Essay On Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

The NCAA has been around and evolved since the beginning of college sports. This organization is a non-profitable organization, but ironically makes more than millions of profit per year. Branch states “that money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contract”(pg. 228). Meanwhile, the student-athletes do not receive any of this money. This is the start of an unsubstantial business between universities built around amateurism.

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.

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.

There is currently a major issue in today’s college athletics. Universities and the NCAA make billions of dollars while some student-athletes go hungry. There is a huge debate over whether or not student-athletes should be paid as employees of their respective colleges. Personally, I don’t believe players should receive full-time salaries, but Universities and the NCAA should be required to increase the value of the scholarships that they award to student-athletes. By requiring that colleges provide athletes with an additional $2,000 per semester as part of their scholarship you can greatly increase the well-being (welfare) of the students.

Cameron Newton was a coveted recruit coming out of Georgia’s Westlake High School in 2007. Upon signing with the University of Florida, he earned a back-up spot behind Tim Tebow, the 2007 Heisman Trophy winner. After being arrested on felony charges, Newton dropped out of Florida and enrolled at Blinn Junior College in Texas. Newton led his team to the 2009 NJCAA National Football Championship, after which he was the only 5-star recruit for the 2010 season, as stated on rivals.com. His top two choices for college: Mississippi State University and Auburn University. After his first year at Blinn Junior College he committed to Auburn. During the 2010 football season, Newton led the #1 ranked Tigers to a national championship berth with an

In today’s society, one of the big controversies with sports is, should student athletes be be paid a salary? Some people believe that they should be paid and others would completely disagree. Even though they technically are being paid, they really are not. The only type of way the athletes would be paid is through financial aid or if they have a job. Only their education is being paid by the school. Although some people believe that they should be paid, it would not be a good idea at all. So college athletes should not be paid at all because they are basically being paid to study and play a sport.

about getting a part time job. So they would have more time working on their sport and would have energy for classes. The athletes would not have to worry where they would get their money if the NCAA paid its athletes. If the athletes do not have to worry where they are going to get their money from, then could could spend more time perfecting their game and would also help them have more energy to do well in their classes too (“Top 10 Reasons College…”). These would also lead them to be more competitive towards whatever sport they are playing because they have more energy to work for it. When someone have been working all day one something, they usually tired right? Well this is the exact scenario for college athletes every single day. The

The NCAA is one of the most profitable organizations in the world due to their monopoly on major college sports. Across the country there are over one thousand colleges and universities in the NCAA separated into 3 divisions, with a total of 89 different sporting events, and a staggering four hundred thousand student athletes in the organization. The NCAA makes money in primarily one way and that’s ad revenue for the commercials played during an event. In the Men’s NCAA Basketball tournament a 30 second add cost over seven hundred thousand dollars to run. The NCAA is a big business with millions of fans, so it is surprising that so few want to hold them accountable for the damages that they cause in their “amateur athletes”. The only difference

Are college athletes getting ripped off? Are they put into an unfair situation? Currently, college athletes do not get paid and they do not receive wages because the National Collegiate Coaches Association (NCAA) president feels that college athletes are not professionals, they are just college students who also play a sport. College athletes should be paid because the NCAA and colleges collect an extremely large amount of money from the athletes bringing in revenue, and it would make the sport more competitive.

The NCAA makes an average of almost 1 billion dollars per year, there has been a huge discussion and controversy going on about whether or not college athletes should get paid or not. There have been numerous cases where student’s athletes have had consequences brought upon them because they have taken improper benefits from booster or even their own coaches. The NCAA makes plenty of money off these athletes from sporting events to jersey sales. College athletes are expected to miss numerous amounts of class time do to the nationally televised games that bring in revenue. I also believe if paid there will be a huge decrease in athletes accepting improper benefits from booster and other. For these reasons that I have listen this is why I

Paying collegiate athletes is a very controversial topic that has been talked about since the creation of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in 1910. People believe that the rules that are in place now for collegiate athletes should remain the same, which classifies college athletes as amateurs, banning them from earning any type of compensation for their athletic ability. Other people think that college athletes should be paid for many reasons, including their dedication, risk of injury, competitive unbalance, and because of the profits, the NCAA makes from athletic events. Student-athletes in college do not get the same opportunities to do certain things as people that are not in any athletic events. Most college students

The final decision on whether to pay college athletes has the ability to change college sports dramatically in many aspects. Paying college athletes would be a negative addition to college sports. There are plenty of uncertainties when it comes to the amount of money each player would earn, especially with thousands of colleges in America in different financial states.

There has been a lot of talk about college-athletes for the past couple of years in America. One of the biggest question is if college-athletes should get paid to play or not? This topic obviously has two sides to it. One side people are pushing the idea of paying these college-athletes thousands of dollars to play that sport. On the other side people are not liking the idea of paying student-athletes to play that sport and they’re only in college. This paper will examine whether or not paying student-athletes is a good idea or a bad idea. This document will support the fact the student-athletes should not get paid to play any sports at any college level. This document will only follow football but will have the same effect on other sports. Their will be three main points for this discussion. First being that college students are too young and immature. Next point will show some profession players that really fall under these categories. The last point will show some of the reasons why people think they should get paid. If a student plays a college sport, this is their time to develop their skills and only professionals should get paid.

More than 460,000 student athletes compete in the NCAA alone, many of which are D1 athletes and participate in one the major sports (NCAA). With college athletics on the rise for popularity, March Madness basketball tournament generates more than $1 billion each year in ad revenue (Green). The last audited number for revenue released by the NCAA reported was a yearly revenue of $871.6 million (NCAA). Many think with all the money floating around these athletes should be paid in some way, others argue otherwise (Debate). There is strong controversy whether college athletes should be compensated other than scholarships.

What Is More Important? ”Money is flooding into these athletic departments and the athletes benefit in many ways, but do athletes deserve to be paid for what they do?” (Walch). It is hard to make a living out of football in college because the athletes devotes their time and body to the sport, but aren’t getting money which is needed to make a living. The college athletes are the ones who bring in the money, but they don’t get any of it (Meshefejian).