touted sports programs?
College athletics, as a whole, have become too commercialized, and this
commercialization hurts the academic integrity of universities throughout the United States. One
might argue, though, about where to place the blame for this commercialization. Are media
programs too relentless in broadcasting these college sporting events? Is the public far too
infatuated with college athletics? Are universities at fault for allowing athletics to dominate over
academics?
The United States is the only country that ties athletics to the university setting. Most
other nations have no athletic programs affiliated with their universities, so athletes have to join
local club teams. Many do not understand why our nation even places such a high premium on
collegiate athletics. Though universities of other nations lose the economic benefits and “name
Kantner 2
brand” marketing from college sports, their academic quality may benefit by avoiding the burden
of fielding quality athletic teams. After all, colleges and universities are places of higher
learning, not sites to breed elite athletes.
I believe the term “student-athlete,” for some, is bogus. If you graduate high school with
aspirations of becoming an elite professional athlete, your primary focus will not be on your
studies but rather on athletics. Unfortunately, though, the highly popular professional sports
such as basketball and football require athletes to wait at least one year after high school
graduation before they can enter the professional draft. As a result, some athletes will enroll in
college with the intent to drop out after a year to enter the professional ranks—essentially
abusing the higher education system to bolster his or her athletic resume before dropping out of
school after one year.
The Southeastern Conference, known by sports enthusiasts as the SEC, serves as a prime
example of excessive commercialization in athletics. The Conference is known for its
dominance in football, consistently winning bowl games and national championships every year.
Some of these schools have also been given the reputation of building strong football programs
at the cost of academic integrity. For example, a Florida State University tutor testified that
some of the football players she tutored “had a second grade reading level.” This tutor was
under accusations for committing academic fraud (Hinton). According to a 2010 study
conducted by the Delta Cost Project at American Institutes for Research, the SEC spends an
average of $163,931 per athlete, as opposed to $13,390 per student (Petchesky). The report
shows that colleges throughout the nation, not just the SEC, spend far more on their revenueproducing athletes compared to their students.
Kantner 3
Many universities possess large athletic stadiums and grandiose complexes, thus serving
as another example that college sports have become commercialized. If you tour the campus of
any athletically-focused university, you will see large and lavish stadiums, arenas, and practice
fields. These humongous sports complexes, however, are not usually funded solely by the
university, but rather by private donors. For example, Terrence Pegula, a billionaire and a Penn
State graduate, is responsible for funding Penn State’s Pegula Arena and its Division I hockey
team. Imagine how much the university, in academic terms, could improve if these donations
were for academic rather than athletic purposes.
The Sandusky scandal at Penn State can serve as an example that college sports have too
strong a presence in society. Though the scandal was one involving the football team, the
university had to endure ridiculous amounts of criticism and questioning by the general public
before its legitimacy could be restored. Even today, people still joke that Penn State is a “school
for pedophiles” and that it places more importance on the football team than on education. Some
students may have even avoided applying or matriculating to the school as a result of the
scandal. Though the academic integrity of the university was in no way affected, people were
changing their opinions of the entire university as a result of a scandal involving the actions of an
assistant football coach.
There also exists a highly under-represented group within the U.S. college athletics
community: those who participate in non-revenue-producing sports. Sports such as basketball,
football, and baseball receive extensive coverage and thus revenue. These sports are also, as a
result, able to afford nice amenities such as their own locker rooms, practice fields, and stadiums.
Meanwhile, other sports are largely ignored, mainly because they do not produce much (if any)
profit for the athletic department. For example, the University of Maryland recently cut eight
Kantner 4
varsity sports, while retaining its lavish spending on the football and basketball programs. The
eliminated sports include men’s indoor and outdoor track, men’s cross country, men’s and
women’s swimming and diving, men’s tennis, women’s water polo, and competitive cheer
(Prisbell). Interestingly, all of these sports are relatively inexpensive to operate compared to
other high profile sports. These actions show that college athletics have practically become a
business, with athletic departments and administration focusing on highly successful or
profitable sports and the less-popular sports fighting a losing battle to even remain in existence.
