College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

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.

Athletics in colleges in the United States of America forms the fundamental component of inter-college sports. Despite the massive triumph of the NCAA competitions, athletes do need some payments in monetary compensations to reward them for their tireless efforts in the athletics. The chief reasons provided by the NCAA for lack enough income to pay these athletes is that its cravings to uphold its amateur status and those payments would prejudice the veracity of the college athletics. Therefore, in my arguments the college athletes should be paid for the following reasons (Baird 01).

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

With the universities pulling in more than twelve billion dollars, the rate of growth for college athletics surpasses companies like McDonalds and Chevron (Finkel, 2013). The athletes claim they are making all the money, but do not see a dime of this revenue. The age-old notion that the collegiate athletes are amateurs and students, binds them into not being paid by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This pay for play discussion has been talked about since the early 1900s but recently large steps are being made to actually make a change. There are many perspectives on the payment of collegiate student athletes coming from the NCAA, the athletes themselves, and the university officials.

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

In the United States, college athletics are growing larger by the minute. College athletics contribute not only to the recognition of colleges and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), it also contributes to the income of colleges and the NCAA. Without student athletes, these colleges and the NCAA would not reap the benefits of college athletics, such as: increased awareness of colleges, higher application rates, and of course the revenue brought in from game and event tickets, apparel, and contracts for licensing and television rights. Since the student athletes, who devote a great deal of time to their sport, are the cog in the machine that is the NCAA and college athletics, they deserve the fair and rightful compensation that they certainly do not currently receive. Here is exactly why student athletes in the NCAA should be compensated for what they do for their colleges, on and off the field of play.

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.

Another source of money could be generated from boosters. Many schools and athletic teams have booster clubs that generate money. Some of this money could go to giving the athletes compensation for their hard work. (Zimbalist 73)

These athletes are only offered paid tuition, as well as a twin bed in a dorm. College athletes need to be paid a portion of the money that is profited from universities, memorabilia, and for their person being simulated

An issue that has been a well-known topic of conversation recently is the subject of college athletes getting paid or not. This issue has been circulating amongst sports fans throughout the country. Everyone from the fans, players, parents, and media groups all have opinions on this matter. Over the past ten years college athletics has gained an enormous amount of popularity and income from American audiences. As a result of this, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has been debating about collegiate athletes getting paid for their participation and I am going to discuss the reasons for why people are for it and why people are against it. The real questions most people are wondering is: Is it ethically right to pay college

With the athletes having more success with fans has increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). According to NCAA rules “you are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever: taken pay, or the promise of pay, for competing in that sport”. However, many athletes are targeted by the black markets, and end up taking money from under the table. Paying athletes would benefit the NCAA, student-athletes, and the athletes’ families.

Since its inception in 1906, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, commonly known as simply the NCAA, has pondered the burning question of whether student-athletes should be compensated for their play. Currently, the NCAA employs an amateurism policy, an eligibility regulation that all potential Division I athletes must abide by to participate in their respective sports. This set of rules prohibits players from receiving any form of compensation, whether that be as a result of participating in a sport, being awarded prize money, or signing with an agent. Athletes are allowed to accept financial aid administered by the university, but this generally small subsidy for education is accompanied with uncertainty, and is the only form of “payment” they are permitted to collect. However, there is sufficient evidence that college athletes should be paid as compensation for the money they make for the NCAA, the negative effects that sports have on the players ' lives, the benefits that the sports bring to the school, and for the potential profits missed on social media because of NCAA regulations.

Despite devoting “forty to sixty hours per week to their sport most of the year, which is more than many full-time jobs, Division I football players aren’t considered employees and lack basic economic rights under the NCAA’s cartel restrictions” (Johnson). The NCAA made “$912.8 million dollars last year and are now poised to top the eye-popping mark of $1 billion in annual revenue” (Clotfelter). These types of figures prove that revisions must be made when it comes to paying student athletes. To be clear, “student athletes do not need salaries or monthly paychecks, even though the NCAA runs just like any other professional sports league” (Johnson). Rather than, they should simply be allowed to live within their means like anyone else in America.

The millions of dollars brought into the schools by the athletes, is given to everyone else besides the athletes. The coaches, the president of the school, and the faculty are the ones who get all of it. “It is a modern form of

If an athlete is happy and performs well it reflects well on the coach and helps him to keep his job. Ensuring the athletes play is the greatest goal for some coaches. Most athletes understand this and in turn start to receive cash and other gifts because they know they can. They begin to feel “entitled to pay for play” (Matt Ryan 3). The schools do not do much to prevent this from happening though. They don’t give extra food to athletes that do more physical activity than most ordinary students. Neither do they offer more spacious room accommodations to larger athletes that take up more space than the average student would. An athlete will not always take advantages of their abilities for the cash. Some athletes are in dire need of money to help themselves and their families. They may come from a low-income household where they were looked to for support. The importance “of an athlete who was looked upon for support in the family before college” isn’t as understood by the NCAA (McMurphy 6).