University Athletics, the House Settlement, and Student Fees: Should student fees support compensation for student-athletes?

The University that employs me, UNCG, announced today that it has adopted new policies based on the House Settlement for compensation of student athletes. Although I would like my Substack post to be more irreverant than this one, I have grown to care deeply about the students I teach here (about 1,000 since 2021). So, this post is a little more serious.

In some ways, the question I pose in the title is moot. Student fees for athletics already support scholarship for student athletes at many universities. The House Settlement, though, potentially changes the nature of compensation for student-athletes. I worry that outside of the very few schools that make money on athletics, this burden will fall on other students. And, for schools like UNCG, where over 50% of students are Pell eligible and first generation college students, that burden seems unfair

Before I get snarky, let me say that I am in awe of UNCG's student athletes that have been in classes I teach or in our graduate program. In general, they are fabulous students and people.

A challenge for UNCG, though, is that 85% of atheltics revenue comes from student fees. All students on campus pay roughly $800/year to support division 1 athletics. So, whatever happens with compensation for student athletes, the bulk of the revenue to support it will come from other students.

UNCG students leave me in awe as a professor. A large proportion of students in my classes work 20-40 hours a week in jobs while being a full time student, often with obligations to families and many commuting more than an hour each way. I don't know if I could have made it through college with the burdens they bear.

One result of the majority of students being so busy and financially stressed, is that very few students that I know have time to regularly attend athletic events. I don't think I have ever recalled students in classes I teach (I have taught about 1,000 students sincd Fall 2021) talk about how the athletic teams are doing. Perhaps, one day the men's or women's basketball will make a run in March Madness that will change that.

If I assume that after deductions, a student takes home $10/hour, then they have to work 80 hours just to pay the athletics fee that supports student athletes (and the new compensation model), better advising and mental health support for those students, and salaries of coaches and athletic staff which are a significant part of the budget.

UNCG experienced budget challenges that led to eliminating programs including physics, math graduate programs, and anthropology. Some might argue that it is incongruous for a university to have not reallocated funds from athletics to suppor the educational mission. But, the university will (correctly) argue that revenue from student fees can not be legally reallocated to support the general operating budget. So, there truly was/is no direct trade-off between educational and athletic budgets, with respect to 85% if the athletic budget at UNCG when the program elimination occurred.. The amount of subsidy to athletics from the university operating budget that could be used for academics is not really clear to me, but relative to student fees it is a small number.

I had only wished, with respect to academic budget cuts, that there were a more public discussion of lowering the athletic fee and asking for board approval for a concominant increase in tuition to support the education mission. For, exampe, reducing the athletic fee in half and raising tuition by that amount would have pretty much closed the operating budget deficit and would likely provided enough funds to meet the scholarship commitments to student athletes.

This is of course is not necessarily doable. I don't think it is free to move from division 1 to division 2 with respect to conference and venue commitments. But, I find there is very little discussion on campus, or among students, about the athletic fee. So, to be fair, there is no groundswell of anger of students about the athletic fee.

I am a person with autism and sometimes when I think something is unfair I can't let go. Athletic fees for the student population of UNCG is one of those things. I really don't know if my perspective is correct.

When athletics spending is brought up by faculty, the general response is: 1) fee revenue can't be used to support academics; 2) student athletes are some of the best students at UNCG (true); and 3) athletics is an important front door that encourages engagement with the university and is important for the Greensboro community. I can't really argue with any of these responses, other than I don't know of data showing the importance of athletics in attracting students and donors to the educational mission.

My main concern in working so closely with students at UNCG is that I don't think they need any financial burdens that don't have much of an ROI for them. I hope somebody in administration is thinking about this aspects of its student fee as UNCG adapts to the new world of Div 1 athletics due to the House settlement.

I just hope that those that support UNCG athletics understand the burden that it places on students. $800/year is a lot of money for many of them and represents around an 8% add-on relative to tuition for in-state students.