Essay on Paying College Athletes

Many student-athletes can have their whole career, their passion, and love of their respected sport taken away from them with just 1 play. The student-athletes are representing their respective school and making the school more popular and more students will want to enroll there and the student-athletes are making the NCAA millions of dollars, but the NCAA will not give the student-athletes just a little allowance because it will “ruin the integrity of college sports”. Student athletes-athletes should get paid because students could get hurt in one play, the NCAA makes millions of dollars on the the players, and it will make the players do smarter things with their money.

When it comes to college athletics, there always will be a problem that arises. It is one of the most controversial topics there is. One of the main issues within athletics is the idea of whether to pay college athletes or not. Several studies have been done along with articles from various sources. This has been on the rise especially since “March Madness” is coming up. “March Madness” may only consist of three weekends, however, an 11 billion dollar deal is made to televise the games (Wilbon). This is when you have to take the time to sit back and contemplate whether these college athletes really are getting the fair end of the stick. Under NCAA laws it is forbidden to pay these athletes for their performance yet at the same time they

Some pros, or why the idea makes sense are: players should be entitled to some form of compensation due to the money they bring to the school and the injury risk they face each time they play their respective sports. Athletes from poor families need money to be able to support themselves since their families cannot do it for them. The money the football and men’s basketball teams should go back to the players instead of paying for sports who make no profits. If the athletes were paid it could help keep kids that aren’t ready to go pro from going pro early. While pay for play sounds nice, there are also reasons it wouldn’t work. A big question that would come up would be, where would the money come from? A majority of athletic programs don’t make enough of a profit already. Title IX would make it so each athlete, regardless of sport, would have to be paid the same. Many believe that non-revenue sports would have to be abandoned since there wouldn’t be sufficient funds to support them.

The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many

College athletics are becoming more like the professional leagues except for one big issue, money. Student athletes bring in a vast amount of revenue for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) not to mention recognition and notoriety regarding the athlete’s university. However, the debate continues as to whether student athletes should or should not receive payment for playing college sports.

This could solve the problem with some players not having enough money to live. According to College Student Journal, 54% of college students said that student athletes should be paid for their services, but if they were to get paid, colleges might have to increase tuition and fees in order to get enough money to pay the athletes (Schneider, 2001). Some people say that paying college athletes will reduce the amount of illegal payments to the athletes. That is not necessarily true, because illegal payments still could occur to ensure that an athlete will complete a task. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) makes around $100 million per year (Edelman, 2013, P.61). Some people might say that it is wrong for the NCAA to not give any money to the athletes that make most of the money for them, but it is against the rules to pay them. If colleges were to pay students, the college trying to get a student to attend their school in order to play football would have to offer more money than several different colleges, in order to intrigue the student into going to that college (Kisska-Schulze, 2014, P.32-34). There is a difference between a professional sport and a college sport. “The difference between a purely commercial model (professional sport) and the educational model is the purpose for generating revenue: in a commercial entity, the purpose is to make a profit,

Even though an additional $2,000 a semester does not seem like a lot of money, for some smaller market colleges this extra expense may create problems. That is why I suggest either requiring the NCAA itself to provide the extra money to the players or allowing the players to make money off of jersey sales, autograph signings, etc. By potentially taking this financial burden away from the schools and transferring it the NCAA you avoid putting undo stress on smaller schools and instead ask the NCAA, a multi-billion dollar industry, to barely dip into their huge expanse of funding/profit. Furthermore, the NCAA itself is considered a non-profit organization so instead of hoarding the billions of dollars a year that it earns it should be giving money back to the student-athletes who have made the NCAA what it is today (SOURCE). Even though many schools would not be able to pay student athletes the extra scholarship money many larger schools could easily provide this additional scholarship money. For instance, some schools already pay their head football coaches millions of dollars a year. One specific example of this is Alabama Head Football coach Nick Saban. Saban makes six million dollars a year and also receives other

Imagine being a college football star and finding out that a jersey representing your school with your name and number on the back is not only selling for $110 in stores nationally, but it is profiting higher than some professional sports jerseys. Now, imagine that you as that student-athlete will not be making a single penny off your institution using your name for monetary profit. Why you ask? Because according to the governing body of collegiate sports, the National Collegiate Athletic Association or NCAA, this would be considered an act that would bring an athlete out of his amateur status. Yet, it is okay to exploit that athlete’s talents as if he or she were a professional

