NCAA Athletic Salaries

College sports are a phenomenon that keeps viewers coming back for more. Stated in an article on Money Nation the NCAA makes an estimated $1 billion per year and this number is still growing. What really is insane is that all that money is made off of college athletes, who don’t get a penny from that total number. The debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid has been around for decades and probably will still be here for years to come. Paying college athletes would make the teams unfair, change how hard players will work to get better, affect the amateurism of college sports, and lastly influence the athlete's willingness to participate in college sports.

Over the past 30 years or so college athletics have gained immense popularity and has resulted in an amazing amount of revenues from the NCAA and its Subsidiaries. The debate as to whether college athletes should be paid even beyond their athletic scholarships. While reading this paper it will answer the question as to whether college athletes should be paid by exploring the reasons for and against the payments of these athletes beyond their scholarship.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) makes roughly $1 billion in income annually and the athletes do not receive any of it. This topic has been debated for many years and is still being debated. The debate dates back to the 1980s and now athletes are demanding that they deserve to be paid since profits are made off of them. Some athletes such as former and current basketball and football players came together with lawsuits to federal courts asking for rewards from profits NCAA makes gets of them. Research has opened several different opinions on this matter. There are many pros and cons for paying college athletes. College sports provide a huge source of the university’s income. The athletes, however, receive their scholarship

For about a decade, the debate between whether collegiate athletes should be paid while playing has been contemplated. Now, the focus has moved from all sports to two specific areas, football and men’s basketball. Sprouting from many court cases filed against the NCAA to some ugly sandals dealing with the athletes themselves. In the 2010 – 2011 time frame, this controversy really sparked up chatter; eventually leading the current pled for sport reformation. Our student athletes are the ones who are at the expense here stuck in between this large argument. Over the past 10 years, there has been minor things done for either side and the players themselves have started taking things into their own hands. The year 2010 a total of 7 student

Every year, thousands of student athletes across the world sign the NCAA’s 08-3A Form, also called the “Student-Athlete” form, which waives their right to receive money for the use of their name and image. Like many of us in this class, these college athletes devote their time to their academics while spending additional hours with training and practices throughout the day and receive no stipend in return. This 08-3A form defines college athletes as amateurs, who cannot receive payment for playing their desired sport. While their schools and coaches may make millions of dollars in salaries and endorsement deals and are the highest-paid public employees in many states due to their performances in their desired sport, these “amateurs” can never

Furthermore, where should the money come from? Is it the responsibility of the school to pay these athletes or the NCAA? Other questions include how much should students-athletes be paid, how often, will it work in a similar way that professional contracts work, etc.? All these questions reveal how difficult it would be to change the college athletic system to compensate college athletes. Regardless of what number of individuals feels that athletes ought not to be paid for their ability, there is pretty much the same number of individuals whom feel they ought to. There are numerous reasons why individuals think a student athlete ought to be adjusted. Some of those reasons incorporate; individuals feel that frequently the college utilizes these athletes as boards for their school. Additionally, the universities are "offering the athletes' names and achievements for the schools own acknowledgment. “Athletic organizations are utilizing college athletes to offer their items, along these lines the athletes ought to see a portion of the money that is earned. It has even been demonstrated that promoting through understudy athletes extraordinarily impacts more youthful

“College Athletes for Hire, The Evolution and Legacy of the NCAA’s Amateur Myth” written by Allen L. Sack and Ellen J. Staurowsky. In their book, the authors enlighten the reader on such issues as athletic scholarships, professionalism in college sports, and favoritism for athletes as well as many more important legal, and ethical issues that we as a country need to address. In this paper I will not do a standard book report by simply regurgitating the information I read in their book.

The NCAA feels the athletes should not be paid. Horace Mitchell from the NCAA Board of Directors states

For example Josh Huff a former wide receiver at the university of Oregon, states, “it’s ok for the NCAA to make money off my name and likeness, but once I go charge people to get in my party it’s a problem.” COLLEGIATE ATHLETES: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN NCAA AMATEURISM AND A STUDENT ATHLETE'S RIGHT OF PUBLICITY is an article that explains the unfairness in this situation. Because of his displeasure with the non-compensated and amateurism rule, josh began to shed light on the truth of that student athlete’s right are being violated. The NCAA alone makes millions of revenue of the hard work of these student athletes, names and participation in collegiate athletics. While the only thing justifies the decision, keeping them from being paid is that they already are receiving free education as well as college stipend. Looking at the meaning of amateurism and its purpose this article is to back up student athletes and recognize that their work and role in the NCAA is a little deeper than amateur status. Universities are making money of these students hard work and while the names on the team roster are what generate the demand, the ones in the backgrounds get compensated very handsomely. As stated in this article “The NCAA’s purpose is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body and, by so doing, retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports.” But this clear line is already crossed when universities allow their students to become personal sales pitches and promotional puppets. See a lot of schools athletic revenue thrives of the backs of these students, literally using the names of these students and their success to uplift their school

According to the NCAA, student-athletes are students first and athletes second. However over the last decade there have been many questions raised about what the actual definition of what a student-athlete really is. This is because of the millions of dollars generated by institutions that broadcasting and promoting these “student-first” athletes. The main question that arises from this is should the NCAA and or institutions/ conferences be paying athletes for their services? By looking at the billions of dollars a year that the business of college sports generates just in television and radio time alone, indicates that student athletes should be paid. If these schools and the NCAA are making billions of dollars

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.

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.

College athletes should not be paid. “ They argue that the main purpose of going to college is to get a education, not to make money” (“Should college”...1). College is not a job, it is a place to learn. Also many college athletes receive scholarships to attend that school. “The value of the scholarships athletes receive during four years of college can be well over $250,000” (Weiss et al.1). Therefore, athletes

A September court decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the status quo of "amateurism," a principle that essentially means student players can't be compensated beyond what it costs to attend college. In other words, college students shouldn't expect big payments or NFL-sized contracts for their athletic exploits anytime soon, even as they help feed a multi-million dollar beast of merchandise and ticket sales.

Salaries, wages, and compensations have always been major and generally controversial topics in democratic America. And, with the rising popularity of college athletics, particularly football, compensation (or lack thereof) for college athletes has recently been a hot topic in American sports. While some of the debate stems from the similarity between responsibilities college athletes have to their programs and those of professionals, most of the issue involves the principles of amateurism. Recent “scandals” involving college athletes such as Terrelle Pryor, Johnny Manziel, and Todd Gurley have raised questions about the ethics of amateurism, particularly with regard to the NCAA organization. The issue is found in a very gray area, where there is most likely no definitive one-size-fits-all solution, but the resolution of this issue is one that will change and shape the future of college athletics across the national landscape.