BrandView
This story is sponsored by Southern Utah University. Learn more about Southern Utah University.
I’m not saying we should make anything like the pros make. I’m not saying we should be making millions of dollars, but scraping by each month while giving everything I can to school, giving everything I can to my family, to my church and then to football puts me in a very difficult situation. – Andy Phillips, Utah kicker
Editor's note: This is the final of a three-part series re-examining college athletics in the state of Utah as the landscape across the country has vastly changed within the past year.
SALT LAKE CITY — Andy Phillips’ mind drifts to money.
It’s hard not to. He’s a husband and a father. His time spent preparing for football as the starting kicker on the University of Utah football team and working in the classroom as a double-major makes it practically impossible to find spare time for a job to help with funds around the house. Megan, his wife, teaches dance but also spends plenty of her time caring for Max, who is nearing his first birthday.
It means Phillips is essentially making ends meet on the $1,100 per month stipend already allotted from his scholarship. The upcoming cost of attendance (COA) stipend will help, but as he calculates his cost of living, he knows it’s not enough.
“I’m lucky because I’m in the business school and understand finances a little bit better than maybe your average football player,” he says, chuckling. “Budgeting and knowing where you are each month has been really important. My wife and I are on the same level in knowing where we can’t spend and where we can spend. But a lot of things come up like car repairs and property taxes. It’s hard, just really, really hard.
“The (Las Vegas Bowl) was awesome to us,” he adds, referencing the perks players received for reaching a bowl game. “We received some gifts, and the gift from the school was some cash, so that helped. But $1,100 — there’s no way that can cover the cost of living, especially for someone in my situation.”
Phillips said he’s fortunate to have saved up as much as possible before Max was born, but other unexpected costs can and have popped up along the way. He has a budget specifically set aside for diapers, of course. Then, in true Murphy’s Law fashion, Megan’s car was totaled early in the semester. Phillips is thankful Megan and young Max were OK after the crash. As for the cost: “Just drained the savings,” he sheepishly laughs.
Given his state, he’s handled it well.
"Maybe that’s just the competitive side of me, but if I can get through this, if I can handle this, then nothing can really phase me out on the football field or in the classroom," he says.
The former walk-on attests he's grateful for the opportunity he's been given as a scholarship athlete. He's made the most of it, too. Last season, his first as a scholarship athlete, Phillips became a first-team Pac-12 member on the field and an academic honorable mention in the classroom.
However, he also reflects on his past. Before football, Phillips, 26, competed as an alpine racer on the U.S. Ski Team until 2011. The world of competitive skiing is much different from college athletics. There he could use his likeness and promote himself as a brand for any extra profit. He cites those around him as an influence to changes he’d like to see in college athletics one day.
The debate isn’t new, but Phillips is determined to influence some sort of change, if not during his career then sometime down the road. He’s frustrated because while the battle has been brewing, nothing has been done about it. COA stipends are a welcomed beginning, but he hopes reform of college athletics doesn’t end there.
Phillips also has unlikely allies within the state as the fight for reform continues.
At BYU, there are plenty of student-athletes who share a similar story. For example, BYU quarterback Taysom Hill is married and would like the opportunity to make extra money on the side but can’t due to the busy life of a student-athlete. He points out that even if he could find time for a part-time job, there are NCAA regulations in place that cap the amount he could make even in the summer.
Interestingly enough, in an independent study on college athletics conducted for the Pac-12, athletes were "most interested in making it easier to find part-time jobs" among other improvements. That desire trickles down to athletes outside the conference.
“There is a lot of demands on our time. Where a lot of students can take the spring and summer off and go work and build enough money to make it through that next year, we can’t do that,” Hill says. “We’re stuck working out, and there are not a lot of opportunities.”
Hill isn’t worried as much because his collegiate career will end after the fall semester. He also is pleased with the steps that have occurred since he began his college career, but he sees the need for additional changes.
“I think (the COA stipend) is a step in the right direction," he says.
X X X
What comes after COA stipends?
That’s where the current debate lies and likely where the Power 5 schism becomes noticeable. So far, the answer is nothing, but that could change soon. Schools across the country are waiting patiently while several court cases play out before dealing with the million-dollar question.
