Personal Statement: Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

In her article she emphasizes the fact that paying college athletes would be completely unfair to other students that attend school. She argues that the student athletes have almost everything provided for them in college and how regular students don’t have some of the opportunities that they do. She also goes on to say that the scholarship that the school provides for their athletes is payment enough, whether it is a full or partial scholarship. She also hints on the fact that being broke and having no money is all a part of the “college experience” and that everybody is struggling to make ends meet and that it everybody is working hard to make money and that a majority of the people who attend college cannot afford to go out and overindulge and spend money on the things that they want, so college athletes should not have this privilege either. Also, smaller colleges would not be able to shell out money like larger colleges could so a large school would be able to pay more for a player than a smaller college would, therefore putting the smaller college at a disadvantage.

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.

College is not a cheap investment, and some of the students are stuck with the job of paying for it without the financial help of family members. The cost of tuition and fees averaged $32,405 at private schools, $9,410 at public schools, and $23,893 for out-of-state students at a public school. (Collegedata.com) Most college students try to hold a job down so they may afford to eat and put quarters in the washing machine so they will have clean clothes the next day. Colleges; however, should not just hand out thousands of dollars to the students, they only need enough for living expenses so they do not have to hold down a job. Student athletes should have a three-meal plan: breakfast, lunch, and dinner. This three-meal plan should be paid for by the college in which the student is attending. The plan would provide student athletes free food three times a day in order for the students to get the nutrition they need to mantain their athletic ability. With this plan, student athletes will not have to stress over mainting a job in order to eat. Student athletes should

College athletes should be paid for the benefaction that they put forth in making that athletic department at their school flourish. Colleges should provide monetary donations monthly along with the scholarships to the athletes to make it easier for them to take care of themselves. This could possibly even out the distribution of money between coach and

A major argument by those who oppose paying college athletes is that they are amateurs who are students first and athletes second. However, that is not nearly the case. Many athletes in college are there to compete and attend school simply because they have to in order to play for that particular team. The NCAA purposely schedules games for times in which players are guaranteed to miss class, for

When we think of college athletes, we always think of how great these athletes are in their sports and how hard they are striving to be better in their sports. But what we do not see is when these athletes aren’t scoring touchdowns or making the buzzer beater 3 pointers is how their regular day to day life is, and how it could be difficult financially. This brings up the question of why are college athletes not currently being compensated for their participation in their sports? Why do they have to rely on a faulty scholarship that isn’t even guaranteed to the athlete to play sports for their college? If they are even lucky enough to receive one. When they aren’t even able to even receive a scholarship they have to pay for everything out of pocket. Which makes it difficult to do so since they mostly just practice and go to school everyday.

The NCAA has defended its policies on not paying college athletes on one reason which is because athletes are on full scholarship that cover tuition, accommodation, fees and meal plans at the university they attend. While these costs are all covered, there are lots of costs associated with being a college athlete that tuition doesn’t cover. There are expenses that are not covered by scholarships. For example throughout an athlete's loaded week they may find themselves starving well after the university's dining places have closed. So with no other option to have, these costs have to com out of their own pocket.

College athletes should get paid the same as a regular job. They work very hard at playing their sport. They should get paid the same as any other career because they are working hard at what they major in. If a college player gets hurt and can’t play anymore, they should have money coming in from the college to pay for their hospital bill. For example, John didn’t like to play basketball and when they started paying him he scored more points.

Paying college athletes is a very controversial subject. There are pro’s and con’s to both sides of the subject. In my unprofessional opinion I believe that college athletes should be paid. Coming from a student athlete I know how much hard work and dedication is required to be successful on the field/court wherever the sport is taken place, let alone in the classroom. In 2011-2012 the NCAA reported $876.1 million dollars in revenue. Basketball generated roughly $293 million, baseball generated roughly $419 thousand and football the rest. The University of Texas generated more than $93 million in 2011-2012.(“How Much Money Do College Sports Generate?” ) I believe the NCAA makes more than enough money to have a flat rate pay for each player

College sports have been growing in popularity over the last few decades. Every year, schools receive millions of dollars through intercollegiate athletics. The NCAA athletes provide entertainment not only to the schools that they attend, but also to millions of spectators around the world. The athletes are the ones who have worked so hard to acquire the revenue that colleges receive. Without them, none of this money would exist, so why shouldn’t they be paid? With so much money coming in, the athletes should be given a portion of the profit as a reward for how much time and energy they have put into their teams.

The question about payment to college athletes is consistently raised in discussions because the decision is extremely controversial. It is important to mention that there are both pros and cons on this matter. Payment to college athletes can be perceived as a positive opportunity or negative drawback of involvement in professional sports that distracts them from learning. Young people should be able to develop their individuality, socialize and learn instead of being focused on the job before getting a diploma. In fact, the vast share of research sustains the idea. A payment to young athletes for their sports achievement should be perceived as an issue because they are not yet responsible for spending wisely, they get distracted from academics and could start living a frivolous life that would deteriorate not only their professionalism but also damage the future.

According to the NCAA regulations, a person is not eligible to participate in any sport if they take pay or promise of pay for competing. This does not only sound unjust, but is actually an extremely complex problem when it comes to college students. Compensation of college athletes is not only a necessity because of the competition level or

College athletes should be paid because they too risk their bodies like professional players. In contact sports like football there is 47,199 overall injuries a year alone, men and womens soccer have a combined injury report of 28,500 injuries a year. These injuries are concussions, head/neck, upper and lower limbs, torso, and pelvis areas. Most division one (D1) schools cover the total insurance of a sports

As I have said, college athletes should be paid to play. You are paid for working, right? Even if it is in a job that you love. These players love playing the game that they do, but they also have personal things they have to handle. Yes, their education is important, but if they don’t have a full scholarship they can’t even pay for their scholarship.College athletes should be paid for playing because they should get a reward, theyŕe putting their life in danger, and itś a way to pay for college.You never know, paying them may end up helping you in the long

I think sports is just for fun and not for money at least now I think but once you graduate college I think that's when you should get paid. I think i would just play for my