THE NCAA: IN THE LENS OF THEORY

The NCAA is a corporation that controls the benefits student-athletes receive from their institution. Over 460,000 student-athletes are under this system in the United States. Critical scholars would ask: how has the authority of the NCAA disallowed student-athletes the inability to receive money for such an immense period of time? What group is benefited from the NCAA? How has the NCAA become a monopsony power and been able to deconstruct the power of the student-athlete? 

Horkheimer’s article, “Reason Against itself”, states and analyzes how the critical theory works in the function of an independent producer: “The so-called transcendental factors which constitute the ego: memory and foresight, conceptual thinking, the integration of all experiences into one identical conscience knowing itself as the same in past and future, all these elements were tremendously enhanced by the economic situation of the independent producer and businessman.” (Horkheimer 85). Horkheimer, using critical theory, describes how certain elements of life lead individuals to accept the functions in which they are placed. This allows independent producers an opportunity to use ideas, outside of their experiences, to enhance their economic situation. Critical theory would find that power structures have a relationship to the integration of individual experiences. Power structures, such as the NCAA, have the potential to shape society in a way that brings benefit to the NCAA corporation. The NCAA power structure serves in the system of capitalism. The democratic law permits the NCAA to use its system of alienating student-athletes. Horkemier would believe this notion diminishes the power of student-athletes, which results in under achievement in institutional education and individual development. 

Critical theory would analyze the revenue the NCAA generates and how the revenue is generated from the student-athlete. Critical theory would analyze revenue “to understand the taken-for-granted systems, power structures, and beliefs that dominate society.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). The revenue would claim the power of the NCAA and express the dominance it has on the system of collegiate athletics. The power structure has direct relationship to revenue because student-athletes receive no income from the NCAA. Former Student-athletes’ are beginning to recognize how the NCAA took advantage of their identity for profit. The education that the NCAA promised was limited, due to the work schedule former student-athletes were forced into to assure their scholarship wasn’t revoked from their institution. Student-athletes are institutionalized from the systems of democratic law and capitalism. 

 

In relationship with the NCAA are the institutions (colleges). The institutions are the platform of how the NCAA functions. The critical theory would investigate the institutions “to reveal the ways in which competing interests clash and the manner in which conflicts are resolved in favor of particular groups over other ones.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). The functions of the NCAA provide wealth to the athletic departments of the institutions. Statistics express that coaches’ salaries can be higher than the president of the institution (Saint Mary’s). Critical Theorists would consider the athletic departments, among institutions, receive more privilege than the student-athlete. 

In Peters article, “Genealogical Notes on the Field”, he describes the relationship that the field of communication has to the institutions among society. “We must see how the institutional field shut down fruitful paths of inquiry into the place of communication in modern life and society.” (Peters 138). Peters is assessing that the relationship between institutions and law of society are deconstructing the process of learning and understanding of communication. The institutions, who function under the NCAA, are diminishing the process of inquiry and education among student-athletes. Institutions value the revenue the student-athlete generates rather than the world class education they can offer the student-athlete. Critical theory would research how the institution functions and discover the true path the institution offers to their student-athletes. Through Peter’s statement, critical scholars would investigate the following about how student-athletes are under-privileged: they would review how institutions offer an education to student-athletes, they would review the graduation rate among student-athletes and the amount of income former student-athletes earn during the fiscal year, and lastly, review the amount of revenue the institution earns from athletics. Critical scholars would assess if institutions deconstruct the privileges of the student-athlete similarly to the NCAA.

“If the scholar raises his voice against the use to which his findings are put, he speaks as a citizen…” (Horkheimer 80). Former and current student-athletes are beginning to voice their opinions against the NCAA, because they are not receiving the high-level education the NCAA promised them. The sudden rise of rebellion against the NCAA, would make critical scholars investigate the privileges among former student-athletes. “If you have privilege, or lack it, because who you are or where you come from, then you are facing the kind of social difference that assumes great importance in the critical tradition.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). Critical scholars have particular “interests to who are served by those power structures.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). Critical theory is interested in power structures because they are responsible for what privileges a group has over others. 

Critical theory would assess the sudden rise of lawsuits against the NCAA as a way of also trying to change the authority system of the NCAA. The theory would review how the lawsuits are changing the system of the NCAA. The lawsuits would assess the functioning authoritative system of the NCAA. “The individual pays for the tremendous achievements of modern industry, for his increased technical skill and access to goods and services with a deepening impotence against the concentrated power of the society which he is supposed to control.” (Horkheimer 79). Talented student-athletes generate power among institutions and the NCAA, yet Horkheimer is claiming the student-athletes are unable to have any control of their power because of the power structures they have been placed in. Student-athletes can only initiate change on the output of the system, because the corruption is withheld by the elite class that student-athletes have no control over. Since student-athletes cannot eliminate the NCAA, they use the media, lawsuits, etc. to spread awareness of the corruption of the NCAA. This relates back to Peter’s argument that institutions are destroying the fruitful paths of inquiry. The corruption of the NCAA along with institutions limit the student-athletes’ development of inquiry. Student-athletes are fighting against the authority of the NCAA to change its system to function towards the benefit of the student-athlete. Horkheimer is assessing that power structures function through governmental law and can limit the power of individuals that they are suppose to have. There are many functions of the NCAA that diminish the privileges and advantages of being a student-athletes in college. The NCAA’s use of “amateurism” has diminished the privileges of student-athletes and has made the NCAA a multi-billion-dollar corporation. Critical scholars would search for which group is privileged and benefited from the NCAA revolving around “amateurism.” 