The largest one is the Ed O’Bannon case, which began in 2009. In 2014, a federal judge ruled that the NCAA broke antitrust laws by not covering COAs and other costs. While the NCAA immediately appealed, a settlement was reached in early July of this year that would pay student-athletes for their likeness being used in NCAA video games from 2003 to 2014, according to a USA Today report. More than 16,000 student-athletes had filed claims to receive a portion of the settlement. Those claims could reach upward of $6,000 or more.
Though NCAA video games are no longer produced, there is still plenty of name, image and likeness usage around college athletics. A recent national example focused around former Texas A&M star Johnny Manziel. Fans could type his name into an NCAA store search and find his No. 2 jersey for sale. Though the jersey didn’t bear the name of a student-athlete on the back, it’s clear it was promoted the same.
In Utah, BYU offers a No. 4 jersey, Hill’s number, on its bookstore website. In early February, Fanzz, a sports apparel store, tweeted out a photo of a No. 21 Utah basketball jersey, saying, “Newly arrived in SLC area stores today, @JordanLoveridge @Runnin_Utes jerseys!" The school asked for the tweet to be removed, which it was within a few hours of being posted, according to Brett Eden, who helps oversee the use of Utah's trademarks.
How do players feel about having their jerseys for sale? Hill concedes he’s honored to see fans dish out money to buy No. 4 BYU football jerseys. “It’s cool to be a role model. It’s cool that someone would be willing to pay to wear your jersey around,” he said.
At the same time he adds student-athletes should receive at least a portion of the sales, if their number is being sold.
“I think that would probably be appropriate,” Hill says.
It's worth noting that athletic departments typically aren't in charge of any form of merchandising, such as jersey sales. That's handled by another department on campus. Eden said jersey sales aren't a significant source of revenue and fill in "less than half of 1 percent" of Utah's total sales.
In terms of using jersey numbers, Utah is now backing off from using current players' numbers as it heads into the future. In an email from Utah's trademarks and licensing department to retailers obtained by the Deseret News, the school now asks retailers to use generic numbers relating to significant events in the school's past.
For example, No. 4 and No. 8 are acceptable in football because it honors Utah football's undefeated seasons in 2004 and 2008. The No. 50 will be allowed in reference to the year Utah was founded in 1850, as will No. 96, mascot Swoop's number, No. 11, which is Utah's first year in the Pac-12 and the year the current calendar year, which is No. 15 this season. In basketball, retailers may use No. 44, No. 61, No. 68 and No. 98, which honors the school's championship season and three Final Four runs.
The University of Arizona, another Pac-12 institution, already institutes a similar policy. However, starting as early as August, schools could start paying student-athletes as much as an extra $5,000 for use of NILs (name, image and likeness). It all depends on if or when the NCAA gives the green light or if the courts force the NCAA to do so.
While the schools outside of the Power 5 scamper looking for ways to provide COAs, those universities in the Power 5 are playing out scenarios in preparation of NILs. If these stipends spread as quickly as COAs did, the top schools have to be ready.
“At this time, we’re exploring that,” says Steve Smith, Utah Athletics' chief financial officer. “We want to make sure our student-athletes are well taken care of, so we’d probably certainly look at doing that. We want to make sure we remain competitive, and certainly a good part of recruiting is to build off of that. At this point, we haven’t made any final decisions because we’re still kind of waiting for the courts to make their final decisions on what’s going on there. But certainly it’s something that we are looking at implementing if the decision is given that it’s something we can offer.”
X X X
Polls have shown the majority doesn't believe student-athletes should be paid, and NILs would be the first step in that direction. That was the finding of an NCAA study conducted in 2013, which was used during the O’Bannon case. The following year, The Washington Post concluded about the same. In a study partnered with ABC, The Washington Post discovered 64 percent of those polled opposed additional salaries to college student-athletes beyond a scholarship.
Do college student-athletes deserve more than what they’ve already been provided?
“If it’s $30,000 a year, how many students would take that and run with it?” asks Dr. Chris Hill, athletic director at the University of Utah, about rough cost a full scholarship gives a student-athlete at Utah, in an interview back in February. “If it was 40 hours a week, how many people would feel good about essentially getting $30,000? How many students would say, ‘oh, how much is that an hour?’ But people don’t want to multiply that out because that’s unpopular.”
He pauses, reaching into his pocket to whip out his phone. He calculates 40 hours per week at 50 weeks, equating to 2,000 hours. At the estimate of $30,000, he computes it to roughly $15 per hour under the current model. It’s a rate he expects most students outside of athletics would be happy with.
