Essay On Why College Athletes Should Not Get Paid

College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.

NCAA, short for National Collegiate Athletic Association, is a “non-profit” organization which over watch all the athletic related activities on college level. In the early 20th century, President Roosevelt created NCAA because he wanted to insured college athletes from injuries and even deaths. Despite the original purpose of the NCAA is not about money, it has become one of the most lucrative companies in the USA. According to Taylor Branch, “big-time college sports are fully commercialized. Billions of dollars flow through them each year. The NCAA makes money, and enables universities and corporations to make money, from the unpaid labor of young athletes” (Branch). Besides the tremendous fortune these college athletes made for the NCAA, it is also a vital source for university entertainment, enrollment, and money. Although these athletes generate great fortune and put up great shows for society, they do not receive proper pay back. To balance the current unfair compensation system to the athletes, in addition to free tuition, college athletes should be treated as workers in a business market system and paid depending on their own performance.

Paying College athletes has been a trending topic around the National Collegiate Athletic Association over the years. Many have strong opinions about this topic, and the opinions vary. The discussion of paying college athletes began in 1991 when the famed Fab Five became a household name in the United States. The Fab Five is arguably the greatest recruiting class of all time; all attending the same school (Baxter). The Fab Five first created controversy when they started to question why the university and university officials were making millions and millions of dollars off their names, and they were just deprived hungry college kids not making a dime. Nike even made billions by copyrighting their famed black athletic socks, black

Due to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules and regulations no college athlete is able to receive any compensation or endorsement while participating in college athletics. These rules have long been challenged, however no changes have been made by the NCAA. With universities grossing close to $200 million a year college athletics has turned into one of the top industries in the world. The NCAA is a governing body of college athletics, but without people questioning the NCAA and demanding changes to the monopoly that the NCAA is nothing will happen to the unfairness to college athletes like it is currently.

The argument whether a student-athlete should be paid to play or not be paid is one that spans the ages. College sports are considered to be of amateur status by the NCAA. Therefore they believe student-athletes should not receive a pay check to participate in a sport. However on the other end of the spectrum, many critics believe that student-athletes should receive pay for play because not only are they participating in a sport, they are entertaining the spectators. They believe that if performers in the entertainment industry are paid, why not pay the college-athletes.

Kids grow up loving to play sports in their free time. They never get paid to play when they are at a young age. They do it for the love of the game and for the need for competition. This is the way that it is in college right now. College athletes compete with all their hearts to be the best they can for their schools. They don’t get paid a cent. It has been a common debate if that is the right way to do it. Should it be that college athletes do not deserve to get paid for playing a sport? It should not be this way. College athletes certainly should get paid to play.

Waking up before the sunrise is a daily routine. Early morning film sessions, class, then practice, which dominates the day. There are few moments in between for food and socializing, but the life of a student athlete is anything but ordinary. Sleep, eat, practice and school are all an athlete knows, and with the pressures of campus life it becomes even more difficult. No time for much of anything, let alone getting a job. Like most students, these athletes need money, but do not have a spare moment to work. Without any source of income, athletes are put at a major disadvantage. Their full-time job is athletics, in addition to rigorous college-level courses. The possibility of becoming a professional athlete and making millions

Howard P. Chudacoff, a professor of history at Brown University, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal titled, “Let’s Not Pay College Athletes.” Chudacoff outlines the reasons why athletes in the major two collegiate sports, football and men’s basketball, that participate in a power five conference; Atlantic Coast, Big Ten, Big XII, Southeastern, and PAC-12 Conferences: should not be paid for their services to their institutions. Chudacoff provides examples of academic centers and practice facilities to strengthen his point that collegiate athletes are given enough royalties to go along with a free education.

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.

Does it make sense for colleges to run a multimillion dollar entertainment business? The idea of paying college athletes has increased in popularity in recent years. People believe that the athletes should get compensated for their time and money they make for their schools. It may seem like a legitimate argument, but paying college athletes are not why schools are built. Instead, colleges should focus more on educating students and athletes.

Should college athletes get paid? My answer is no. There are many reasons why I say no and there are many reasons why college athletes should get paid and why they shouldn't. The College Industry is worth about 4 billion which is way over enough to pay college players. I think College athletes should not get paid because they are already being paid with an athletic scholarship, it will create greed and jealousy between players, the university that the athletes apply will pay for everything else.

First, some say that college athletes should be paid because of the fact that the schools and the NCAA make billions. In an article from USA Today, it stated: “NCAA made more than $1 billion for the year” (Mama). On the other hand, they should not be paid because tons of the athletes get scholarships, they are rewarded with a free education, and they are technically getting around twenty-thousand dollars a year. First, in an article from Scholorshipstats.com in statistics from 2015 regarding the amount of scholarship money that was given out was nearly 2.2 billion dollars.

There have been ongoing arguments over the past decade of whether or not college athletes should be paid to play. Many argue that they do not have time to get real jobs because the requirements for the sport that they participate in are far too demanding. Others cite that these athletes are provided full scholarships to attend the schools at which they are playing the sport. However regardless of the argument, I still feel that college athletes should NOT be paid to play.

Each university associated with the NCAA differ in size and budgeting. Some schools would have no problem paying each student athlete at their school only because of their profits from their ultimate money sports such a football and basketball, while other schools struggle now to even field enough teams to remain an NCAA school. This is why I find it intriguing to see where each school lies on how this situation could affect them. Athletes being paid could also affect high school and pro sports as well which interests me more to research this topic. High school athletics could improve by students pushing harder at the high school level to reach the college level because of pay, while pro sports could have many different affects such as students not leaving school early because of pay at the college level now.

College athletes are finally getting attention on the fact that they are not paid. I believe that whether or not it is college or pro sports they deserve a salary. These players put their heart and soul on the field and get nothing in return. In the articles “Athletes New Day” by Paul Marx and “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid” by Warren Hartenstine, the reasons for college athletes to be paid are very evident. No matter the case, if the students move on to pro sports or not after college, they should be entitled to some pay for their contributions. College athletes deserve to be compensated for their playtime in these sports, sales of products with their name on it, and even compensation for their injuries.