March Madness is well upon us as I write this. Filling out a bracket based on a field of 68 teams vying to become the NCAA champion of college basketball in an effort to win money (or bragging rights for correctly choosing a champion) is a rush that many never thought possible. In 2010, the NCAA reached an agreement with CBS and Turner Sports to a fourteen year, nearly $11 billion contract to televise the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. That comes out to roughly $771 million annually for the NCAA.  This is American capitalism at its finest, and I’m not above anyone trying to legally make a buck. Simply put, collegiate athletics is big business, and student athletes are unpaid blue chip employees.

Yes, you read that correctly. Student athletes are unpaid blue chip employees. Universities and their student athletes use each other in an effort to get what they want: the universities make exorbitant amounts of money off the extraordinary efforts of their student athletes, while said student athletes receive an education for little to no monetary cost to them via scholarship. With that said, some of the money the NCAA earns from their March Madness television deal should go to the players participating in the tournament. In fact, collegiate athletes in general should receive some kind of monetary compensation for their efforts.

Whoa, some might say. These athletes are already getting paid in the form of their scholarships. Their respective university scholarships pay for their tuition, room, board, and travel expenses. It seems like a sweet deal on the outside looking in. But make no mistake: these scholarships aren’t free. Long hours are put in by these athletes to work out, practice, watch game film, as well as attending team meetings. All of this is orchestrated for one reason: to  make the university money. Money that lines the pockets of university presidents and faculty. This money is also used to fund collegiate sports that just don’t receive the revenue (or attention) that college basketball and college football receive. The Frozen Four is the NCAA Final Four of college hockey. Quick, which schools participated in the 2013 NCAA Frozen Four? Oh, you didn’t know there was a Frozen Four? I rest my case.

And let’s be real: most of these players are young, African American men who would be just another statistic to American society if they weren’t able to run, jump, or throw with amazing accuracy. That’s why these universities want them in the first place. If they were to get injured and couldn’t play, what good are they to their universities? Collegiate athletics are a revolving door that uses athletes as interchangeable parts.  Universities will find someone else to take the injured athlete’s place. The school could take away their injured athletes’ scholarships, and these kids could wind up out of school, left to join the workforce and fend for themselves.

Some detractors might say paying these players would jeopardize their amateur status. Frankly speaking, do these detractors really care about these players’ amateur status? Of course not? And do these detractors care if these young athletes have money to buy the most elementary of things, like food? I think you know the answer to that one. In Mitch Albom’s book “Fab Five”, University of Michigan basketball player Chris Webber tells a story about how he and his friend were in a restaurant buying food. Webber had to return some of his food because he didn’t have enough money to pay for everything. Not too far away, in a sporting goods store, Webber saw his jersey hanging on a sales rack. It’s disenfranchising when your collegiate basketball jersey with your number is displayed in a store for sale, and you’ll never see a nickel of that money.

Many of these student athletes aren’t allowed to get jobs, since employment prevents them from their athletic responsibilities. I don’t mind if a booster decides to give athletes perks like cash, free meals, or cars. And to think that these kids could and should turn down something as insignificant as a free meal, especially if they’re broke and hungry, is naïve and unrealistic. Some of these athletes come from less than affluent backgrounds, where they might need to work to support themselves or their families to survive. Why would anyone want to deny kids an opportunity to support themselves and their families? In addition, there’s no guarantee that they’ll go pro after their collegiate career ends.

And finally, some may take umbrage with my using the word “servitude” in the title of this article. Servitude is defined as “a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one’s course of action or way of life”. These student athletes are leading structured lives where their classes, practices, film studying sessions, and games are scheduled. Yes, that comes with the territory. But all of that won’t guarantee a shot at becoming a professional athlete, which makes the word servitude fitting regarding student athletes. This is why I feel they should get some sort of monetary compensation.