“If you’re going to have a scholarship to college — that’s a really valuable thing,” he adds. “The question is could you make a lot of money above and beyond that and should we let them do that? I don’t know the answer to that. Part of me says let them try it and see what it really does, but a lot of people feel that ruins the collegiate model.”
Scott Barnes, former athletic director at Utah State University, is one of those people. He said he doesn’t find the idea of paying student-athletes feasible under the current collegiate model and the values he believes it stands for.
“We’re unique in the world in that athletics at our level is at an alignment in part of the university and in many ways helps to advance the university’s mission," he says. "When you start to stray away from those core values, alignment principles, you have a very different look and it becomes corporate — in that sort a for-profit model, if you will.
“The dynamic changes completely. Now you’re running a business. And when you’re running a business, you invest in your cash cows and need to cut your dogs. It doesn’t relate to college at all because we’re about providing opportunities for student-athletes. We’re not in that other game. It doesn’t fit in any way and it doesn’t belong in the collegiate model. If it does occur, and you assess market value for say your quarterback, then we’ve lost our way and it’s a completely different animal.”
X X X
Not everyone, however, considers it as a negative issue.
"I love it," says Ed Lamb, head coach of Southern Utah University's football team and a BYU football alumnus. "I mean, if the money is there, I think it's the right thing to do to help support those athletes at the highest level possible. If the money's not there, in my mind, there's no argument (to do it).
"It may not be an advantage for SUU, but if I take the broader perspective — if the market is there in any given environment, then I think those student-athletes should be taken care of at whatever level that market will allow."
David Berri, a professor of economics at SUU and former president of the North American Association of Sports Economists, is an outspoken critic of the collegiate model. He’s written several pieces for TIME.com regarding the topic.
Universities have the funds to pay athletes, Berri argues.
“They are running a business, and the players are the employees of that business, and in the U.S. economic system, we pay our employees,” he says, bluntly over the phone from his office. “Whether or not you’re making a profit is not the defining characteristic of a business. There are lots of businesses that do not make money but still have to pay their employees. They are making money.”
But how does the state of Utah stack up in the overall national college athletic landscape? Not so well, when compared to some of the goliaths. The University of Utah dominated the public schools, reeling in around $56.4 million in revenue in the 2013-14 fiscal year, according a budget report obtained by the Deseret News.
Though it led all public schools in the state by a wide margin, Utah finished 53rd in revenue on a list of 230 Division I public schools in the nation, according to a database set up by the USA Today. The Utes slipped just ahead of Washington State, which ranked lowest of the public Power 5 schools in revenue. Meanwhile, 20 schools in the database racked up $100 million or more in revenue in the fiscal year, led by Oregon’s $196 million.
A deeper look into the numbers shows Utah is on a meteoric rise, indicating how well the Power 5 schools are thriving while others struggle.
For instance, Utah is listed behind Cincinnati — a non-Power 5 institution — in total revenue, but Utah jumped up roughly $9.62 million in revenue from its previous year, and the program has nearly an 83 percent increase in total revenue since 2010.
Cincinnati, on the other hand, reported around a $2.8 million decline in revenue from its previous year. In addition, Cincinnati received nearly 46 percent of its revenue from subsidies, such as student fees, while Utah received just 17.5 percent from institutional support.
Utah’s rise comes as it receives more from its affiliation with the Pac-12. When Utah joined in 2011, it did so not receiving a full share of league revenue, building its way up until it became a full-fledged member in the 2014-15 fiscal year. As the percentage of the share Utah received increased, Utah’s yearly revenue has skyrocketed. Smith estimates Utah’s revenue will jump to around $65 million or more after the ’14-15 fiscal year’s numbers are tabulated and sent to the NCAA. Those final numbers will not be released until 2016.
If it does reach that high, it’s a far cry from the $30.8 million in revenue accounted for just five years ago, but that comes with costs. As officials at Utah look to potentially double its revenue in just five years, the school’s expenses will likely do the same. Berri said schools often spend money as quickly as they bring it in.
“The thing with universities that you have to remember is that they’re nonprofit organizations and as nonprofit organizations, there is no one to claim differences between revenues and costs," he says. "So what these organizations have decided to do is spend the money."
