Matching Items (2)
Description
The overall purpose of this study was to examine the model of revenue generating amateur athletics (namely men's basketball and football) as governed by the NCAA and to find a competitive model maximizing benefit for all involved stakeholders. This study was examined using historical context, the Business Model Canvas popularized by Strategyzer, models of fair pay based on revenue in commerce, as well as the NCAA's own research. Major findings uncovered a structure operating as an oligopoly in which the only path of playing professional football is by way of playing through the NCAA, questions of importance on the educational aspect of the NCAA model for specific athletes, and the opportunities for new systems of organized men's basketball and football. Amateur collegiate athletics, specifically in men's basketball and football, could benefit from a new system that provides an additional path to the major professional leagues. Basketball has recently developed a system to verify the claims of this thesis while football is still reliant on the NCAA model. A future comparative analysis could be utilized to measure basketball's success or failure in their new system specifically targeting how it affects the athletes, the NBA, and the NCAA.
ContributorsHensley, Brian Matthew (Author) / Lande, Micah (Thesis director) / Cho, Steve (Committee member) / Technological Entrepreneurship and Management (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
In this project, I will attempt to determine the moral permissibility of amateurism, as it relates to student athlete compensation, defined by the NCAA. Amateurism is the term that defines the current profiling of student athletes by the NCAA as non-professionals. Therefore, in the eyes of the NCAA, in order for a student to participate as an athlete, there are eight stipulations of characteristics they may not embody, specifically surrounding playing sports for personal monetary gain. The problem in question with this definition is the perceived inequity of the amount of money coaches, officials and directors are making from revenues surrounding the sport versus how much the players see. This analysis will include a situational analysis of the current environment—the nature of the NCAA student athlete problem, as well as an investigation into two proposal environments. The first is labeling student athletes as “professionals” and compensating them through negotiated contracts, and the second models after the pre-1988 International Olympic Committee definition of amateurism, which allowed athletes to pursue their own side endorsements relating to their athletic performance.
Through literature review and semi-structured surveys and interviews, this study will attempt to discern the true motives of the stakeholders in the student-athlete compensation case and use these motives along with ethical analysis to determine the moral permissibility of the proposed environments. This study will follow 4 specific research questions:
1. To what extent is “amateurism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
2. To what extent is “professionalism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
3. To what extent is “Olympic amateurism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
4. How should the knowledge of these concepts’ moral permissibility affect how we apply the law in the area of this case?
This project will conclude with commentary on what the implications are towards modern law for after determining the moral permissibility of all environments.
Through literature review and semi-structured surveys and interviews, this study will attempt to discern the true motives of the stakeholders in the student-athlete compensation case and use these motives along with ethical analysis to determine the moral permissibility of the proposed environments. This study will follow 4 specific research questions:
1. To what extent is “amateurism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
2. To what extent is “professionalism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
3. To what extent is “Olympic amateurism” a morally permissible concept to govern student athlete compensation?
4. How should the knowledge of these concepts’ moral permissibility affect how we apply the law in the area of this case?
This project will conclude with commentary on what the implications are towards modern law for after determining the moral permissibility of all environments.
ContributorsShockness, Spencer A (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis director) / Koretz, Lora (Committee member) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Management and Entrepreneurship (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05