Joe Nocera Analysis

The hot topic in amateur sports has been as to whether or not college athletes should be paid. The NCAA amateur rule states that an athlete in college sports cannot be paid other than their athletic scholarship. These athletes spend a tremendous amount of time at school practice and then working on schoolwork after practice. The NCAA is an organization that oversees all of the athletes that make up the basic unit of intercollegiate sports. The success of the NCAA whether it’s through the sale of merchandise, game day revenue or NCAA tournaments that each individual sports has, despite the absolute success of these tournaments these athletes receive any monetary compensation .Some of the main reasons why the NCAA lack of payments are that it wants to maintain its amateur status and

In the video, Meet King joe, an American worker is portrayed as the luckiest worker in the world. The video is persuading other people that life as an American worker is the best life ever. An American worker earns 100 times more money than a Chinese worker. A Chinese worker should work hard to earn 10 cents while an American worker uses machines to do their work and earn $10 every day. There are advantages and disadvantages in being both workers. An American worker obviously earn more with the help of technology and Chinese worker earn lower without the use of modern technology. We as community might think life as the American worker might be happier but we must always remember money can’t buy happiness. The Chinese worker might be happier

Throughout my paper I will demonstrate many different ideas on whether college athletes should get paid why they should not. I will talk about the things paying the athletes will do for the NCAA, how it is unfair for athletes to be used and not get anything out of those moments, and they generate revenue for the NCAA just on certain players presence. I will also talk about why college athletes should not get paid. They

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.

College athletic programs are among the most popular sporting events in America. With this rise in popularity, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its colleges have also seen a rise in revenue in recent years. In 2014, the NCAA made over 900 million dollars in revenue. Some collegiate coaches, such as Kentucky’s John Calipari, have yearly salaries in the millions, not counting incentives and endorsement deals. While, clearly, money is being made, NCAA regulations ban collegiate athletes from being paid. Many question this rule and argue that athletes at the college level earn and deserve pay for play. The debate to pay or not to pay college athletes rages on despite the latest court ruling supporting NCAA policies. Because colleges and universities earn such a profit from sporting events, many fans feel it is only fair to distribute some of the wealth to the players. Supporters of paying student athletes feel that these young men and women should be fairly compensated for the time demanded of the athletes and the stress put on the athletes, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. Those in favor of paying college athletes contend that athletic and academic work ethic at both high school and collegiate levels will improve, as well as, fiscal responsibility in these young adults. The NCAA argues that paying athletes would negatively affect their

The National College Athletic Association, better known as the NCAA has been involved in constant turmoil for quite some time now. In the college sports world, there are two variant sides by which neither can come to a final decision. Those side are for and against paying college athletes for participation. While some agree that “coaches are paid too much for players to be struggling to buy food” (Connolly), some actually seem to disagree. Agree or disagree, the athletes deserve a resolution because the longer the issue, the longer the struggle. The two side fail to realize that their arguments and discord does

Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.

Throughout the years college sports have been about the love of the game, filled with adrenaline moments. However, the following question still remains: Should college athletes get paid to play sports in college? Seemingly, this debate has been endless, yet the questions have gone unanswered. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) plays a vital role in this debate. The NCAA is a billion dollar industry, but yet sees that the athlete should get paid for their hard work and dedication.

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.

Howard Chudacoff raises the controversial question of whether or not college athletes should be paid during a time of the year when people are most focused on college athletics, March Madness. Chudacoff is a firm believer that college athletes are given enough amenities as it is and do not deserve extra compensation or paychecks. His main arguments to support his position revolve around the royalties that power five athletes receive in regards to education centers, training facilities, and the fact that these players receive a free education. Chudacoff paints the picture of these facilities throughout his article and appeals to the reader’s pathos by descriptively showing the reader how college athletes really do live like millionaires.

As college sports continue to progress and attract millions of fanatics, the idea of paying these young athletes seems more reasonable considering all the revenue they generate. New York Times features an article by economist Joe Nocera, called Let’s Start Paying College Athletes. Nocera argues that payment to college is inevitable, the NCAA generates $6 billion dollars in revenue, and can only compensate the athletes with an inadequate education due to all the time athletes spend contributing to the athletic department. His professional background and analysis, with the help of a few others, helped Nocera develop a 5 element plan to reform college athletics. Some of the elements such as lifetime health insurance

Several times throughout the article he seems to have a tone that hurts his credibility and arguments, by saying “It is ludicrous to argue that the Power 5 programs cannot afford this.” This harsh, unintentional bashing at others who do not believe in what the author is saying hurts his claim and argument by talking down to his audience; as if they do not know what they are reading. Another remark he makes is, “the appeal of college athletics, in no small part, is that the players are students at the universities, so they would still have to take classes. But their loads should be reduced during their years of eligibility, and once their playing days are over, they should be able to finish their education free. That’s only fair.” Here the author is almost stating that regular non college student athletes are not at the same level of importance as the athletes, possibly making some readers frustrated that these athletes get the easy road throughout college. Also, by saying they will be able to go to college free after playing, makes students going to school after graduating for a higher degree feel unimportant and unprivileged compared to the

Thesis: College athletes should not get paid due to the financial restrictions of the NCAA, the imbalance of competition, and the fact that these young adults are students.

Abstract:  Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.

"You have your mother's eyes" or "that smile is just like your dad's." Sayings we've all heard, but not for one Bradford County man.