For Utah, joining the Pac-12 meant higher revenues, but also meant catching up with the other Pac-12 schools in coaches salaries and buildings, and officials countered that as the reason for the steep increase in costs. The university is dishing out $11.3 million in coaching salaries and another $10.3 million in other staff pay to keep up with competitive rates. Once a new basketball practice facility is complete, Smith said the university will pay around $4 million a year on that and its recent football practice facility combined, which too, is to keep up with a Pac-12 Conference that features five public schools that created $85 million or more in revenue during the ’13-14 fiscal year.
“Operational wise, we’re looking at about another $800,000 or so just to maintain operations and maintenance of those two buildings,” Smith said. “Then we have our cafeteria that we feed our athletes and that’s about another $1.2 million or so a year. It’s pretty significant. Those buildings aren’t going to be cheap to maintain. That’s a pretty significant part of our budget.”
Overall, the university claimed a little more than $55 million in expenses during the ’13-14 fiscal year, leaving a $1.4 million revenue, and that went straight into paying back the university for a loan taken out at the beginning of the Pac-12 era. That deficit, according to Smith, once hovered around $7 million, but is now under $5 million. “We’re just slowly paying it back,” Smith said. “We’re certainly anxious to get that paid off. (Chris Hill) is a big advocate of making sure we’re financially solvent. In all of his years until we entered the Pac-12, we had positive fund balance and moving in, we just knew were going to need to invest early as we moved into this transition in this league knowing there was going to be a pretty good payoff in the next couple of years. Our revenues have jumped substantially when we became zero to 50 percent share members, 75, and this will be our first year as full share members.”
Utah still has plenty of catching up to do within the Power 5, but it’s certainly in a suitable spot.
“We try to look forward rather than behind us,” Smith says. “I’m certainly glad to know where we are now.”
Behind Utah is a completely different picture in the state. In addition to seeking legislative help for COAs, USU signed a 22-year deal worth $6.3 million with Maverik, Inc. for the school’s football stadium naming rights. For Barnes, any help was welcomed in the hunt to remain competitive with other schools. USU claimed $25.1 million in revenue during the ’13-14 fiscal year and $25.7 million in expenses.
“It’s certainly not a new concept, and it’s not easy to align your priorities,” Barnes said of the school’s deal with Maverik during an interview in May. “We felt like our values and Maverik’s leadership and values were an alignment. The timing was perfect for both of us, and we are continually relying more and more on private funding. That comes in a many number of ways. It comes in outright gifts, donations to the scholarship fund, multimedia rights and corporate sponsorship all play a vital role in stabilizing the growing our budget. In return, creating a positive experience for our athletes. At the end of the day, that’s our top priority.”
For Utah’s four public Division I institutions not in a Power 5 conference, there are bigger financial burdens. The majority of those school’s revenues come from subsidies. Utah Valley University received the most percentage-wise with 85 percent of its revenue coming from institutional aid. These funds come from a mix of student fees, funds allocated to athletics by the university or even Federal Work Study support. The 85 percent isn’t just tops in the state, it’s 12th-highest in the nation. The majority of schools near the top of that list are non-football schools like UVU. However, UVU athletic director Vince Otoupal said the school has no intention to adding the sport and will continue to rely on men’s basketball as its top revenue sport.
Some states, such as Virginia, have passed laws capping the amount of subsidies athletic programs can take.
“It’s just a matter of using that money correctly and having a good plan for it and then executing that plan in the right way,” Otoupal says. “We need to do a good job of scholarship management, those scholarship dollars that come in and then other things, we need to look seriously at in the very, very near future is the COA issue.”
The USA Today database doesn’t provide numbers on private schools such as BYU. However, BYU’s total revenue numbers closely mirror that of Utah’s in the school’s most recent NCAA Equity report, filed after the school’s 2013 reporting year. In that document, BYU claimed roughly $60.1 million in total revenue, with $43.7 million generated from its teams. Officials at BYU, an FBS independent, have made it clear that joining a Power 5 conference remains a goal of the near future, as do most Division I schools looking on the outside of a massive league annual revenue.
“The minimum right now for a Power 5 conference team is $20 million per year,” BYU head football coach Bronco Mendenhall says. “It doesn’t take long to think about what advantages that could give a player in your program, and financial support leads to stability.”
Mendenhall is quick to add he doesn’t see a similar future as an independent.
“Not with the way the current television contracts are going,” he says. “If you look at the (non-Power 5) and what their television revenue per team is — let’s say that’s $2 million to $4 million per year — compare that to $20 million. Put two years together, that’s $4 (million) versus $40 (million). Which team do you want to be on? ... The financial part of it is the primary motive in terms of providing best opportunities for student-athletes — if you’re a Power 5 member.”
