College Athlete: The Cost Of Amateurism

Collegiate sports have turned into a billion dollar industry and are probably just as popular, if not more popular than professional sports. College athletes put their bodies on the line to play a sport they love, many with hopes and dreams to one day make it to the professional leagues. Athletic facilities are the major money makers for all universities. Colleges bring in billions of dollars in revenue annually, yet athletes do not get paid. Some fans believe athletes should not get paid due to their sports level being “amateurish.”; however, this is far from the truth. There is much more to being a college athlete than just practicing and playing games. These student-athletes must practice, weight lift, go to meetings, travel, go to tutoring and study groups, all the while maintaining sufficient grades. This is very tedious work and is very time consuming. College athletes have a high standard to live up to (Frederick Web; Huma Web; Patterson Web ).

In his article “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch (2011) describes how universities are focused on advancing and receiving money from major athletics and having star athletes, but how the universities are not caring for the “student athlete.” The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has made college sports into an unmerited business. However, as years progress more athletes are getting smart and are taking the NCAA to court. The more students that challenges the rules by the NCAA and take them to court, the secrets and undermining values of the NCAA come out and the closer the NCAA comes to an end.

I believe that college sports should be considered a profession. Athletes deserve to be paid for their work. College athletics are a critical part of America’s culture and economy. At the present time, student-athletes are considered amateurs. College is a stepping-stone to

College athletic programs are among the most popular sporting events in America. With this rise in popularity, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its colleges have also seen a rise in revenue in recent years. In 2014, the NCAA made over 900 million dollars in revenue. Some collegiate coaches, such as Kentucky’s John Calipari, have yearly salaries in the millions, not counting incentives and endorsement deals. While, clearly, money is being made, NCAA regulations ban collegiate athletes from being paid. Many question this rule and argue that athletes at the college level earn and deserve pay for play. The debate to pay or not to pay college athletes rages on despite the latest court ruling supporting NCAA policies. Because colleges and universities earn such a profit from sporting events, many fans feel it is only fair to distribute some of the wealth to the players. Supporters of paying student athletes feel that these young men and women should be fairly compensated for the time demanded of the athletes and the stress put on the athletes, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. Those in favor of paying college athletes contend that athletic and academic work ethic at both high school and collegiate levels will improve, as well as, fiscal responsibility in these young adults. The NCAA argues that paying athletes would negatively affect their

When people hear of college athletics, all they think of is a game. Most people do not realize that there is a million dollar industry going on around these athletes. Eric He, a sports fanatic who writes for the Daily Trojan, states, “The NCAA is a nonprofit, tax exempt organization that just happens to be a billion-dollar industry, raking in $740 million per year from March Madness alone” (par. 7). When the NCAA is generating that much money, how can it not go to the players? It is not the

that student athletes are students who gain access to a college education through their participation in sports, for which they earn scholarships to pay tuition, fees, room and board and other allowable

“Schools that offer athletic scholarships have embraced a form of professionalism, and have made a conscious decision to use paid performers to attract revenue and/or publicity to their schools,” (p.4). The main problem with professionalism in college sport is that what began as amateurs’ competing for the pure fun and pleasure of it, with a little bit of school rivalry, has turned into a multi-million dollar business. No longer is the focus on higher education, the focus is now on whether or

Being an athlete is hard enough but when you add the “student” it gets twice as difficult that’s why they need extra money so they don’t need a separate job and have more time for school.

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.

Its no secret that college sports brings in the big bucks, and without the athletes preforming day in or day out universities would lack the funds to support a school needs. The college sports industry makes 11 billion in annual revenues (Mitchell, Horace, U.S. News Digital Weekly). 11 billion dollars made off of college sports alone is enough its self to pay these student-athletes for their contribution to a school’s success because without them there wouldn’t be this much income. They need these athletes and the NCAA should quit exploiting them for their talents and compensate them. Student-athletes are amateurs who choose to participate in intercollegiate athletics (Mitchell, Horace, U.S. News Digital Weekly). Indeed, they are amateur but in sports the word professional has a different meaning since in all sports there is a 1-2-year stint before an athlete can go from the college level to a professional standpoint. Meaning it only takes a year or two

For decades college athletics have been a huge money making business and for decades the players at these universities have been the ones making the majority of it. The issue with this topic is that college athletes receive nothing more than a scholarship which is sometimes not enough. Many college athletes have spoken out about this issue and the NCAA has fired back in response. The NCAA argues that these athletes are not professionals and do not deserve payment. If college athletes were to receive payment they would no longer be amateur athletes. Some fans think it would ruin the integrity of college athletics because college athletes are supposed to be working towards making it to the professional level, if they were to receive payment for play it may tarnish some athletes work ethic. What is at stake in this piece is that college athletics make billions of dollars a year and the main attraction to the events that make the money are the athletes that play in the game and those athletes do not receive any of the money made. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes because you cannot just pay the top athletes you must pay all athletes. If the NCAA were to do this they would lose a lot of money from what they bring in now.

The NCAA and the universities represented by it are now making more money than ever through their athletic programs than ever before. However, due to amateurism regulations set by the NCAA, the college athletes that generate the massive revenue the NCAA receives are not paid at all. The article opens with the argument that college athletes should be paid for their play. The argument is supported through information proving that the NCAA undervalues athletes through the money they generate for their school versus the amount of scholarship money the school provides them with. The article also discusses how the NCAA also prevents athletes from marketing their own image and

“Although the NCAA claims college athletes are just students, the NCAA's own tournament schedules require college athletes to miss classes for nationally televised games that bring in revenue” the NCAA claims student comes first but the “students”are the ones missing class because of the games. Also they are the one risking their careers on the line because at any point at time they can have an ending career injury and most of time happens in college. The players are the ones making the money and the ones getting the ratings. Plus they are the ones showing up for the commercials on the brands they doing . “The typical Division I college football player devotes 43.3 hours per week to his sport -- 3.3 more hours than the typical American work week” this shows how much devotion they put in the sport but yet they don’t get

College athletes should be paid to play and schools need to consider compensating these athletes for their talents based on the revenue they generate. Given the fact college sports is a big money maker for many universities and colleges, Kenneth Cooper, author of the article, “Should College Athletes be Paid to Play”?, argues that “college athletes should not be paid due to the fact they are still amateurs who are representatives of the schools they attend” (Cooper). Additional arguments made by Cooper against paying the athletes, include the fact that “these men and women are not just athletes, but students first” (Cooper). From my point of view, this statement would be true only if the emphasis were realistically placed on academics. Therefore,

The athletic departments in most major universities have been criticized for five reasons. Many prestigious schools admit athletes with scores almost 200 points below the national average, and even farther below their own standards. Universities admit student athletes that would not make it into their schools if it were not for their athletic performance. Athletes are seen as receiving preferential treatment. More than a dozen collegiate coaches make over one million dollars a year. Many college athletes attend college to land themselves professional spots, not to receive an education. Athletic programs becoming top of the line means that regular students no longer have the possibility of playing college sports. College academics appear watered-down to college athletes who many believe do not receive the same academic treatment that other students do. Why is this the case? When it all comes down to it, universities these days, are under pressure to bring in money. Athletics makes money.