Let’s Start Paying College Athletes Essay

Without the sport, you have no money coming in. You simplify it to no players = no money. This model also takes into account the fact that college sports are completely different now than they were when the NCAA was founded over 100 years ago. Economically, the decision by universities to not pay players is a genius method of exploitation. Let’s take the University of Texas for example. Currently, a nonresident business major pays a little less than $17,000 dollars. A Texas resident for the same major pays a little more than $5,000. A four-year degree would cost less than $70,000 and $20,000 respectively. These are the 2009-2010 statistics which is the same year the Longhorns football team went to the BCS National Championship game. The very same year the reported revenue from the football team alone was 69 million dollars. Out of the 120 players on the team only 8 were from out of state. That means (assuming 100% of the players have a full scholarship) that the school paid $736,000 for scholarships. What this means is that because of the football teams success, over 68 million dollars was generated as pure profit because of the players hard work. After looking at the facts the idea that a scholarship is sufficient to reimburse the players is a pretentious one. If the universities whole goal is to ensure that the students get a proper education then the stipulations on the scholarships should be enough to refute that. If an underclassman student-athlete

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.

         The NBA has seen many different players come and go throughout its 50 years of existence. In the last 15 years, there has been a boom of underclassmen leaving college early to enter the NBA draft. The last NBA draft in June, the top ten picks alone were underclassmen(Sports Illustrated, 264). Many more underclassmen are entering the NBA this year. The typical college career for the basketball players is playing until your junior year, then going pro. The NBA and the NCAA must do something in order to keep these young players in college.

We often forget that playing a sport is not the only way to earn a scholarship. Many students are accepted for exceptional grades, involvement in the band, clubs, or being well rounded. Most of these students just have to study to keep their scholarship, while the athletes have to work hard and be a student. In a competitive market, “workers” are paid according to the value of the output they produce (Heath). It does not seem right that the college journalist can sell their piece to a paper for extra cash, or the local band can play for a few dollars at the bar Saturday night, or the biology major that takes an internship at the school lab can be profitable yet college athletes cannot. Under the NCAA they are not allowed to make any money of their skill. Any college student should be able to endorse products (Wilbon). This is why the idea of going to school for free should not be an argument against paying athletes, because that is not the case and they have earned it.

“Here’s Why We Shouldn’t Pay College Athletes” written by John R. Thelin, illustrates how collegiate players should be prohibited from earning any funds from universities or private agents because they already receive a great amount of grants and scholarships based on their ability in a certain field. The author touches on the scholarship model vs the salary model, he leans slightly towards the scholarship model by using the example of how taxes play into the situation if a player captures a salary. Also Thelin states that student athletes should have something to look forward to in the professional leagues, a large income does just the trick. Furthermore, the reaction I had when I read John Thelin’s statements included that he is one hundred percent spot on with his perception that participants in college activities are already getting their schooling for free. As well as the idea that these

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.

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.

Every child at some point in their lives dream about becoming a rock star, doctor or an astronaut, but the career that stands out the most is becoming a professional athlete. Why? One reason could be the ever increasing media coverage on each individual sport with certain channels devoted for just that particular sport, keeping viewers updated and thirsting to get out and play. Another could be the ease of getting out in the backyard as a kid to shoot the basketball, throw a football, or hit a baseball because it is harder to perform heart surgery or fly to the moon when you're only a child. With that being said; it is easy to look up to a professional athlete and put your heart and soul into them wearing

The idea of paying college athletes to compete is not new, unlike most people think. This debate has been around since the 1800’s. The college sports industry makes about $11 billion in annual revenues. Fifty colleges report annual revenues that exceed $50 million. Nationally in 2010-11, the top 15 college basketball programs generated roughly $293 million, less than a third of what the top 15 football programs generated, baseball makes very little money compare to basketball and football according to Jeffrey Dorfman. These revenues are coming from multiple sources, such as ticket sales, sponsorship, and broadcasting rights. The National Collegiate Athletic Association recently sold broadcast rights to its annual men 's basketball tournament for upwards of $770 million per season. At the University of Alabama, the head football coach, Nick Saban, recently signed a contract paying him $7 million per year; more than 91 times the average wage of an Orange County public school teacher. However, the facts I have mentioned so far concerns football only. Football and basketball are the biggest sources of athletic revenues in the majority of universities. So with all this money involved, should student athletes get a percentage of the revenue their sport brings to the university?

