Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay

Should college athletes receive pay for what they do? You’ve probably seen this pop-up a million times, and thought about it. You’ve probably figured why should they? Aren’t they already receiving benefits from a full-ride scholarship? But then an athlete will get caught up in a scandal like Johnny Manziel, where he signed footballs for money.. then you think well why shouldn’t he receive that money? And you then contradict yourself. But shouldn’t they receive money from outside sources, and then the benefits from the school. Not get a salary from the school just the benefits they’re already receiving, and money from sponsors. Wouldn’t that make sense considering the money they’re making the school? According to an ESPN report Alabama

Many believe that college athletes should not be paid. The main debate against compensating college athletes is that they are at the university for educational purposes and playing sports is a benefit. The NCAA states, “Student-athletes are students first and athletes second. They are not university employees who are paid for their labor” (McCauley 10). Universities get all the financial benefits of the money earned from sports played from things such as team jerseys, sports passes and tickets, etc. Many argue that it is only fair to give a portion of the profit to the players that earned the money. It is very important when arguing for or against paying college athletes to not take into fairness, but to hold

College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.

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.

NCAA, short for National Collegiate Athletic Association, is a “non-profit” organization which over watch all the athletic related activities on college level. In the early 20th century, President Roosevelt created NCAA because he wanted to insured college athletes from injuries and even deaths. Despite the original purpose of the NCAA is not about money, it has become one of the most lucrative companies in the USA. According to Taylor Branch, “big-time college sports are fully commercialized. Billions of dollars flow through them each year. The NCAA makes money, and enables universities and corporations to make money, from the unpaid labor of young athletes” (Branch). Besides the tremendous fortune these college athletes made for the NCAA, it is also a vital source for university entertainment, enrollment, and money. Although these athletes generate great fortune and put up great shows for society, they do not receive proper pay back. To balance the current unfair compensation system to the athletes, in addition to free tuition, college athletes should be treated as workers in a business market system and paid depending on their own performance.

Kids grow up loving to play sports in their free time. They never get paid to play when they are at a young age. They do it for the love of the game and for the need for competition. This is the way that it is in college right now. College athletes compete with all their hearts to be the best they can for their schools. They don’t get paid a cent. It has been a common debate if that is the right way to do it. Should it be that college athletes do not deserve to get paid for playing a sport? It should not be this way. College athletes certainly should get paid to play.

The opposing view maintains that claiming that the NCAA does not pay its athletes is a ridiculous accusation. The purpose of the NCAA and all universities is to provide these athletes with an education and a degree. Giving athletes so-called “full ride” scholarships fully covers the cost of their education. NCAA president Myles Brand spoke

The debate over college athletes being paid is primarily argued in NCAA Division I athletics, because that is the highest level of college athletics. However, that just strengthens the argument as to why college athletes should not be paid. At the Division I level, athletic departments are allowed to award student-athletes full-ride athletic scholarships. That pays for tuition, room and board, additional school fees, and—because of the pressure to pay athletes—certain cash allowances for food. The financial advantage earned by athletic ability alone is tremendous. With student loan debt rising to historic levels, every student would love to have that much financial assistance. The vast majority of college athletes will not play a professional sport. The scholarships that they earn give them an advantage by allowing them to receive an education without having thousands of dollars worth of debt to pay off. It is often said that education is the key to success, but the necessary education normally comes with years of

"College Athletes Should Not Be Paid due to Post-Eligibility ). But this downplays the exploitation. The athletes in major football and men’s basketball programs are disproportionately black, many from poor and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. For many of the college athletes this is the ¨only game in town¨. Paying College Athletes is a huge mistake because it is a quote on quote ¨misdiagnoses the disease but because it suggests that the only cure is to put the patient out of his misery.¨ It fails, to recognize the value of sports as a part of education. This can be seen in the numerous student athletes, from basketball to tennis players, who pour so much time into training and playing games with no hope of going to a major league level. Many of these kids, in even the biggest sports show dedication and determination for long periods of time after it is clear to them that they will never be on the professional level. ¨At many of America's largest colleges and universities, athletics has become overemphasized at great financial, academic, and moral costs. As average for the entire period of 2004-2006, only 16 teams broke even. ¨ ( NCAA Division I Institutions:

According to College Athletes Should Not Be Paid by Jason Whitlock, he states that “The notion that a full scholarship isn't a fair exchange for athletic services provided to a university—regardless of how much money an athletic department generates from those services—is ridiculous” (Whitlock). Athletes are taking classes they don’t need, but take random classes just to keep their grade point average up so, they can still be eligible to play. They shouldn’t be taking classes like that to begin with because it useless and just a waste of time; when college athletes could be taking the all their classes that lead them towards major. People think that since student athletes receives a scholarship it means that everything will be paid for

College athletes can be easily manipulated these days. Student athletes go long tedious days to stay academically eligible and also work to keep a high level of competitive play during their competitions. These athletes need to praised and rewarded for outstanding accomplishments they have achieved during their career. These athletes are not being rewarded but are also living on and off the campus without any money in their pockets. Since these athletes are living without an adequate supply of money, they are highly susceptible to grabbing money from booster clubs or any others who are very willing to help them in any way or form. The problem with this situation is that those athletes are going to get themselves and also their school’s athletic

Most student-athletes playing a sport in college are there on an athletic scholarship. The scholarship is granted to them by their respective schools and is worth anywhere from $50,000 to $200,000. According to Edelman, the football program alone at University of Alabama brought in roughly 143.3 million dollars of revenue. In perspective, that’s about 2 million per player. Even though Alabama is an elite program and brings in more than the average football program, the NCAA brought in nearly $845 billion in 2011 per Sonny. Now it is obvious there many ways a university brings in revenue, but it is safe to say that a player is worth more than that $100,000 scholarship. In fact, a substantial share of college sports’ revenues stay in the hands of a select few administrators, athletic directors, and coaches. Now think about what college athletics would be without the world class athletes it has today, or without any athletes at all. If a school didn’t “award” athletes these scholarships, there would be

Think of a student who make amazing grades, even in a time as stressful as their college career. This person could be the one to discover a way to Mars, or cure a disease like leukemia. If we pay student athletes, why isn’t this student paid for their studies? At this, one may think, “Well, it’s not certain that this individual will truly do much after leaving college.” Yet, the same can be said for a college athlete. If a student plays football in college, it doesn’t mean that the student will play in the NFL.

In trying to decide what research topic I wanted to use, I took many ideas into thought. I decided that the one idea that interests me most is whether student athletes should be paid or not. This is very intriguing to me since my master’s program is sports management. In order to do this research there must be many ways to use research as well as ideas from other people. This project is a very big topic in today’s discussion amongst sport fans, college administrators, and student athletes themselves. Media has recently put more pressure on this topic as well with the Northwestern decision to unionize as well as pointing out an athletic director gaining an $18,000 supplement for a wrestler at their school winning a national

College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and