        The critical theory will search deep into the system of the NCAA. “In the field of communication, critical scholars are particularly interested in how messages reinforce oppression in society.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). The theory will look at why student-athletes are amateurs and what impact amateurism has on the privileges of being a student-athlete. “Critical discourse analysis looks at actual features of texts that manifest these oppressive arrangements.” (LittleJohnFuss 58). The theory will analyze the authority of the NCAA and how it functions through amateurism in collegiate athletics. The critical theory “is interested in uncovering oppressive social conditions and power arrangements in order to promote a freer and more fulfilling society.” (LittleJohnFuss 57). Critical scholars can successfully investigate the power of the NCAA and how it uses under privileged student-athletes to generate its wealth and how it limits the emancipation of student-athletes. 

        The critical tradition teaches us the systems of mistreatment between groups throughout history. In Benjamin’s article, “Theses Philosophy of History”, he describes the relationship between history and oppression, and how these two intertwine with the critical tradition:

“The tradition of the oppressed teaches us that the state of emergency in which we live is not the exception but the rule. We must attain to a conception of history that is in keeping with this insight. Then we shall clearly realize that it is our task to bring about a real state of emergency… (Benjamin 257).

        The critical tradition pursues history to indicate whether or not there is a “state of emergency”. There are implications in history where certain rules or laws teach us the “state of emergency”. For instance, the history of discrimination and laws against certain groups has a relationship with the “state of emergency”. Benjamin would find the longevity of “amateurism” and the history of oppressing the student-athlete as a “state of emergency”. The NCAA tries to avoid the “state of emergency”, by sending messages through TV advertisements (paid by the NCAA) during NCAA competition to manipulate the public to believing the NCAA is supporting student-athletes. The fallout of the NCAA will come due to the amount of groups protesting against its power and authority over student-athletes. These groups protesting against the NCAA are essentially using critical theory to show the corruption of the NCAA. We must remember, the NCAA’s power structure was built through the system of capitalism and democracy has allowed them to use student-athletes to benefit their corporation.

        Alex Demirovic suggests, similar to Horkeheimer, that the functions of democratic law limit the value of individuals and alienates them from common thought. “The problem is the administrated world as a whole, including the democracies in the USA or Western Europe. However, those real historical processes point in a terrifying way to the setback which the project of human emancipation has experienced.” (Demirovic 370). Demirovic is suggesting that critical theory will investigate the functions of democracy and represent how historical events have limited the freedom of the individual among society. Demirovic’s statement is how critical theory assess the function of government. The power of government allows the NCAA to continue to change the emancipation of student-athletes. The critical theory will express the historical truth of the NCAA and how they limit the privileges and freedom of the student-athlete. 

All student-athletes must sign a contract, under the NCAA, to compete in collegiate athletics. Some key points that the NCAA contract state are the following: (1) student-athletes aren’t allowed to receive any payment for participating in athletic contests, (2) student-athletes are not allowed to receive endorsements, and (3) student-athletes must accept they are “amateurs” not professionals. The term “amateurism” has been adopted by the NCAA to make education a priority for student-athletes, rather than sports. This idea of amateurism is one of the primary functions of the NCAA. Albert Wellmer believes critical theory would analyze how and why “amateurism” initiates struggle among student-athletes. “What distinguishes a critical theory from traditional forms of social is that critical theory conceives of itself as part and parcel of a struggle for an association of liberated human beings, in which everybody would have an equal chance of self-development.” (Albert 706). Albert is describing that critical theory leads to the possibility of equality among self-development. The theory investigates the struggle among self-development, therefore Albert believes the theory asserts “possibility” of equal self-development. Albert believes the “possibility” is through critical theory because it analyzes an association or branch of people and investigates why their self-development is limited. Albert is essentially stating that critical theory will lead to the possibility of discovering a solution to improving the self-development of student-athletes. The authority of the NCAA maintains its power through amateurism. Critical scholars would investigate the function of amateurism and how it revolves around student-athletes’ quality of education and how the NCAA limits their self-development. Critical theory would investigate the NCAA definition of amateurism and use its definition to understand how the NCAA system functions from “amateurism.” Albert and Horkeheimer would try to find a distinction between a collegiate athlete to a professional athlete and how the collegiate athlete is less privileged than a professional athlete and the relationship between self-development.

Works Cited

Benjamin, Walter.  “Thesis on the Philosophy of History.”  Illuminations.  Ed. Hannah Arendt.  

Trans. Harry Zohn.  New York, NY: Schocken Books, 1968.

Demirovic, Alex. “What Does It Mean To Speak OF The Actuality Of Critical Theory?.” 

ACME: An International E-Journal For Critical Geographies 12.2 (2013): 366-379. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 May 2016. 

Horkheimer, Max.  “Reason Against Itself: Some Remarks on Enlightenment.”  Theory, Culture, 

and Society 10 (1993): 79-88.

Littlejohn, Stephen and Karen A. Foss.  “Traditions of Communication Theory.”  Theories of 

Human Communication.  10^th edition.  Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc., 2010.

Peters, John Durham.  “Genealogical Notes on ‘The Field.’”  Journal of Communication 43.4 

(1993): 132-139.

Wellmer, Albrecht. “On Critical Theory.” Social Research 81.3 (2014): 705-733. Business 

Source Complete. Web. 16 May 2016.