College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

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

Joe Posnanski, a sports journalist and former columnist for Sports Illustrated, weighed in on the controversial issue of college athletes receiving money as a service of their play. “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid” published 2011 from the Norton Sampler starts off by introducing one of his main arguments that “College athletics are not about the players” (Posnanski 585) but instead are about the alumni and the colleges themselves that people support. If player on a team left and made their own team would that colleges alumni now support their semi-pro team, no chance. College Supporters love the youthful feeling and the how close they feel too it. He shows how big time college athletes do get paid in tuition, room and board, food,

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

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.

Jameis Winston, Dwayne Wade, Giancarlo Stanton, and Dalvin Cook all are very big people in Florida’s sports market. They all are important to their team’s success and considered leaders on their teams. The major difference between the four players is that 3 of them are compensated for their work, but on the other hand, one which is a college student receiving a free education, isn’t paid for nearly doing the same kind of work. Many people would argue that it’s not fair that college athletes aren’t being paid for bringing in millions of dollars to the institution they play for, putting their lives in danger to play the sports, and missing tons of class to prepare for their sports games without being paid. Those who argue against the compensation of athletes would say that most college and universities don’t make nearly enough revenue to pay all the college athletes as well as saying college athletes already receive a free education with scholarships and that should be the real reason to be in college. This issue has been a debate for many years among players, the National Collegiate Athletic Association & even outside influences like celebrities and law officials.

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

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.

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.

College athletics are becoming more like the professional leagues except for one big issue, money. Student athletes bring in a vast amount of revenue for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) not to mention recognition and notoriety regarding the athlete’s university. However, the debate continues as to whether student athletes should or should not receive payment for playing college sports.

A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.

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.

Throughout history the big question surrounding the college athletic industry is if college athletes should get paid for the participation in the sport. It has recently over the past few years been brought up as a huge topic in college athletics, a lot of people have their views in if they should or shouldn’t. The big picture everyone has to look at and get an understanding to be the economic aspect of it. There are a lot of factors that people fail to realize that involve paying these athletes such as the supply, demand elasticity, taxes and equity vs efficiency, all of these play a minor role in the impact of the answer people are waiting to get. In my opinion I feel as an athlete myself I feel we should get paid for playing sports. But

Collegiate athletes attend college to master their craft before going professional, and should not be paid. This also does not factor in other things such as injury and other issues that could arise. Colleges paying students to perform is not merited and would only cause more problems. Scholarships are important because they allow a student who could not usually attend college for free with the only requirement being that they play on the football team. That is why student athletes should not get paid, because they are already receiving a free education. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) of college football would be nothing without its players. The NCAA is broken up into three divisions, going from best known and talented universities in division one to the least known and talented universities in division three. Depending on the talent of the high school player he can pick from any of the three divisions. If that same player reaches the ultimate goal of a college football player, which is to be recruited to the Nation Football League (NFL) then that player is known as a Premium college player. Universities that would pay college football players would set a precedent that sports are more important than an education, which is why they should not get paid.

There has been a recent debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many people believe they should get paid, but many others believe they should not be paid. College athletes should not be paid because the students should worry about their education, it is an extracurricular activity, and the Ncaa does not approve of it.

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" -Winston Churchill (Brainy Quote, 2013). Unfortunately this has been the trend within the collage athletics sectors over the years and dates back to the historical times when the NCAA was formed. There have been varying excuses put froth by different bodies on why the college athletes cannot and should not be paid ranging from the claim that the education and support they get is of equal measure to the effort they put into the games to other reasons like it is a measure to protect the students from commercialization of their labor and possible exploitation at a tender age. But one thing that we must all ask ourselves is that how much in terms of cash is made within the athletics circles in the name of these college athletes? Who then are the beneficiaries? Where do the vast amounts that are derived from television rights go to? What distinguishes these college athletes from the ones who are barely out of college and play professional football and get paid for it, bearing we watch both at the comfort of our homes? Don't we have college athletes who are a brand in themselves and don't brands get paid just like the ones out of college?