College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

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.

In America sports wherever there is people, there will also be sports. Sports have played a major role in American history. To some people sports is all they have. It is just the way that things are. The issue in sports now is that the NCAA exploit the sports world and the very backbone of the corporation is the poorest. It is an issue that has been around for quite some time now. The issue is that the sports world face is the fact that college athletes are not paid, although they perform in a multibillion dollar industry. The NCAA basically has a monopoly on college athletics, and generate about one billion dollars a year. College sports are extremely demanding both in and out of season, and these athletes put their future on the line. The NCAA should be legally obligated to compensate athletes, based solely on the fact that the money made, is from their performance.

The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many

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.

Now, paying these athletes doesn’t have to be for everyone. Only the high caliber, D1 athletes. The D1 athletes put in all this time and effort to get a scholarship, but don’t see any money. Now that’s not right. These D1 caliber players don’t come around all the time. There are not many of them. Plus the schools that do have these players are super rich. “These teams not only provide their supporters with a steady source of entertainment, but their performance also helps bring notoriety and pride to the universities they represent. College athletics, especially the so-called "revenue sports" of men 's basketball and football, is now a multi-million dollar business that is marketed, packaged, and sold in the same manner as other commercial products” (Acain).

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.

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

The NCAA states that the student athletes are paid in the form of an education, but this is not always true. There have been many instances in which student-athletes have graduated with grade school reading levels or never graduated because they were not directed to pursue any specific degree path (Marquette sports law journal). The emphases of winning in collegiate sports use to be for moral. College sports now are a very lucrative business and a lot of it comes from being on television and through sponsorship. Nike is going to endorse the teams that win over the teams that lose. College athletics has been estimated to be a $60 billion industry (McCormick). Universities are all too willing to try and get a piece of this huge industry.

In the United States, college athletics have been immensely popular since the early 1900’s. Ever since then, the three major sports -- football, basketball, and hockey-- have brought in major cash and popularity for colleges around the US. The revenue college sports bring in today is mind boggling. For example, in 2011 the Houston Sentinel found that the University of Texas’ Athletic Program was bringing in $120,288,370. The Longhorns were the the most profitable team in college sports that year; however, the numbers still speak for themselves. The problem I have with Texas making millions and millions is that not a single . According to NCAA rules, “You are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever: Taken pay, or the promise of pay,dime outside of scholarship goes back to the players who are making them this money. Whether Texas would be willing to compensate their players is not the main issue however. The problem is with the NCAA and there rules about having to be an ameteur to compete. Because of such harsh rules, athletes are struggling to pay rent and afford to eat, leading to them ultimately cheating and breaking such rules. I believe these rules also hurt the college. With no pay, a lot of the best athletes are extremely to make their fortune in the professional leagues after just one year of college, not getting degrees and lowering the level of the college game. While some argue that college athletes should not be paid because they are only

You were just shown some of the many reasons why college athletes should be paid but opponents of this will say that that if the athletes were paid that it would make lower level colleges more undesirable for the players. But the reality of that is that the lower level colleges are always, and have alway been less desirable for college athletes. They have smaller facilities and less attention. The reason athletes go to lower level schools is because they were denied by the higher level colleges(Wall Street Journal,2016,p.1). Another reason why lower level collages won’t suffer from paying the athletes is the NCAA is a nonprofit so the money made off of sports is supposed to be spent on sports so if that can be enforced they can definitely

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.

College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and