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.

One of the most controversial subjects we as individuals hear about this day in age is whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid. Many people argue that these athletes do intact, deserve to be paid for their time and hard work. NCAA athletes create a name for themselves by playing and performing well on their college teams. The better these athletes perform, the more publicity the school revives. This then leads to higher ticket sales and stores around campus selling jerseys and other clothing items with athletes names and numbers on the back. NCAA schools have become comfortable with using athletes’ names to bring in a revenue for the school, and yet the athletes never see any of that money. On the other hand, many people believe that these athletes do not deserve, nor should they expect to receive payment in return. They believe that these scholarships and the education are payment in itself. Some even bring up the question on if it is affordable or even realistic to pay college athletes.

Every child, at some point in their life, dream about becoming a rock star, a doctor or an astronaut. The career that stands out the most in young boys and girls dreams, is becoming a professional athlete; Why is that? One reason could be the ever increasing media coverage on each individual sport. Certain channels are devoted just for that particular sport, keeping viewers updated and thirsting to get out and play just like professionals on television. Another reason could be, how easy it is to get out in the backyard as a kid to shoot the basketball, throw a football, or hit a baseball because it is a lot harder to perform heart surgery or fly to the moon when you're only a child. With that being said, it is so easy to look up to a

Many people believe that college athletes should be paid for how much revenue they bring to their school. However, there are also people who think they should not get paid because they already have numerous advantages that other students do not have. Student-athletes at the Division 1 level that play men's basketball and football should not necessarily be paid a salary but should be able to make money off of their accomplishments, especially if we hold them on a high pedestal as we do now.

Most student-athletes playing a sport in college are there on an athletic scholarship. The scholarship is granted to them by their respective schools and is worth anywhere from $50,000 to $200,000. According to Edelman, the football program alone at University of Alabama brought in roughly 143.3 million dollars of revenue. In perspective, that’s about 2 million per player. Even though Alabama is an elite program and brings in more than the average football program, the NCAA brought in nearly $845 billion in 2011 per Sonny. Now it is obvious there many ways a university brings in revenue, but it is safe to say that a player is worth more than that $100,000 scholarship. In fact, a substantial share of college sports’ revenues stay in the hands of a select few administrators, athletic directors, and coaches. Now think about what college athletics would be without the world class athletes it has today, or without any athletes at all. If a school didn’t “award” athletes these scholarships, there would be

Division I college athletics have come a very long way since its original erection in the late 1800s as only something that occurred at the Ivy Leagues. Today, there is now a side which advocates for paid compensations for college athletes (this is mostly focused in football and basketball). According to the NCAA 's current policy on intercollegiate compensation the athlete first must be considered an amateur. This rule that is in place is extremely redundant because in order for a student to be eligible to be an NCAA student athlete they have to be considered an amateur. This means that, basically as of right now, there is no strongly enforcing rule that is in place to determine whether or not athletes should be paid. The world of college sports has grown rapidly over the past few decades with new television broadcasting contracts, video games, and overall popularity; making it a legitimate broadcasting rival to pro sports leagues such as the NFL or NBA. The reason why college sports have become so popular is due to the increased demand for television games which stems from the excitement of the teams playing. College sports are what they are today because of the players who have become increasingly more exciting to watch. Under normal circumstances, one would be in agreement with the notion of paying a student athlete that is on a team bringing in money from broadcasted and sold out games as a form of compensation. I am on the opposite side of this argument. The