With the infiltration of commercialization into collegiate athletics comes the disastrous
influences and enticement of money, fame, and success. College sports are intended to develop
responsibility, commitment, and teamwork, but do these values actually appear in college
athletics today? The focus has shifted to enhancing individual athletic performance in order to
produce exceptional sports teams the university can use for bragging rights. Coaches place such
a high premium on winning and notoriety that they often compromise many of the positive
values that intercollegiate athletics are meant to exhibit. College teams have become a similar
entity to products being marketed to sports fans and broadcasting stations. According to a 2006
poll conducted by the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, 60% of Americans
believe that college sports are more like professional sports than amateur sports. The same
percentage also believes that college sports have become too commercialized (Knight
Commission). Since 2006, these percentages have probably risen.
Many universities have fallen victim to the pursuit of athletic prowess and conference
championships, often resulting with academic or recruiting violations, student-athletes
committing crimes, and accepting bribes or other monetary gifts. Indeed, college sports have
become corrupted as a result of commercialization. The importance of winning and creating a
Kantner 5
reputable program seems to overshadow ethical matters, perhaps because a successful program
implies more revenue for the athletic department. Even Penn State’s own football coach, Bill
O’Brien, led others to believe he was looking for a professional coaching job, but ultimately
decided to stay with the university after receiving a $1.3 million pay increase. This pay increase
was funded by the aforementioned Penn State booster Terrence Pegula, raising O’Brien’s annual
salary to $3.6 million and making him one of the highest-paid college football coaches
(Solomon). The situation exemplifies the notion that some college coaches might not have the
best interest of the university in mind, and rather simply seek the highest paycheck possible.
Are college athletes being used as pawns to produce revenue for the university? I, along
with many others, think so. When a college coach recruits potential athletes, do you think his or
her first priority resides in whether the student will excel academically, or whether the athlete
can produce big numbers for the team? College coaches are simply not concerned with whether
their athletes will excel academically or get a good job following graduation because, well, why
should they? The student, in the coach’s eyes, exists to make the team better.
When an athlete signs a scholarship contract, he or she essentially becomes property of
the university, and will have no choice but to dedicate all of his or her spare time to the team in
exchange for the tuition discount. My father, who played football for two years at the University
of South Carolina, ended up quitting the team because the sport took too much time away from
his studies and the football program was rather unsympathetic to his academic issues (mainly
because he wasn’t at risk of becoming ineligible for competition). This discussion leads to the
fact that athletes often receive special treatment and perks, which could include personal tutors,
unlimited access to gyms and facilities, lavish housing, and free gear, to name a few. I sense that
some athletes may abuse their status constantly to skip class or forego assignments. This
Kantner 6
generalization, though, does not apply to every student-athlete, but it may be a somewhat
undeserving stereotype that society has formed of college athletes.
Some may argue that though collegiate athletic programs have become too
commercialized, the money generated benefits the university and allows it to fund research
projects and other academic endeavors. This notion is false, though, because of an NCAA rule
that restricts profits from athletic programs to be used solely within the athletic department.
Even though many universities bring in a lot of revenue through their athletic programs, most are
actually losing money due to excessive spending. In fact, only 22 of 227 public schools in
Division I NCAA generate enough money to pay for their athletic programs. Though revenue
increased by nearly $190 million in 2011, spending increased by more than $267 million,
according to a USA Today sports analysis (Upton and Berkowitz). One might ask why a school
would continue excessive spending if its athletic department is losing money. The answer
resides in nothing more than pride. Can you imagine if a school like Penn State cut its football
team? Instead, schools which are facing large deficits will eliminate their less-popular sports in
order to keep the popular ones around.
