Should College Athletes Be Paid?

The article responds to the debate about if college athletes should be paid on top of their scholarships/benefits. Critics of college sports argue that these student athletes are being exploited because it is possible for schools to generate revenue from TV contracts and other beneficial arrangements. Ackerman and Scott, both commissioners of a conference/sport, respond by stating “College is a time from learning, and college sports provide young men and women alike a chance to learn, grow, graduate, and achieve great things in life.” The purpose of this article is to educate the audience, critics of

Collegiate sports have turned into a billion dollar industry and are probably just as popular, if not more popular than professional sports. College athletes put their bodies on the line to play a sport they love, many with hopes and dreams to one day make it to the professional leagues. Athletic facilities are the major money makers for all universities. Colleges bring in billions of dollars in revenue annually, yet athletes do not get paid. Some fans believe athletes should not get paid due to their sports level being “amateurish.”; however, this is far from the truth. There is much more to being a college athlete than just practicing and playing games. These student-athletes must practice, weight lift, go to meetings, travel, go to tutoring and study groups, all the while maintaining sufficient grades. This is very tedious work and is very time consuming. College athletes have a high standard to live up to (Frederick Web; Huma Web; Patterson Web ).

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 hottest debates in the sports industry is if college athletes should be paid. If you want to pay these athletes, how would the college determine the dollar amount that should be paid? Should the basketball team make more than the football team? Should the the soccer team be paid as well? Cheerleading? Chess team? Should everyone on the team get a salary? What if your college is good at football and your basketball team is awful? Rather than thinking about these questions, the college board is just better off not paying athletes like how they did in the old days. For example, “When the National Collegiate Athletic Association was founded by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1905, the institution was devoted to the belief of not providing a salary to the college-athletes who took participated in the organization. It is based on the belief of amateurism, and it was a remarkable idea” (Meshefejian). However, The continuous growth of NCAA causes a huge amount of revenue to come into colleges and this cause controversy to whether if athletes should be paid for what they do. The opinions on this subject can be grouped into two general categories. Some feel that college athletes should not be paid because education comes first and athletes are already paid in full. Others feel that college athletes should be paid because playing a sport is a full-time job and it would make the sport more competitive. Although some

College athletes should be paid to play and schools need to consider compensating these athletes for their talents based on the revenue they generate. Given the fact college sports is a big money maker for many universities and colleges, Kenneth Cooper, author of the article, “Should College Athletes be Paid to Play”?, argues that “college athletes should not be paid due to the fact they are still amateurs who are representatives of the schools they attend” (Cooper). Additional arguments made by Cooper against paying the athletes, include the fact that “these men and women are not just athletes, but students first” (Cooper). From my point of view, this statement would be true only if the emphasis were realistically placed on academics. Therefore,

In America we feel comfortable deciding how much somebody should get paid or if in fact they should get paid. We like to make decisions like that because it gives us power over somebody else. There are numerous ways where throughout history we have tried to influence how much a group of people get paid, or to influence the how much a certain race should get paid. We want to give everybody the same opportunity to succeed not depending on race, religion, or ethnicity. To give everybody a fair shot in life doesn’t always work out because you can’t always please everybody. You might work hard and put in a lot of effort, but to reach a certain outcome doesn’t always home to fruition. Being an elite level athlete and studying in school is one of

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

Imagine, if you were in college, and a football player, spending all your time and energy playing football and you are being paid. You work your way up to the NFL tryouts and haven’t been picked . Wouldn’t you be devastated. Now you have nothing else to do. You should’ve focused on something to lean back on in case this would have happened. The article I read was, ‘Should College Athletes be Paid?’. The topic was that people are considering paying college football players. But I don’t beleive that should happen. I chose this considering that anything involving college has always been of interest. Especially on this problem, whether the college’s money should fund a sport.

The NCAA makes an average of almost 1 billion dollars per year, there has been a huge discussion and controversy going on about whether or not college athletes should get paid or not. There have been numerous cases where student’s athletes have had consequences brought upon them because they have taken improper benefits from booster or even their own coaches. The NCAA makes plenty of money off these athletes from sporting events to jersey sales. College athletes are expected to miss numerous amounts of class time do to the nationally televised games that bring in revenue. I also believe if paid there will be a huge decrease in athletes accepting improper benefits from booster and other. For these reasons that I have listen this is why I

Over the past few decades college sports has grown in popularity across the United States. But it hasn’t been until recent years that many Americans have started to argue about the big revenues generated by many of the elite sports programs. However the big question that stands out is: should the athletes generating millions of dollars worth of profit a year for their University receive any of the money for their performance? Even though student athletes don’t receive a big paycheck at the end of the month, in one way or the other they do receive rewarding benefits through scholarships and grants because of their ability to be successful on the playing field. Thus, college athletes should not be paid because they are receiving a free education through scholarships and earning countless other benefits for being part of the university’s athletic program.

