Should college student-athletes be paid has become a much debated topic. The incentive for a student-athlete to play a college sport should not be for money, but for the love of the game. It has been argued that colleges are making money and therefore the student-athlete should be compensated. When contemplating college income from sporting events and memorabilia from popular sports, such as football and basketball, it must not be forgotten that colleges do incur tremendous expense for all their sports programs. If income from sports is the driving factor to pay student-athletes, several major problems arise from such a decision. One problem is who gets a salary and the second problem is how much should they be paid. Also, if the income …show more content…
There would be no rush to graduate because the student-athlete is receiving free education, housing and meals as well as making money. College sports should be played for the love of the game, not for the love of money. If the NCAA decided to pay college athletes, it would create more problems than solutions. For example, if student-athletes are offered a salary, most likely the cost of school tuition will go up because the money paid to the student-athletes must come from somewhere and the revenue from sporting events and memorabilia will not be enough to cover all student-athlete salaries as well as expenses to run all the college’s sports programs. In addition, not all college sports draw the same fan base and therefore, income is greatly varied between sports programs which in turn will create an unfair balance when determining the salary for each student-athlete. All student-athletes regardless of which sport they are participating would expect equal pay. If the student-athletes are paid a salary, in addition to receiving a scholarship, which includes, tuition, books, housing and meals, it would be grossly unfair to non-student-athletes because tuition costs would be increased dramatically and ultimately be unattainable for the non-student-athlete. Without reasonable tuition costs, less students will attend and in turn this loss of
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
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.
Which is against NCAA rules, athletes are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever: Taken pay, or the promise of pay, for competing in that sport. Nor are athletes allowed to work anywhere where there image maybe use to promote business. These amateur athletes have no incentive to stay in college and finish their respective degrees, as many cannot afford to pay for the increasingly expensive college experience. Some even argue, College athletes are being exploited by their schools, which make millions of dollars off of intercollegiate athletics. Everywhere else athletes are paid, so why shouldn’t college students too?
Now granted college student athletes usually have scholarships which covers tuition, housing, fees, and course related books. That’s what a lot of people argue about, when someone says “college students should get paid.” College student athletes don’t have time for a job at all. The schedule of an average college student athlete consists of going to classes, practicing for 2-3 hours, going to a mandatory study hall to do homework or study. These athletes spend up to 44.8 per week on their sports (Hartnell) . It's almost nearly impossible for college athletes to even have time to have a good paying job. Colleges should pay their athletes' in some payment, not saying that they should get $1 million but $2500 wouldn't kill anything. People claim that the NCAA couldn't afford to pay college student athletes, but the NCAA is a multi-billion company. Nevertheless college student athletes need some extra pocket change to help them make things meet, and to help college athletes learn to manage their
A study related to paying student athletes showed, “…opponents of payment believed that student-athletes were already paid, and paid well through an athletic scholarship. DeShazier (2000) reported that in addition to an athletic scholarship, academic tutoring, special computer laboratories, and other benefits student-athletes receive, a college degree will earn and employee, on average, $17,089 per year more than one without a college degree.”(“College Student Journal”) If these athletes are going to be making more money than the general public when they graduate, without having to pay back loans, then there is no need for additional payment while participating in college sports. All these arguments pertain to why athletes shouldn’t receive extra money.
With the current system, most of the profits of the NCAA make their way back to the athletes, as explained above, but if athletes were to be paid, interest in college sports would suffer. Currently, fans of college sports, myself included, watch college sports as opposed to professional sports largely because they realize the players are playing for the love of the game as opposed to for profit. If college players were to get paid, this reason would be moot, and college sports would essentially turn into a minor league for the professional leagues. As a result, college sports would lose most of their viewership and earnings
Today's childhood kids try to join the positions of the best who ever played the game, and college is the first step in that American dream. At this level kids surrender a lot of time to put in hours every day trying to be the best of their ability. As of right now, a college athlete cannot be paid or promoted in a way that benefits the school or the athlete. A developing debate focuses on whether these athletes should be paid for their hard working dedication.
Over the recent years of college sports, there have been controversies and arguments concerning the payment of athletes that are still students at colleges and universities. As the NCAA makes more and more revenue, people, especially the college students really push to the thought of being compensated for what they do. There are many reasons why this issue simply will not budge. Firstly, the NCAA is just too massive of an organization to compensate every student. Students also get compensated in other ways other than just a paycheck. Also, it can cause problems with their school life, and financial irresponsibility.
