This is a 23-year old article in a law journal (h/t) I hadn’t come across before this weekend, but regardless of which side of the student-athlete compensation debate your sympathies fall, it’s worth your attention, because, without descending into loaded language (like “plantations” or “slavery”), it articulates how schools exploit their student-athletes.
No doubt the article shows its age in certain places, but it’s hard — at least it seems that way to me — to deny the power of some of what is argued there. If you believe the current amateurism-based model fairly compensates student-athletes, there are several arguments made by the authors (for instance, “Non-athlete students are not placed under the same confining restrictions as their athlete counterparts.”) meriting rebuttals that I’ve rarely, if ever, heard.
If nothing else, I don’t see how preventing these kids from marketing themselves to third parties is justified. Let me know what you think.