Around 60 percent of National Basketball Association players are penniless within the first five years of retirement. Countless of these athletes point their fingers to poor financial investments, funding their family and friends and having extravagant spending habits. If the NCAA agreed to begin paying student-athletes, the financial experience could help them develop a foundation of financial knowledge, and teach these young adults how to manage their finances and carry that wealth of knowledge to which ever career field they decide to take (Patterson). Student-athletes getting paid has gained so much momentum and controversy that the issue has made its way to the federal courts. The college football players at Northwestern University appealed the National Labor Relations Board to form a union. The main reason why these student-athletes went against the board was because they felt like they should be treated like regular employees and not students. An average college football player dedicates about 43.3 hours per week just towards football. That is 3.3 more hours than the average American work week. Another reason is even though the NCAA claims college athletes are just students, the NCAA requires that college athletes miss classes for nationally televised games that generate a large amount revenue. For example, the NCAA Division I football championship game is played on a Monday night. That means that the championship game requires football players to miss the first day of spring classes, which clearly demonstrates that the student-athletes are actually athletes first and students second. Also, the annual NCAA men’s basketball tournament, which generates about one billion dollars per year, affects more than six days of classes. Another clear indication that the NCAA cares only about how much money their student-athletes

Collegiate sports have progressed to one of the most highly profitable industries in the U.S. today. Through the years, these institutions have developed, marketed, and optimized a method to generate revenue of high levels. Yet, no one seems to have a problem with the fact that these players are being utilized and objectified for their talents. Each athlete must give up more than they should, without reasonable benefits. In fact, The University of Alabama made nearly $143.5 million in revenue alone during the 2012-2013 year (Solomon). Exactly $0 went to the players for their in season efforts. Players nowadays are highly recruited and not all of them are given large sums of money to receive a degree from the highly acclaimed schools. In days past, athletes would be more than willing to make any accommodations in order to play the game they love. However, over time it has become more and more difficult. With the large amount of time spent in the classroom and on the field, players are unable to work for much of the year. Fiscal issues is not all that is at stake when it comes the college athletes today, but it is the major factor that turns this educational institution into a highly profitable business.

Sporting events at colleges date back to the mid 1840s and 1850s with Yale and Harvard introducing rowing, followed quickly by baseball at other institutions. Today, it is a multibillion dollar industry that is governed loosely by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and is generating revenue and popularity at an unprecedented rate. Therein lies a dramatic imbalance within this system. The millions of dollars raised do not funnel directly to the institution. They are used in a variety of ways to pay at times, extraordinary salaries. In addition to this, not all sports programs end up subsidized by the most popular sporting events of football and basketball. As there are many facets to be reviewed regarding this issue, the most dramatic topic within this dilemma is the student athletes themselves. There are theorems that these individuals should be paid for their work. It is more than a full time commitment on top of coursework during an athletic season and sometimes outside of the season. The ideas of paying student athletes presents challenges and creates a dangerous series of events that do not support the athlete or the educational institution. The emphasis on the industry of intercollegiate sports has overshadowed its impact on the athletes and their compensation. Several feel that the compensation for athletes in the form of scholarship, room and

For years many people have argued whether collegiate athletes deserve to be paid or not.Although this topic has been a big issue for collegiate athletes and those who support those athletics, the rules have yet to be changed. This essay will argue why collegiate athletes deserveto be paid by addressing the revenue produced by college athletics, considering the hours of dedication athletes spend at their sport, and acknowledging what the NCAA considers “amateurism”. Some of the most known schools in America are known for its athletics programs not academics. Although some do have good academic programs when someone says the nameof a school like the University of Alabama or Clemson many people immediately think about football. Also schools like the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill or Duke, people oftenthink about basketball. All of these “big name” schools wouldn’t have their “big names” without the athletes that participate in the athletics of those institutions. So why aren’t these athletes being paid?In 2014 a legal writer named Marc Edelman contributed an article to Forbes entitled “21Reasons why Student-Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed To Unionize.” In his 7threason he states “The NCAA currently produces nearly $11 Billion in annual revenue from college sports -- more than the estimated total league revenues of both the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League” (Forbes). Of this $11 Billion produced none of the money is given to