Against Paying College Athletes

College sports are a phenomenon that keeps viewers coming back for more. Stated in an article on Money Nation the NCAA makes an estimated $1 billion per year and this number is still growing. What really is insane is that all that money is made off of college athletes, who don’t get a penny from that total number. The debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid has been around for decades and probably will still be here for years to come. Paying college athletes would make the teams unfair, change how hard players will work to get better, affect the amateurism of college sports, and lastly influence the athlete's willingness to participate in college sports.

College athletes should be paid because of the hard work, dedication and effort they put into their respective sports. These athletes are a major source of income for their schools and they are not receiving a penny for it. These college athletes deserved to be paid, colleges are using these athletes to get money and they are never given anything but a pat on the back and a good job. College athletes work and train extremely hard to perform at the highest level possible. In most cases, they spend more time training and preparing for their sport than they actually do learning and studying. They put so much on the line to play and they get nothing in return. These college athletes literally make their schools millions of dollars every

What amount of money should college athletes be paid? This has been a controversial question for many years.Some lower level Division One NCAA athletes think that their scholarships do not pay them enough as it is, and instead they want cash rather than the scholarship. These situations have been taken to court and arbitrated in NCAA hearings. The NCAA, or the National College Athletics Association, has declined for the athletes to be paid a salary every time when they surmise that they should. There are so many reasons why the NCAA has declined for these athletes to be paid and have proven to be naive. The NCAA should not be conciliatory on

The proposal of payment toNCAA student-athletes has begun major conversations and arguments nationwide with people expressing their take on it. “This tension has been going on for years. It has gotten greater now because the magnitude of dollars has gotten really large” (NCAA). I am a student athlete at Nicholls State University and at first thought, I thought it would be a good idea to be able to be paid as a student-athlete.After much research however; I have come to many conclusions why the payment of athletes should not take place at the collegiate level.The payment of athletes is only for athletes at the professional level. They are experts at what they do whether it is Major League Baseball, Pro Basketball, Professional Football,

These people think this because athletes are already being given a free ride to college. An athlete may be given a full paid scholarship; however, if they begin to fail a class they will lose their scholarship. It is hard for athletes to keep their grades up when they’re always on the road and have so much work responsibilities on their backs. This unneeded responsibility can affect them in many ways. One way is that if they are always stressing out about loosing their scholarship they will not play as well as they should. Athletes are not only worried about losing their scholarship, but they could possibly lose their sports job. An athlete trains for 45 hours a week, that’s more then a full time job. A full time job is 40 hours. Training for 45 hours a week is hard work and then trying to manage schoolwork on top of that is even more difficult. The main reason why people think they should not be paid is because they have no way of doing so. College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for

The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many

But why should a student athlete be paid in the first place? Their just athletes right? They go to school just like everyone else? What makes them so special? What makes a college athlete different than the average student is the amount of revenue that they help bring to their selected colleges. This type of revenue is made up from ticket sales, merchandise, media rights and contributions. “USA today” reported that the University of Texas generated $167.7 million dollars from their athletic programs, and that’s just one school. With this in mind, imagine just how much money other colleges are making from their athletics. Sure one can make the argument that they should not be paid because they are not professionals, but one can’t ignore the fact that they are bringing in millions of dollars and seeing none of it.

Student athletes should not be paid. A misconception is that all athletic programs in the NCAA make head-over-toe profit. There are three divisions of intercollegiate athletics, and frankly division three athletic programs don’t make as much or have a profit when compared to division one programs. “Critics of paying college athletes note that only a small number of them compete in sports or on teams that actually generate revenue”. (Paying College Athletes) The truth is only a fraction of athletic programs are actually profitable, while most pose a cost to the institution. The question arises primarily in division one programs and typically in the sports of basketball and football. The argument is made that these institutions receive millions of dollars from their student athletes’ performance, in return they should be paid.

