Never Land Athletic Team Case Study

students now rank 22nd instead of 19th. And most shocking, they fell from 10th to 20th in reading (Parker,2). If you compare American schools to other renowned top schools world wide such as in Europe and Asia you would see a remarkable difference with the amount of time and money spent on sports. Ripley stated that one football player costs about $1,300 a player. Math, by contrast, cost just $618 a student. And the school district could save $150,000 in one year with cutting school sports and extracurriculars (Ripley,3). Our Johnston School District also has a large price as our state's Athletic Director Gary Ross:

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.

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.

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

Many students participate in extracurricular athletics, but sports are not worth their extreme cost. Amanda Ripley, author of a Scholastic Scope article, states, “Maintaining a grass field can cost more than $20,000 a year” (11). She also says that during out of town games, schools provide transportation for teams, cheerleaders, band, meals, and hotels (Ripley 11). These facts reveal that extracurricular sports waste an outrageous portion of a school’s already quite limited budget and it is absolutely critical to put that money towards updating the campus and creating a better learning environment. Ultimately, if institutions don’t stop squandering their money on after school athletics, the future of education will be a grim one.

Purpose: to connect high school athletes with the colleges that will give them the best chnce to

Colleges bring an incredible amount of money by their sport teams alones. According to John Brill, a sports journalist writer, “College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly.” The money made from these sporting events are not being used correctly which is frustrating many college athletes. The money that is being

Bennett, Dashiell. “Only 22 Of 120 Division I Athletic Programs Made Money Last Year.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc., 15 Jun. 2011. Web. 28 Oct 2014.This supports Frank Crumley’s claim that most athletic programs “work in the red.” The author also shows how football is the big money maker. Not all departments can pay their players. Therefore, it would be unfair for departments that can pay their players to do so. The figures come from the NCAA annual report of revenue and expenses for Division I sports. This is one of my main arguments against paying football players.

The magnitude of the controversy to pay college athletes has intensified over the past few years. It might be due to the prevailing economic atmosphere causing everyone, including aspiring athletes, to look for new ways to make money. It might also be due to many higher educational facilities giving the public access to their annual budget, causing outsiders to focus on the profit of specific athletic programs. However, it might also be due to the coaches’ outrageous salaries and the money that universities make from bowl games and basketball tournaments. Regardless, this has intensified the fact that athletes see none of these profits and this is what implores the simple question of “where is my portion?”

There has been a lot of controversy on whether colleges should be paying the paying their athletes. Brian Frederick, a board member of Sports Fan Coalition and an adjunct professor for Georgetown University’s Sport Industry Management Program, believes colleges have a broken system when it comes to athletes. Frederick’s contemptuous tone discredits sports fan, who believe college athletes already get paid enough with their education, by stating “If a student athlete is hurt or unsuccessful, the coaches and administrators suddenly discard the noble ideals of “education” and a player is left with nothing.” With the use of metaphors and similes, Frederick convinces sport fans to take action and make the calls in order to continue college athletics

The argument of whether or not the NCAA should pay its athletes has been debated for around 8 years now, and right when it seems like there may be a breakthrough another reason comes up for the issue to be put on hold. College athletic programs are multimillion dollar programs and the athletes who make this revenue possible are getting the bare minimum to make it by in these college programs. Last year the Texas A&M athletic program was at the top of the NCAA revenue list bringing in $192,608,876. A third of that revenue comes from ticket sales alone, which leaves the rest to television rights, licensing and other donations. In the NCAA there are 26 colleges which are bringing in over 100 million dollars in NCAA revenue (USA Today 1). But still, Horace claims that “there is a misconception that athletic programs in general are profitable and are making hand-over fist. While truly most operate at a cost to the institution”.

Over the past few years, college athletics has grown immensely, gaining an infinite amount of supporters with no signs of slowing down. Today, sports are no longer just sports; they are becoming a business, leaving the athletes with no profit. The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a multi-billion-dollar organization that would not exist without athletes around the country. Each year, just like the popularity, the revenues that each college makes off athletics also increase but the athletes do not receive any of the compensation despite their work and sacrifices. Throughout one year alone, a division one university’s athletic departments can bring in a revenue that ranges anywhere from $70,000,000 to $180,000,000. This revenue consists of multiple aspects; not just ticket sales. College programs also bring in millions from television and

Southwestern University: F The recent success of Southwestern University’s football program is causing SWU’s president, Joel Wisner, more problems than he faced during the team’s losing era in the early 1990s. For one thing, increasing game-day attendance is squeezing the town of Stephenville, Texas and the campus. Complaints are arising over parking, seating, concession prices, and even a shortage of programs at some games. Dr. Wisner, once again, turns to his stadium manager, Hank Maddux. This time, he needs a guaranteed revenue stream to help fuel the stadium expansion. One source of income could easily be the high-profit game programs. Selling for $6 each, programs are a tricky business. Under substantial pressure from

The following Case Study is about the National Collegiate Athletic Association unethical act in the sport college league. How this league creates big amounts of money which is invest in all short of projects rather than take care of the student-athletes. The study case highlight the two main principles issue that the National Collegiate Athletic Association faces; the money how the student are not getting paid and the academic versus sport.

   Abstract:  The Stadium  construction boom continues, and taxpayers are being forced to pay for new high tech stadiums they don’t want.  These new stadiums create only part-time jobs.  Stadiums bring money in exclusively for professional leagues and not the communities.  The teams are turning public money into private profit.  Professional leagues are becoming extremely wealthy at the taxpayers expense.  The publicly-funded stadium obsession must be put to a stop before athletes and coaches become even greedier.  New stadiums being built hurt public schools, and send a message to children that leisure activities are more important than basic education.  Public money