Advantages And Disadvantages Of Paying College Athletes

Paying student athletes has become a growing disputation among college athletes in recent years. College athletes have gained immense popularity among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its participating colleges. This often fuels the ongoing debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. Because of the amount of income student athletes bring into schools, student athletes should be paid based on the amount of success, revenue, and popularity they bring to the school.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) makes roughly $1 billion in income annually and the athletes do not receive any of it. This topic has been debated for many years and is still being debated. The debate dates back to the 1980s and now athletes are demanding that they deserve to be paid since profits are made off of them. Some athletes such as former and current basketball and football players came together with lawsuits to federal courts asking for rewards from profits NCAA makes gets of them. Research has opened several different opinions on this matter. There are many pros and cons for paying college athletes. College sports provide a huge source of the university’s income. The athletes, however, receive their scholarship

“There’s far more that goes into being a professional athlete than being a college athlete. So many differences that people don’t realize. It’s not just about playing football and getting paid to do it. There’s a lot of things you have to deal with.” This quote was said by Robert Griffin, who is an American football quarterback that was drafted in 2012 to the Washington Redskins in the NFL draft. This man is explaining how there is a reason that professional athletes are paid. They are paid because they must deal with other things that college athletes don’t have to deal with and because they made it to the pros. Students should be against college athletes being paid because it is illegal, they aren’t at the professional level of play, and it would tear about the bond they have with their teammates. Not a lot of people can say that they did that and for college athletes to be complaining and taking money under the table is so wrong. You’re in college and your nothing compared to those guys. I don’t care if you’re the best in the NCAA, there is absolutely no reason you should be making money while in college. Most of these guys have full scholarships so there that’s your motivation to play.

College sports are one of the largest and fastest growing markets in today’s culture. With some college sports games attracting more viewers than their professional counterparts, the NCAA is one of the most profiting organizations in America. Recently there has been controversy in the world of college sports as to whether the college athletes that are making their universities and the NCAA money should receive payment while they are playing their respective sport. Many believe that these athletes should be paid. Others argue that they are already receiving numerous benefits for playing that sport from their universities. Many of the proponents of paying college athletes are current or former college athletes who believe their hard work and hours put into practice and competing go under appreciated. They feel that while the athletes are making the university money, the athletes do not receive any cut of these profits. Opponents feel that athletes already receive numerous perks and should not receive extra compensation on top of the perks they already receive.

Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.

Throughout the years college sports have been about the love of the game, filled with adrenaline moments. However, the following question still remains: Should college athletes get paid to play sports in college? Seemingly, this debate has been endless, yet the questions have gone unanswered. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) plays a vital role in this debate. The NCAA is a billion dollar industry, but yet sees that the athlete should get paid for their hard work and dedication.

Sports have been a big part of culture in the United States since the 1900’s. Sports has become a multibillion dollar business of sort, with spots such as baseball, basketball, and football captivating americans.With american sports gaining popularity, the growth of college sports went on the rise. In 2013, The National Collegiate Athletic Association statistically generated $912,804,046 (Alesia, 2014). With all of this income that the NCAA brought in, one has to raise the question, should college athletes be paid? Even though college athletes are student athletes, they should be paid because they are practically employees to the college without compensation.

Should college student-athletes be paid has become a much debated topic. The incentive for a student-athlete to play a college sport should not be for money, but for the love of the game. It has been argued that colleges are making money and therefore the student-athlete should be compensated. When contemplating college income from sporting events and memorabilia from popular sports, such as football and basketball, it must not be forgotten that colleges do incur tremendous expense for all their sports programs. If income from sports is the driving factor to pay student-athletes, several major problems arise from such a decision. One problem is who gets a salary and the second problem is how much should they be paid. Also, if the income

While people may have the opinion that college athletes should be paid, the debate for

College athletics is a very diverse organization involving a lot of students, mainly as the players, and non-students such as officials, coaches and others. The leading governing body for college athletics is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA. College sports is itself a big industry involving sponsorships, TV networks, endorsements, retail products and marketing. But in spite of it being a big business, the players are not compensated for the work they deliver. This opens up two opinions: should players be paid, or should they not? Kristi Dosh’s article, “The Problems With Paying College Athletes”, (UNCLEAR)discusses where the coaches’ money come from to pay student athletes. On the other hand, Mark Cassell’s article, “College Athletes Should Be Able To Negotiate Compensation”, debates how athletes should be able to negotiate their compensation. This paper will evaluate the evidence of both Dosh and Cassell in order to determine which argument is more effective.

One of the hottest debates in the sports industry is if college athletes should be paid. If you want to pay these athletes, how would the college determine the dollar amount that should be paid? Should the basketball team make more than the football team? Should the the soccer team be paid as well? Cheerleading? Chess team? Should everyone on the team get a salary? What if your college is good at football and your basketball team is awful? Rather than thinking about these questions, the college board is just better off not paying athletes like how they did in the old days. For example, “When the National Collegiate Athletic Association was founded by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1905, the institution was devoted to the belief of not providing a salary to the college-athletes who took participated in the organization. It is based on the belief of amateurism, and it was a remarkable idea” (Meshefejian). However, The continuous growth of NCAA causes a huge amount of revenue to come into colleges and this cause controversy to whether if athletes should be paid for what they do. The opinions on this subject can be grouped into two general categories. Some feel that college athletes should not be paid because education comes first and athletes are already paid in full. Others feel that college athletes should be paid because playing a sport is a full-time job and it would make the sport more competitive. Although some

Research paper For my research paper, I will discuss the following topic of should college athletes be paid. I believe this is a very interesting topic that several sports enthusiast and fans would love to figure out. This essay will be very intriguing to anyone who enjoys sports and college athletes and maybe it could even be them in the future? I love sports

In trying to decide what research topic I wanted to use, I took many ideas into thought. I decided that the one idea that interests me most is whether student athletes should be paid or not. This is very intriguing to me since my master’s program is sports management. In order to do this research there must be many ways to use research as well as ideas from other people. This project is a very big topic in today’s discussion amongst sport fans, college administrators, and student athletes themselves. Media has recently put more pressure on this topic as well with the Northwestern decision to unionize as well as pointing out an athletic director gaining an $18,000 supplement for a wrestler at their school winning a national

Personally, I think there is a lot of problem with NCAA, at first I agree with the NCAA why they don’t want to pay the students athlete. Like the NCAAn says their student because they students they shouldn’t get pay like professional cause they still amateur, but the more I watch the video the more my mind started to change. They call the student athletes armature because of that they can’t get pay. Another word, they saying their students if they pay them that would take away they tittle as students and be professional not as students’ athlete. But That confuse me a lot if they see them as student, why don’t they let them be students first? If they not paying them because their student than they should let them be student first. I know They

Even though at colleges, students athletes are mostly always the main focus, they still have to leave some attention for the non-athletes. When non-athletes are looking to pick a school, many love when the school is popular in sports. But even though these non-athletes will love that their school is intense on one certain sport , they might want the school to be fairly large with others too. So in college if student athletes were to get paid, it will most likely not be every single athlete on campus. They are most likely going to pay the most substantial teams on campus than leave the others out. This is not fair to the other teams for many reasons. Also if colleges decide to pay these certain teams, there are certain budgets .With that it