Whether college athletes should or should not get paid has been a controversial topic throughout the Collegiate Athletic Association for many years now. According to the article “My Priceless Opportunity” by Bill Walton , he believes that NCAA student athletes should not get paid because “the players entering the game know the rules going in and that they have been given a chance to make something of their lives in exchange for the privilege of being a student athlete”. Others like Michael Wilbon, author of “As Colleges’ Greed Grows, So Does the Hypocrisy”, thinks student athletes should get paid due to their hard work and labor. While I respect and admire the diligent task of being both a student and an athlete, I strongly agree with Bill Walton and the many others who support college athletes not being paid.

Both sides of this argument have a strong case for why student athletes should, or should not be compensated. The problem might not be what it looks like at first. The main problem is the amount being spent on college athletes and the rising tuition costs for these universities. Duke University 's golf team spent an estimated $20,405 per player (Branstetter). The amount of money being spent on one player on their golf team is represented in the insane amount of tuition which is 60,000 dollars a year at Duke. This is a huge reason as to why colleges are so eager to get a cut of a 60 billion dollar industry. The issue of paying student athletes is not so one sided as athletes work very hard between school and sports, or that

Alan Page took advantage of the scholarship that the University of Minnesota gave him and because of that opportunity he is now a Minnesota Supreme Court Justice. These college players need to take more of an interest in getting an education rather than falling back on their sports career. Because college athletes are given a full-ride scholarships they should not be paid. Colleges don’t have enough money to pay all athletes. To pay every athlete you would have to pay all of the players and to pay all of the players you would have to pay all of the different levels such as: NCAA Division 1, Division 2 and NAIA.

When the topic is brought up about why college athletes should be paid to play, more then half of people instantly will disagree and say “no way, what for”? But have they really looked into all the reasons pointing towards paying them? I know it sounds like I'm trying to say give them all million dollar contracts and call it a done deal, but that is not the case. Aside from the athletic and academic scholarships to pay for tuition, the money they would be receiving would be miniscule to what they could be making if they were working at a full-time job instead. This money would basically cover small costs an athlete must make when living on his own, since there is no time for a job, he has to balance the careful act of school and sports. Only a select few big time athletes will actually make it all the way to the big leagues and receive a big payout. Once this money distribution to the players is in affect, it will clean up a lot of problems in college sports.

College athletes should not be paid. “ They argue that the main purpose of going to college is to get a education, not to make money” (“Should college”...1). College is not a job, it is a place to learn. Also many college athletes receive scholarships to attend that school. “The value of the scholarships athletes receive during four years of college can be well over $250,000” (Weiss et al.1). Therefore, athletes

Another argument in the case for college athletes to be paid would be that the scholarships that are offered to athletes aren’t enough to cover the lost wages they would gain from working a job. Even though some athletes are offered full ride scholarships to great universities, they aren’t enough to pay their rent and other bills that they have. With athletes committing so much time for sports they do not have the time to get a job and pay for their bills and other things they need. This puts more strain on the athletes and can cause them to drop out of their respective sports and when that happens they ultimately lose their scholarships. College athletics are more demanding than a full-time job should pay their athletes for their services provided to the university they play for. The wages lost by athletes at universities are even greater than those working typical eight-hour days. Since athletes, football in particular, commit an immense amount of time to their sports they could be obtaining a wage far greater than the amount of the scholarship they obtained for attending and participating in sports at a university. Another point to be made would be that only a small portion of the people associated with college athletics receive full scholarships. This means that not only are athletes committing so much time and effort for sports, they must pay out of pocket for the portion that their respective

If college athletes were to get paid they wouldn’t be considered student-athletes anymore, they would be considered paid professionals or employees for that college. These student-athletes bring in big business for these colleges and most people believe they should get paid for it. The high school students go through the same struggles as college athletes except at a varsity level. They attend school while playing varsity sports and some still have time to have an after school job. If we start paying college athletes, we might as well start paying high school athletes for participating in