X X X
The argument Power 5 student-athletes — at least in revenue sports — make is that they’re behind these large numbers. Phillips, as a major in marketing and information systems, spends plenty of time dealing with his personal finances, but also knows Utah football’s worth very well.
Utah’s football team brought in $11.1 million in ticket sales during the ’13-14 fiscal year, while men’s basketball tallied another $2 million and the gymnastics program raked in nearly $500,000 more. The football team generated $37 million altogether, which surpassed the other state schools in total revenue. He then looks at his personal finances and those around him, and it’s a totally different story.
He insists his passion has nothing to do with greed, but lessening financial strains in collegiate athletics.
“I’m not saying we should make anything like the pros make. I’m not saying we should be making millions of dollars, but scraping by each month while giving everything I can to school, giving everything I can to my family, to my church and then to football puts me in a very difficult situation,” Phillips says. “So when I’m asked to perform my best on Saturdays, and demanded to perform my best in the classroom, and to be the best husband, the best father I can be, not being financially stable is very stressful and very difficult.”
Wallace Gonzalez, the one of team’s tight ends, has experienced the lows that come with professional athletic life. A former 29th round of the MLB Draft, Gonzalez spent three seasons in minor league baseball, busing small town to small town, living in cheap-rate motels and making $250 per week.
“Pro sports isn’t what everybody thinks it is,” Gonzalez says. He’s happy with the education and the scholarship and improved benefits at the college level, but quick to turn down the notion that student-athletes shouldn’t receive more for the same reason it’s debated about.
“I’d say universities make a lot of money, especially off of football teams. When you look at the big schools in the SEC, Pac-12, I think players should be compensated for their time and stuff," he says.
Other student-athletes at Utah, which would equally benefit from anything the revenue teams make through federal law, are ambivalent on the issue.
“I’m not totally for it or against it,” said former Utah gymnast Georgia Dabritz. “I don’t have too much of a strong opinion either way.” That is the view of many athletes.
Phillips knows he holds an unfavorable view on plenty of public scales. Had it not been for cases succeeding in the courts, it would be an uphill battle. Still, he looks at his schedule and a negative perception of student-athletes and strives for change. He insists he’s just looking for something that can improve his situation and the lives of the student-athletes around him.
“These fans — they just see us on Saturday. They see us show up on Saturday, perform, get all this attention and they’re like, ‘what you’re getting isn’t enough?’ What they don’t see is behind the scene,” Phillips says. “You don’t see me waking up at 5:30 a.m. every day and going to bed at 11 p.m. because I have to find some time to do my homework. You don’t see all the hours I put in in the weight room on my own, perfecting my craft as a kicker. People may say ‘well, oh yeah, you’re a kicker. There’s not a whole lot of demand. Well yeah, there’s a lot of pressure in games.’ But there’s a mental side of kicking that you cannot be a good kicker unless you push yourself to your very limits physically in morning runs and in the weight room. “I try to kill myself in the weight room. I try to kill myself when I’m conditioning. I try to beat as many people as I can. I try to lift as heavy as I can and compete. These people don’t see this side of student-athletes. They just see the glory or fame side of it and assume the other six days of the week we’re going to practice, missing school, missing class, sleeping in. There’s this stereotype that just isn’t right.” He believes the current model leads to unintended problems, such as driving student-athletes from sports like football and basketball to opt out of school early without finishing a degree. In the most recent NBA draft, 47 underclassmen declared early for a draft that only has 60 selections. There has also been a spike in players leaving early for the NFL draft.
“A lot of guys, while they’re getting these scholarships, a lot of these guys leave and try to go to the league without a degree in hand — and a lot of them don’t make it,” Phillips says, with concern. Another related problem he’s seen is the rise of student-athletes switching to easier majors to speed up the graduation process to transfer anywhere to get playing time and noticed by pro scouts. For plenty in high-revenue sports, at least, it’s make it or bust, and the education falls victim, he says.
It’s possible that the pay-for-play debate could finally come to an end if NIL stipends are passed, but Chris Hill isn't sure it will resolve a seemingly never-ending debate in college athletics.
“It’s going to be ongoing, I think, because of the high-profile nature of coaches salaries and the money involved," he says.
Like the schools waiting for the court decisions to be finalized, it’s just a matter of time until the debate can finally be put to rest.