The American dream of making a living in sports at both the collegiate and professional level grows each year. The youth of today’s society strive to join the ranks of the professional athletes they worship, and college is the beginning of that dream. Over the past few decades, college athletics have gained immense popularity across universities in the United States. Intercollegiate sports bring in a surplus of revenue to their respective universities as well as build a reputation for the college. Athletes attending Division I sports go to their particular schools in hopes of fulfilling their dream of making it professionally. There is a long-debated argument on whether college athletes at the Division I level should be paid to attend school
To pay, or not to pay? That is the question when discussing the proposal of collegiate athletes earning a salary for participating in sports programs. Collegiate sports programs thrive throughout the nation. A forefront in american culture, college sports bring in a multitude of money, attention, and prestige for the school represented. Crazed fans, proud alumni and every-day spectators are entertained each year by college athletes giving there all in the sport they love. These athletes are not given any money out of all the money raised and are often seen as used. Despite arguments towards collegiate athlete salary proposals, payment for playing collegiate sports should not be made a possibility because earning an education in itself reaps financial benefits, the recognition of the athletic department’s roles displays flaws, and athletes are informed from the beginning what to expect out their scholarship as well as the system. Though many people find the leeching off of these devoted athletes to be a issue, paying these athletes is not the a possible solution to the problem.
The first and foremost reason student athletes should receive some form of payment is simply because there is plenty of money to go around. As previously stated, the NCAA makes over 11 billion dollars annually across all their sporting platforms. This is no way a modest amount of money. The problem today is how that money is distributed among those within the NCAA system. For example, Alabama’s head football coach, Nick Saban, is slated to make more than 11 million dollars this year alone. Additionally, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany is said to be receiving a 20 million dollar bonus at the end of this year (Armour NP). And this is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to higher-ups in the NCAA receiving outrageous salaries while players get nothing. In 2013, the average salary for a BCS eligible football coach was 2.05 million dollars, and in today’s 2017 world that figure would only be higher. Additionally, the average salary of a division I men’s
The author concludes that it does not seem practical to pay collegiate athletes. There are too many barriers to keep programs from doing this. Athletic departments do not generate the needed funds to do so, and as a result trying to pay athletes could lead to the termination of programs. Paying student athletes could also result in losing the charm currently associated with college sports, by turning it into somewhat of a business.
College athletics has become a very prominent phenomenon in American society within the last few decades. A new American dream of becoming wealthy through sports at both the collegiate and professional level is rapidly growing. Today’s young minds strive to join the ranks of the worlds greatest and college athletics is the beginning of that dream. At the collegiate level athletes sacrifice a great amount in order to be eligible to play the next big game. Today, a college athlete is not permitted to be given any money or marketed in a way that profits the school or the athlete. A growing controversy pivots on whether college athletes deserve to make money for all their hard work. Every year, the NCAA and universities earn millions of dollars from athletes that every average Joe loves to watch. For instance, the University of Southern California (USC) probably made a few million from their stars Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush. Should these athletes be given some of the earnings since the money was made because of them? After considering the viewpoints of those who argue that college athletes should not be paid, this essay argues that athletes at the collegiate level should be compensated. College athletes should be paid because of the amount of money that the schools receive, the amount of money that the National Collegiate Athletic Association receives, and the sacrifices that college athletes make in order to maintain
The idea of paying college athletes has been an ongoing debate since the early 1900s. With current television revenue resulting from NCAA football bowl games and March Madness in basketball, there is now a commotion for compensating both football and basketball players beyond that of an athletic scholarship. Because of the title “Student-athlete”, college athletes have the obligation to be a student first, and an athlete second and should not be paid to play.
Well, college athletes already thrive in many free perks just for playing a sport such as; get sports scholarships, housing, meals, and many more. Also, there’s no fair way to pay the athletes, the athletic programs cannot afford to pay them, the NCAA is a non-profit organization, and lastly playing a college sport is more of a privilege, not a job nor an errand. Paying college athletes would be a ridiculous thing to do, considering their abundant amount of benefits. So, we should think about these benefits and help the NCAA make the right decision, not paying college