BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Should college athletes receive greater compensation, and if so, how? Increasingly, that question is being asked in litigation and within the NCAA as the value of college sports continues to explode.

The Ed O'Bannon antitrust lawsuit by ex-college athletes argues that current players should share television and licensing revenue and athletics departments could restructure how they spend money. Meanwhile, the NCAA has been unable to pass a rule allowing schools to provide $2,000 cost-of-attendance scholarship stipends to athletes. The difficulty in adopting the rule has frustrated some leaders of wealthy conferences, such as SEC Commissioner Mike Slive.

Between 2005 and 2012, 47 percent of the Division I public universities listed in a recent USA Today Sports revenue database increased coaches and staff pay at a higher rate than their athletic scholarship costs, according to an analysis by AL.com.

The compensation rate for athletes is not keeping pace with the lucrative deals made by non-profit universities and athletic associations. A review of the USA Today Sports database shows the gap between total athletic revenue -- which typically includes public subsidies -- and what schools spend on scholarships and compensation for coaches and administrators.

Oregon's pay for coaches and staff increased 220 percent from 2005 to '12, compared to a 74-percent increase in scholarship costs. Penn State's coaches/staff pay increased 144 percent, and scholarships costs were up 59 percent.

West Virginia, during its first year in the Big 12, saw coaches/staff pay increase 146 percent while scholarship costs were up 52 percent. Louisville experienced a 119-percent increase for staff pay, compared to a 62-percent increase for scholarships.

Locally, Alabama, Auburn, UAB and Troy each had larger rates of increase for coaches/staff pay than scholarship costs. South Alabama, Jacksonville State, Alabama State and Alabama A&M experienced the opposite, with a higher rate of spending on scholarships.

There were many schools with higher spending rates on scholarships than salaries. Although they tend to be lower-resourced universities, examples of wealthy schools with a higher rate of scholarship costs include Ohio State, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Iowa and Georgia.

Seventy-one percent of the public BCS schools experienced higher expense increases on coaches/staff pay than scholarship costs over the past seven years. Meanwhile, 60 percent of non-BCS schools spent a higher rate on scholarship costs, illustrating the haves vs. have-nots debate.

Among athletics departments that reported at least $35 million in total revenue last year, 67 percent saw higher increases on coach/staff pay. That number was 40 percent for schools with less than $35 million. The figure stayed at 40 percent even for the 35 schools under $10 million in athletic revenue last year.

For instance, USA Today Sports listed Grambling at $5.1 million in 2012 revenue, down 9 percent from 2005. But Grambling's coaches/staff pay increased 97 percent while its scholarship costs went up 33 percent.

Scholarship costs can be a function of how fully funded an athletics department is and how fast a university raises tuition. Since many wealthier schools are fully funded in sports they offer, new revenue goes elsewhere, often to employees and facilities. The analysis suggests that's happening with many lower-resourced schools, too.

According to the NCAA, salaries/benefits make up 34 percent of athletics department costs. That's followed by scholarships (15 percent) and facilities (14 percent).

Those who support increasing what a scholarship covers say the current deal for athletes hasn't changed in decades. Studies show the average actual cost of attending public universities exceeds an athletic scholarship by about $4,000 per year.

Financial-aid departments at universities often create estimates that they say reflect the actual cost of attending their school beyond tuition, housing and books. Some schools consider costs for health insurance, transportation, food, computers and inflation.

The estimates can vary, such as whether a student comes from within the state or from out of state and lives on or off campus. Athletics department officials then choose which cost figures to report to the NCAA.

NCAA President Mark Emmert got the option of a $2,000 stipend passed by the Division I board in 2011, but enough universities quickly overrode the legislation, citing the costs associated and Title IX gender-equity concerns. The measure has returned to the drawing board.

E-mail: jsolomon@al.com. Follow @jonsol