If you were not already aware, television networks exert a strong influence over college
sports. If an athletic event is to be aired on television, the TV networks dictate the date and time
the game is held. If you have ever sat through a long time-out during a football or basketball
game, that time-out occurred because of predetermined “TV time-outs,” which allow the
broadcasting company to profit from advertising during the college’s sports game, effectively
capitalizing on a university’s athletic program. ESPN, a popular sports network, features its own
television channel dedicated solely to college sports, titled “ESPNU.” Video game producers
have even benefitted from college sports. EA Sports and 2K Sports are two companies which
Kantner 7
have capitalized on several college sports, such as basketball, football, baseball, and hockey.
According to video game-tracking firm NPD Group, EA’s NCAA Football franchise has total
revenues over $868 million as of 2011 (Gaudiosi).
Society, unfortunately, has placed an exorbitant premium on college athletics. Often
times, people, especially children who grow up watching college sports on TV, will tend to
associate a certain university with its athletic programs. For example, many have heard of
classic LSU football, but I bet not as many know that LSU stands for Louisiana State University.
The University of Michigan, though it boasts excellent football and basketball teams, is also one
of the top public universities in the country, a fact I did not discover until I started looking at
colleges in eleventh grade.
During the month of March, college basketball seems to dominate daily life, with
everyone carefully watching every single college basketball game to see if they picked the
correct teams to win, not to mention the $3 billion betting industry that arises during the
tournament (Jones). Millions of Americans dedicate December and January to watching every
single football bowl game. Some even value collegiate athletics over their professional
counterparts, commonly citing that college sports provide a more intense atmosphere than do
professional sports.
I would definitely say we live in a sports-driven society. If you explore any college’s
website, you will find an “Athletics” tab clearly displayed alongside others such as “Academics”
“Financial Aid” “Apply Today,” etc. I am also willing to bet that you will find the school’s
mascot plastered somewhere on the website, thus utilizing athletic spirit to possibly stimulate
prospective student interest in a school. As I walked around Penn State’s campus during the fall,
Kantner 8
I noticed several signs that read “Proud to support Penn State Athletics.” As much as I
appreciated the display of school spirit, I noticed far fewer signs that read “Proud to support
Penn State Academics.” This discrepancy exemplifies the importance society places on athletics,
often times over academics.
Parents could be partially culpable for contributing to the emphasis placed on college
sports. I am sure you know of the parents who find a sport in which their child excels, and they
ingrain the idea that the child has to obtain a college athletic scholarship. As a result, the parents
are willing to spend thousands of dollars to send the child to athletic camps and tournaments,
enforcing the notion that obtaining a college athletic scholarship is the only possible method
through which the child will attend college. What happened to focusing on obtaining an
academic scholarship? Of course, some parents want to see their children excel academically,
but I find more parents vehemently pushing for their children to get an athletic scholarship.
Students who are offered a full athletic scholarship seem to receive more praise than do those
who obtain a college’s top academic scholarship. In my mind, students and their parents should
not place their highest priority in athletics as a means of acceptance to a college.
Universities may also be at fault for allowing sports to become such a dominant presence
on campus. Schools should not be admitting sub-par students solely based on their athletic
abilities. I know I would be upset if I were rejected from a selective university to make room for
an athlete who was less academically-qualified than I. Many are well-aware, though, that
athletes have much easier admission standards, and often would not be accepted to the university
if they were not athletes. According to a study conducted by the Journal-Constitution, football
and basketball players average more than 220 points lower on the math and reading portions of
the SAT than the average student of the same university (Go). Harvard University’s basketball
Kantner 9
team and its recruiting process also exemplify the disparity between athlete and average student
academic levels. A 2008 New York Times article details how Tommy Amaker, then a new coach
for Harvard Basketball, created a lot of controversy by recruiting players who were not
sufficiently qualified for Harvard’s stellar academic reputation, all so Harvard Basketball could
finally win a conference championship (Thamel).
Many will assert that successful athletic programs can generate interest in prospective
students and can actually attract better students, and that a solid athletic program will add value
to the “name brand” of the university. While a solid sports program will generate more attention
to a school, it might not be for entirely positive reasons. I would not necessarily correlate
successful athletic programs to solid academics—I might actually view them as inversely related.