The National Athletic Association’s (NCAA) current policy of not paying college athletes needs to be changed. Athletes need to be compensated for their labor, to ensure their well-being at the Universities instead of using them to gain a profit. There needs to be a change in the world of college sports, there needs to be a Union for college athletes to insure they are taken care of instead of NCAA executives, Athletic Directors and the Coaches of these schools. A quote by Shabazz Napier point guard for the University of Connecticut tells why there need to be a change to the

A lot of people to this day wonder if student athletes should be paid. This topic has created a lot of controversy among a ton of people. Yes, paying student athletes seems harmless, but if you look beyond the big picture, it could ultimately ruin the NCAA and all college sports for good. UWIRE Text stated, “Getting paid would suggest that college athletes are simply carrying out job responsibilities instead of a recreational activity on game day, which could take away the fun and sanctity of watching the NCAA” (UWIRE Text). Student athletes in college should not be paid to play their respected sports due to the fact that they are already getting paid and that it would make the NCAA organization uneven in the payment of players, the classroom,

Luckily their revenues do not correspond. Spending millions more to pay players would only make a more difficult financial situation for schools that are already subsidizing athletics. If they expand athletic costs by millions of dollars, that means they’ll be draining the academic budgets even more than they already are. Although Huma, the NCPA and CAPA president says, “The idea that there 's not enough revenue out there is ridiculous. The major conferences recently signed television deals worth an additional $1.2 billion over their previous deals,” he says. He also notes that “schools already share athletic revenue in a variety of ways. If the NCAA is seriously worried about the schools that aren 't making money, the association could institute a revenue-sharing program that would distribute the money more equitably.” (Huma, 2014). Even though student athletes work incredibly hard to not only stay good but also thrive in their collegiate endeavors, that doesn’t mean the university they attend should pay them for it. That’s their choice to play, college is a place for obtaining an education. Not trying to get paid for playing a sport like a professional. The question of whether or not student athletes should get paid arises primarily in reference to student athletes who play football and basketball at NCAA Division I institutions with high profile and high income athletic programs. The argument is that because some institutions receive millions of dollars from the

Should College Athletes Be Paid? This question has the propensity to cause much commotion within the various collegiate athletic divisions; e.g., NCAA, BIG 10, MEAC, and CIAA. The complexity involved in flushing out an answer to this question coupled with our status as college students may have played a direct influence in the decision of the group Long Term Money’s (L.T.M.) choice to use this topic as an interest for group assignment. A “student athlete” is a participant in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which he or she is enrolled. Student athletes must typically balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete. Due to educational institutions being colleges, they offer athletic scholarships in various sports; therefore, the proverbial question of which came first, “the chicken or the egg?” comes to mind. Are the individuals who would be directly affected by such an action, considered students’ firsts, or athletes, and if they are athletes, should be they be considered employees governed by significant employment and labor laws eligible for pay? If they are now employee, how will this affect their pursuit of the educational process, eligibility for scholarships, classes, study, etc.; what changes that must take place for the plan (if granted) to be carried out, would it be consistent across the entire country. So, with so many unanswered questions, we ask again; “Should College Athletes Be

I am against paying college athletes. I am against it because the athletes are not just athletes; they are students too. The athletes are getting paid to go to college at the school that they are attending. Being an athlete is second to being a student, because if the student-athletes do not make the grade to pass then they can not play. There is already so much going against paying these student-athletes. Will all the athletes be paid the same amount? Will a starting football player at Ohio State get paid the same amount or more than a walk on redshirt freshman that will not get to go on the field on Saturdays for three more years? Will some schools get to pay the student-athletes more than others? For say will Alabama football get

The NCAA has many rules that are disagreeable. Not everyone can agree on every single rule. It just would be impossible to make it for everyone to be happy. One of the most controversial rules is whether collegiate athletes should be paid or not. People disobey this rule and are forced to suffer greatly making the players and colleges upset. Both sides want to make it fair for the both the players and the NCAA. Colleges are usually left out when talking about this question even though they will be greatly affected either way. Allowing this to happen would give players the majority of the advantages. The NCAA would have a few advantages but wouldn't benefit as greatly as the players. This rule won't have major effects on the players or NCAA but will affect the colleges. This debate has been going on for years and has heated up over the past few years.

Some college athletes were starving in their dorm after practicing and playing in games for a week straight. Since they make no money from the sport the play they decided to call and beg their coach to buy food for them. Recently the have been pushing him to talk to someone about getting them paid to play college football. This isn’t the only time this has happened. Student compensation has been a big topic in the world of sports. The NCAA has been an amateur league ever since its creation. It was never thought of widely to pay college athletes 10-20 years ago but many are thinking it may be it may be time to start paying the athletes. Since the beginning of college sports and the NCAA there have been many debates on whether or not college