College Athletes Should Get Paid

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) makes over $871 million dollars a year on college athletics. Some studies estimate as much as one billion dollars each year. A college university can make anywhere from several million dollars up to $120 million from their athletic programs. A college athlete gets paid nothing and yet a majority of their time and schedule is dictated by the sport they play. In the book Student Athlete’s Guide to College, author Hillary Abramson says, “If you’ve gotten to the college athletic level, you 're accustomed to making sacrifices to benefit your athletic career. In college these sacrifices only get harder.” (Abramson 8). In Dominic Alessi’s 5 Reasons Why NCAA Athletes Should be Paid, he points out that student athletes schedules are much harder than regular students schedules. “By late afternoon they have already put in a 10 hour work day.” (Alessi). Even though they are considered student athletes, the NCAA actually has rules which allow the athletes to miss class in order to fulfill their team obligations. College athletes should be paid because they spend a majority of their time with their sport, many colleges in the NCAA make a large amount of income from the sports programs, and it would help many athletes learn to be financially stable and help them in the real world as only a small fraction of college athletes turn professional and make a career

One of the most controversial subjects we as individuals hear about this day in age is whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid. Many people argue that these athletes do intact, deserve to be paid for their time and hard work. NCAA athletes create a name for themselves by playing and performing well on their college teams. The better these athletes perform, the more publicity the school revives. This then leads to higher ticket sales and stores around campus selling jerseys and other clothing items with athletes names and numbers on the back. NCAA schools have become comfortable with using athletes’ names to bring in a revenue for the school, and yet the athletes never see any of that money. On the other hand, many people believe that these athletes do not deserve, nor should they expect to receive payment in return. They believe that these scholarships and the education are payment in itself. Some even bring up the question on if it is affordable or even realistic to pay college athletes.

College sports is a multi-billion dollar industry. Each year thousands of high school students are recruited to play college sports, but under strict conditions. Students are required to do well in athletics while keeping up with their academics. College athletes spend up to forty five hours per week on practices, training, and games. In addition, they spend roughly forty hours on their academics. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) does not think it is necessary to pay these athletes because they want to maintain the “amateur sport” status. According to Stanley Eitzen in his “College Athletes should be Paid, “The universities and the NCAA claim their athletes in big-time sports programs

They are bringing more money than the NFL, NBA and NHL. Which is crazy because so many people get to see the money. The coaches, sponsors, television media and a lot more other people down the line the get to see it except for the people that actually made it possible which is the athletic players. From recent studies I found out facts “The NCAA had nearly $913 million in total revenue in fiscal 2013, according to the statement. It had a little more than $852 million in total expenses, including a record $527.4 million distributed to Division I schools and conferences.”(Steve) Consequently, most of this money come from contracts with marketing and multimedia companies that film the Division 1 basketball ball tournaments and all the other collegiate

The System for college athletes isnt perfect, and needs to be worked on, a big problem we cannot seem to agree is how to compensate the student-athletes who drive the NCAA. I would like to start off with a question. Are college athletes being compensated enough for the effort they put forth today? Every Day they wake up early and represent their university whether they are putting in work in class or on the field. Each student-student athlete generates tons of money for their university and they don’t see a dime other than their scholarship that may or may not been renewed every year. Keep that question in mind while reading this essay, and form your own opinion.

In the recent past, college athletics has gained massive fame in the United States. The immense fame of the college athletics has developed over the past twenty years. The massive development and fame of the college athletics have resulted in improved incomes for the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA). Due to increased revenue received by the NCAA, the participates in athletics in the colleges has fuelled the argument of whether the college athletes need to be paid and rewarded more than just the athletic scholarships. In this research paper, I will take a stab at to respond the question whether they should be paid by delving the explanations for and against the payment of the college athletes (Adams and Becky 108).

College athletes should be paid. The athletes put in as much work as the people who do get paid. Why should they not be paid? There are many pros for why they should get paid, but there are also many cons on why they should not get paid. The athletes should get paid because of how hard they work in season and the off-season. Do not pay all of the athletes, but pay the ones who are at a D1 college. The athletes should get paid because they put in the same amount of time as the pros do, and the pros get paid.

Over the last few years there has been renewed controversy about whether college athletes should be paid. The idea of paying college athletes goes back to the early 1900s with one of the first inter collegiate competitions between Harvard and Yale. The modern position of the National Collegiate Athletic Association is that athletic scholarships provide a free college education in return for participating on the university team. Many college athletes dedicate more than forty hours of training per week. College is expensive. How can we expect college athletes to pay for books and other basic necessities if they are busy practicing or participating in home games or traveling to away games? The NCAA needs to start paying these athletes to supplement

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,

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.

Kim Kardashian’s ex lover is not just famous for dating a “Kardashian”; he was more famous for the controversial issue with the NCAA due to proceeds given to him for his ability on the field. Reggie Bush made a lot of accomplishments while being a college athlete. Because of his skills, he was rewarded an amount of money. While Reggie Bush was playing at the University of Southern California, statistics show that the college generated roughly fifty-five million dollars. That’s a lot of money for one athlete to bring in. Every day we hear more and more stories about NCAA investigators and colleges being punished for “paying” players. However, college athletes bring in a lot of money. Therefore, they should get a percentage whether it is a small amount or a large amount. It will depend on the athletes’ ability. While some may argue that paying college athletes to play is wrong, college athletes have a marketable skill and should be paid for their skill.

Some college athletic departments are as wealthy as professional sports teams. The NCAA has an average annual revenue of $10.6 billion dollars. College athletes should be paid because of the amount of revenue that they bring to their college. Each individual college should pay its athletes based on how much revenue they bring to the college in which they attend. The colleges that win their Division title, their Conference title, or the National championship, give bonuses to the Head coach of that team. If colleges have enough money to give bonuses to coaches, that means they have money that is left over for the athlete who gives them recognition to pay them. College athletes should be paid based solely upon the performance and success that they have.

Is an athletic scholarship really enough of a “payment” to reimburse athletes for the billions of dollars made by the NCAA every year? This issue of paying collegiate athletes, especially football and basketball players, has been around for many years. Athletes, students, bystanders, and NCAA analysts and authority figures have a strong opinion about paying college athletes. Whether college athletes should be paid or not is a debate topic that is more prevalent today than ever.

Asking wether to pay college athletes or not is one of the most heated debates in NCAA history. Although it may sound good to the students, it will arise devastating effects on society. The discrimination that might occur if we decide to pay athletes could initiate public riots or violence. The idea of college athletes being paid should be put to rest based on the consequences that would arise (Bokshan).

Athletes who are given full ride athletic scholarships receive free tuition, housing, books, meals and money for basic needs. In addition, they get to attend a top college which they might have not been accepted into without excelling at a particular or multiple sports. With all of these benefits, some people think college athletes should be paid a stipend. College athletes in the United States should not be paid because of the negative effects on the athletes, colleges and the public.