It is also difficult to conclude that people will choose to attend a certain school based on that
school’s popular athletic programs; clearly that would be an ill-advised rationale.
While college athletics at a university setting has demonstrated benefits, these sports have
become too commercialized, with academic integrity becoming compromised in deference to
powerhouse sports teams. College sports have become comparable to a business, and the
athletes are treated like the grunt workers. Several parties, not just the obsessive media sources,
are to blame for this over-commercialization. Unfortunately, I cannot envision college sports
becoming less corrupt and commercialized than they are today. Our society values college
athletics to such as degree that it is nearly impossible for these sports to avoid a ubiquitous
presence in our lives. Once we have allowed college athletics to become as large and powerful
as they are today, it is very difficult for their popularity, along with the status and priority they
have been afforded, to regress. Media sources, such as FOX Sports, ESPN, and ABC Sports will
continue their relentless practice of covering, airing, and criticizing college athletes as if they
Kantner 10
were professionals. Sadly, we were raised and our children will likely be raised knowing which
colleges have the best sports programs before knowing which schools have the best academic
departments.
Kantner 11
Works Cited
Gaudiosi, John. "EA Sports Exec Says NFL Lockout Has Been Good for Its NCAA Football
Franchise." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 02 May 2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2011/05/02/ea-sports-exec-says-nfl-lockout-hasbeen-good-for-its-ncaa-football-franchise/>.
Go, Alison. "Athletes Show Huge Gaps in SAT Scores." US News. U.S.News & World Report, 30 Dec.
2008. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. <http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/papertrail/2008/12/30/athletes-show-huge-gaps-in-sat-scores>.
Hinton, Matt. "Tutor Alleges Some 'Noles Reading On 2nd-Grade Level In NCAA Transcripts." Yahoo!
Sports. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Tutor-alleges-some-Noles-readingon-2nd-grade-l?urn=ncaaf,196189>.
Jones, Jack. "How Much Money Is Bet On March Madness." Bet Firms. BetFirms.com, n.d. Web. 04
Apr. 2013. <http://www.betfirms.com/money-bet-march-madness/>.
Petchesky, Barry. "SEC Schools Spend $163,931 Per Athlete, And Other Ways The NCAA Is A Bonfire
For Your Money." Deadspin. N.p., 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://deadspin.com/5976391/sec-schools-spend-163931-per-athlete-and-other-ways-the-ncaais-a-bonfire-for-your-money>.
"Poll: Americans Are Concerned About College Sports." Knight Commission on Intercollegiate
Athletics. N.p., 2 Feb. 2006. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.knightcommission.org/index.php?option=com_content>.
Prisbell, Eric. "Maryland Accepts Recommendation, Will Cut Eight Varsity Sports
Programs." Washington Post. Washington Post, 21 Nov. 2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-11-21/sports/35282196_1_varsity-sports-programsloh-athletic-director-kevin-anderson>.
Kantner 12
Silver, Nate. "The Geography of College Football Fans (and Realignment Chaos)." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 19 Sept. 2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-andrealignment-chaos/>.
Smith, Betsy R. "Are College Athletes Really Indentured Servants?" The Sport Digest. N.p., 28 Jan.
2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2013. <http://thesportdigest.com/2011/01/are-college-athletes-reallyindentured-servants/>.
Solomon, Brian. "Bill O'Brien Stays At Penn State With Help From Billionaire Booster." Forbes. Forbes
Magazine, 03 Jan. 2013. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2013/01/03/bill-obrien-stays-at-penn-state-withhelp-from-billionaire-booster/>.
Thamel, Pete. "In a New Era At Harvard, New Questions Of Standards." The New York Times. The New
York Times, 02 Mar. 2008. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02harvard.html?_r=0>.
Upton, Jodi, and Steve Berkowitz. "Budget Disparity Growing Among NCAA Division I
Schools." USAToday.com. USA Today, 15 May 2012. Web. 03 Apr. 2013.
<http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-05-15/budget-disparity-increasecollege-athletics/54960698/1>.