School Tuition Compensation

College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for playing sports. Another argument is that if student-athletes were to get paid then it would ruin the amateurism of college sports. People who are against paying the athletes do not want to see the young people become focused on money. “Paying student-athletes

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

College sports are one of the largest and fastest growing markets in today’s culture. With some college sports games attracting more viewers than their professional counterparts, the NCAA is one of the most profiting organizations in America. Recently there has been controversy in the world of college sports as to whether the college athletes that are making their universities and the NCAA money should receive payment while they are playing their respective sport. Many believe that these athletes should be paid. Others argue that they are already receiving numerous benefits for playing that sport from their universities. Many of the proponents of paying college athletes are current or former college athletes who believe their hard work and hours put into practice and competing go under appreciated. They feel that while the athletes are making the university money, the athletes do not receive any cut of these profits. Opponents feel that athletes already receive numerous perks and should not receive extra compensation on top of the perks they already receive.

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.

One of the reasons why the NCAA will not pay athletes is because it would compromise the integrity of intercollegiate athletics. Student athletes should be paid for three main reasons: college athletics play an important part in the amount of revenue a university brings in, players drop out and turn to professional sports early because of the money and fame, and it would help with any financial burdens that the student might have while trying to get an education.

A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.

The question of whether or not college athletes should get paid is of heated debate in todays times. While many believe that student athletes are entitled to income, It remains undougtibly a concern of moral interest to universities across the country. This paper is going to explain the pros and cons that come with allowing student athletes the right to receive a salary.

In the United States, college athletics are growing larger by the minute. College athletics contribute not only to the recognition of colleges and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), it also contributes to the income of colleges and the NCAA. Without student athletes, these colleges and the NCAA would not reap the benefits of college athletics, such as: increased awareness of colleges, higher application rates, and of course the revenue brought in from game and event tickets, apparel, and contracts for licensing and television rights. Since the student athletes, who devote a great deal of time to their sport, are the cog in the machine that is the NCAA and college athletics, they deserve the fair and rightful compensation that they certainly do not currently receive. Here is exactly why student athletes in the NCAA should be compensated for what they do for their colleges, on and off the field of play.

Have you paid attention to all of the news that has been surfacing about collegiate sports lately? It is a big topic now days in the world of sports on weather college athletes should be getting paid to play sports. College athletics have gained great popularity of the past few decades, and have brought schools lots of revenue. A lot of college athletes think they should be getting paid for their services they do for their school. College sports like basketball and football generate over six billion dollars a year, but none of it goes to the athletes. Athletes should be paid for all of the time and dedication they put forth to their sport and the effort they put towards school to be eligible to play, athletes should get paid for all the money they bring to their school by playing sports, and players should also be paid for putting their bodies on the line while playing sports.

Cohen, Ben. "The Case for Paying College Athletes." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 16 Sept. 2011. Web. 28 Oct. 2014. This is an article written by Ben Cohen for The Wall Street Journal. This article is written in favor of paying athletes. He brings up past flaws of the NCAA to reiterate his point. This interested me because of the source it was written from. It is a unique article that is extremely well written. His argument for payment is in strong contrast with much of what I have read and will give me backing points to the argument.

Marc Edelman is firm believer that college athletes deserve the right to get paid without any issues involving taxing scholarships. Edelman states as his thesis, “This movement to allow athletes to share in the revenues of college sports arises from the belief that college athletes sacrifice too much time, personal autonomy, and physical health to justify their lack of pay” (1139). He supports his claim with facts about the amount of revenue college athletics brings into a school. “The college sports industry represents a more than eleven billion-dollar U.S. enterprise” (Edelman 1141). Without athletes, there would be no revenue coming in so athletes deserve a portion of the revenue. He also supports the devotion to the spot by stating, “In these sports, the star athletes devote upwards of forty hours per week to team travel, play, and practice” (Edelman 1141). The amount of time put into the specific sport is equivalent to a normal week of work. Another key point expressed is

Abstract:  Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.

A survey conducted by Five Thirty Eight, a website based polling and statistics company, discovered that high-ranking college quarterbacks are worth approximately $3 million (Karaim, 2014). Many “pay-for-play” proponents argue that high profile players like Johnny Maziel are the reason why the NCAA needs to reform their amateurism policies. Furthermore, advocates insist that current forms of remuneration such as scholarships, stipends, and education, although good, are inadequate in compensating players for their physical contributions (Treadway, 2013). Another concern of advocates is whether current NCAA guidelines provide players with the income needed to cover basic necessities like food, clothing, transportation, and other expenses associated with the cost of attendance (Karaim, 2014). In

Another argument in the case for college athletes to be paid would be that the scholarships that are offered to athletes aren’t enough to cover the lost wages they would gain from working a job. Even though some athletes are offered full ride scholarships to great universities, they aren’t enough to pay their rent and other bills that they have. With athletes committing so much time for sports they do not have the time to get a job and pay for their bills and other things they need. This puts more strain on the athletes and can cause them to drop out of their respective sports and when that happens they ultimately lose their scholarships. College athletics are more demanding than a full-time job should pay their athletes for their services provided to the university they play for. The wages lost by athletes at universities are even greater than those working typical eight-hour days. Since athletes, football in particular, commit an immense amount of time to their sports they could be obtaining a wage far greater than the amount of the scholarship they obtained for attending and participating in sports at a university. Another point to be made would be that only a small portion of the people associated with college athletics receive full scholarships. This means that not only are athletes committing so much time and effort for sports, they must pay out of pocket for the portion that their respective

"Elite College Athletes Should Be Paid: Economists." Vanderbilt Research. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Nov. 2015. .