Every year in the United States, thousands of collegiate student-athletes participate in a variety of different sports, and currently they do not receive paychecks for their performances. College athletics have attained an extensive popularity increase among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA] and the participating colleges, which has fuelled the debate of whether or not college athletes should collect an income. College athletes should not be paid to play because it will negatively affect their college experience. Rather, they should be compensated for their dedication to the sport. Many student athletes accept scholarships to play at a …show more content…
“In the state of Pennsylvania 71 percent of students leave a public four-year institution or private nonprofit four year institution in debt. The average debt is $32,528” (McCauley). This can be an immense strain on someone who may or may not have a job awaiting them after college. Therefore, student-athletes are lucky to earn the opportunity to graduate without the burden of debt.
Another concern with paying college athletes is the uncertainty in the importance of each sport. The NCAA would not be able to create a system that would distribute funds to all athletes in an equal way. It does not seem fair that the athlete who is competing in the National Championship with millions of people watching them is being paid the same amount as the athlete who plays a sport that does not air on national television. It is not the athlete 's fault for playing a less popular sport. They may work equally as hard, so should they not be equally rewarded? As stated by McCauley, “The NCAA reported that 28.3 million viewers watched the 2015 NCAA Men’s Division I National Championship between Wisconsin and Duke. They also reported there were 3.1 million viewers for the 2015 NCAA Women’s Division I National Championship between Notre Dame and UConn” (McCauley). According to these statistics, more people want to watch the men play, but that does not mean the women do not work as hard. They cannot
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,
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 athletes are fun and exciting to watch each and every time we watch them. The only problem with college athletes are that they are not getting paid like they should be. Athletes give it their all each and every time they go out on the court or the field. The NCAA makes billions of dollars each and every year from championship games or the NCAA March Madness, but none of that money is sent to the players. College athletes have the right to be paid by the NCAA and the universities because they represent the product that both are selling.
College sports can determine a person’s lifestyle. Determines whether or not they can go pro or get a job. Paying athletes can give them a better sense of money. They can learn how to save their money up, learn how to spend it correctly, and a great sense of financial awareness. The problem is that many
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.
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
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.
$9,139 is the average cost of college for a student to go attend an in-state four year public university (“College Costs”). This amount does not include housing, food, books, or supplies; this can end up totaling near $10,000, but imagine if both of these figures were paid for you. This would mean you would pay nothing to attend a four year college, and this is the reality for many individuals today; these people are commonly known as student-athletes. Many student-athletes receive full scholarships to schools covering their room, board, tuition, books and any other expenses they may incur because they are playing a sport at the institution. Not to mention many of these individuals will receive stipends to use at their own will. However, these same students feel like these benefits are not enough (“Here’s”). Some students feel like they are being cheated out of their talents because NCAA uses them in media and in other profitable ventures but they are not paid. Others just feel that the role of a college athlete should include receiving payment since they are like professional athletes and see their sport as their only profession. Student- athletes may have a similar role to professional athletes, but do not deserve the same compensation because they are receiving their payment through a school scholarship.
College athletes generate millions of dollars for their schools each year, yet they are not allowed to be compensated beyond a scholarship due to being considered amateurs. College athletes are some of the hardest working people in the nation, having to focus on both school courses and sports. Because athletics take so much time, these student-athletes are always busy. College football and basketball are multi-billion dollar businesses. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes beyond scholarships, and it would be tough to work a new compensation program into the NCAA and university budgets. College athletes should be compensated in some form because they put in so much time and effort, generating huge amounts of revenue.
In the spring of 2014, the Northwestern University football team did something that has never been done before in the history of college sports. Several scholarship players voted on whether the team should unionize. These same players believe that they should be compensated for their play on the athletic field. Countless collegiate sports fans also believe that college athletes from around the country should be compensated for playing sports; however, paying college athletes would cause multiple problems in college athletics. Most people do not understand how much student athletes are given to them free of charge just to attend a university, while the majority of other average students are stuck with the burden of paying for their education. College athletes should not be paid since schools do not have the money to pay student athletes, it would not be fair for athletes who do not play football or basketball, and they have athletic scholarships that allow them to receive a free education.
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 word “college” is defined by Dictionay.com (2014) as “an indepdant institution of higher learning”. This definition is focused around education and the higher learning that individuals receive when they attend a college institution. It is not centered around, nor does it mention athletics. College athletes should not be paid a salary for their participation in college sports, the purpose of college is education and not athletics.
“The NCAA is a private, non profit association consisting of over 1000 members” (Goldman). The NCAA was founded in 1906 and is a large association representing bigger schools and universities (“What’s the Difference…”). NCAA schools are organized into three divisions, D1, D2, and D3 (“What’s the Difference…”). Division 1 schools are typically the largest, division 2 schools are smaller than D1 schools, and division 3 schools are the smallest of the NCAA institutions (“What’s the Difference…”). You cannot pay the more talented players on the team more money. This will cause strikes amongst the other teams and other very valuable players. If certain players are paid differently, it can also potentially change the athletes’ attitudes. When you pay one athlete more money than another athlete, the higher paid athlete becomes more of an individual and less of a team member. However, individualizing team members is not the purpose of any team sport. Paying more talented players more money will teach that player bad habits with their teammates and could eventually lead the player to think they are superior to their team. The only factor that could really determine different pay between athletes would be the different divisions of the NCAA: Division 1, Division 2, and Division 3. One might think that a Division 1 school would pay their student athletes more than a Division 2 or 3 school because it is a larger school. This leads to