Should College Athletes Be Paid?

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.

Helen Hayes expresses that “ the expert in anything was once a beginner.” This quote relates to all athletes in pursuance of making themselves noticeable. Being an amature at sports is an athletes worst fear. Any athlete who is passionate about their sport, wants to succeed in the world of sports; therefore, the rising athletes want to continue their success in college. College is a place where the athletes start to receive fans and begin their journey of success. However, beginning the college experience is like throwing away one’s money because of all the collegian’s expenses. Many college athletes of today are accumulating debt in college instead of collecting money for their dedication and hardwork. The ongoing debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid is starting to raise sport fans and athlete’s attention about the issue. People are starting to realize the true facts about playing college sports and that it is not just fun and games anymore. Athletes are merely performers and the audience is just enjoying the show. With that being said, college athletes are being profited off of without receiving their paycheck. College athletes should be paid because the college they are attending is expensive, businesses are profiting off of them, and the hard work of an athlete is not being paid for.

One of the many controversial issues regarding college sports is whether athletes should be paid or not. The argument against paying college athletes is often that they are already paid in the form of full ride scholarships for a free education, for one, and two that college is for amateurs and to pay them would mean that they are professionals and not student-athletes. But as a college student myself I can tell you a scholarship does not cover all the expenses of college. College sports is big business there is no question about it, but how is a non-profit able to generate billions of dollars on the backs of athletes who never see that money? Karl Marx would call this an exploitation of labor. The essential issue here is that, given the measure of cash that is put into school sports and the enormous benefits that big time college athletics create, would we be able to truly say that the players are amateurs? Or are they just slaves working for the universities? In Dorfman 's article, Pay College Athletes? They 're Already Paid Up To $125,000 Per Year, he supports that athletes should not be paid. On the other hand, in Nocera 's article, Here 's How TO Pay Up Now, he defends that athletes deserve to be paid as well as Taylor Branch’s article in The Atlantic titled The Shame of College Sports. In this essay a connection will be made between Karl Marx 's views and their implications on college athletics.

Throughout the years college sports have been about the love of the game, filled with adrenaline moments. However, the following question still remains: Should college athletes get paid to play sports in college? Seemingly, this debate has been endless, yet the questions have gone unanswered. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) plays a vital role in this debate. The NCAA is a billion dollar industry, but yet sees that the athlete should get paid for their hard work and dedication.

College sports has become extremely popular over the past few years. With the March Madness tournament held in March and the new College Football Playoff held in January, the NCAA has achieved a great deal of attention and high television ratings. Although colleges make tons of money off of their athletes, college athletes receive plenty of compensation. Paying student athletes would cross the line between professionalism and amateurism and would violate the essence of being a student athlete.

For years now there have been the argument if college athletes should be paid to play or not. It is an ongoing debate between many people including the National Collegiate Athletic Association(NCAA), athletes, coach, and other various people. The has debate has gone far enough that a lawsuit has started over it. There are many arguments for college athletes being paid such as; the athletes do not have time to work, their images are being used without any type of pay, and how the NCAA and coaches make millions of dollars off of the players while the players do not make anything. On the flip side of this, arguments that the athletes should not be paid include; they get paid in other varies ways, the average college athletic department loses enough money already without paying the athletes, and the fact that not all college athletes are in school to become professional athletes anyhow so making money from their athletic abilities should not be an issue for them at all.

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

Debating to pay college athletes for their time, effort, and the money the help generate for the school they attend has been an ongoing debate for countless years. This issue has become more prevalent in recent years because of the expense of living in today’s economy, and the fact that big-time college athletes contribute but do not receive any of the millions of dollars generated by their sports. Stanley Eitzen, a professor emeritus of sociology at Colorado State University, former president of the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport, and the author of Fair and Foul: Beyond the Myths and Paradoxes of Sport, stands up for athletes and demands that society and the NCAA [National Collegiate Athletic Association], reconsider

In college sports today there is an occurring issue on whether or not college athletes should be paid to play. This issue has been disputed since the NCAA was established in 1906. These athletes have made money for everybody involved with these schools, but they themselves have made nothing. The main reason these players have not acquired pay is because of the NCAA and their rules and regulations. College athletes should get paid because they are the main source of revenue for colleges. Also they should be paid, because some might be poor or have been injured and they need money to help their lives stay on track.

The excitement of Bowl week in The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is again upon us. This week brings out the die-hard fans all excited and tailgating, but with it comes big business. This business in 2010 broke the $1 billion mark in profits for colleges as reported by CNNMoney.com. With those kinds of profits always dangling in the wind it leads to a question that is asked and argued year after year. Should the stars of the show “the collegiate athlete” be paid for his/her services?

During the years prior to the year 2017, there has been thousands of controversial topics that the world or United States has had to deal with. Whether the conflict is over a world problem such as Global Warming, or if it is a country conflict such as abortion laws. Many people have to work together in order to find the right solution to what will work best for everybody. The steps that is taken to come up with a solution is the same steps for any controversial topic that comes up. With that being said a big controversy in the United States today is whether or not college athletes should be paid while attending and playing for the University of their

Throughout the United States college athletes are forced into debt due to busy athletic requirements on top of standard coursework. A great percentage of athletes finish their athletic career without even graduating college with a degree. These athletes are a huge marketing tool for this universities, from the sales of their jerseys, to using their talent to showcase their brand/logo on television, and also making millions of dollars off of contracts with television networks. Because of this I believe college athletes should be compensated for the time and dedication during their time as an athlete in college

The world we live in, our every action is driven by some economics motivation. Every task we perform now has some kind of monetary value attached to it. While some may argue that has made us materialistic, others believe it’s just a way of acknowledging each other’s hard work. A similar trend is seen in sports; athletes and coaches are paid, highly to acknowledge them and show appreciation. However, when it comes to college sports, everyone’s views change and only the coaches are the ones being compensated. Today, I would like to argue against these double standards because, the effort college athletes put towards their sport and the commercialization of college level sports, justifies the notion of monetary compensation for college athletes.

For some time, there has been much debate on the topic of paying college athletes. In courtrooms across the United States, a resolution—and a possible revolution—is beginning to gain traction. Some people believe that a scholarship is payment enough, whereas others believe the athletes are being exploited to generate millions of dollars toward the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Although student athletes and universities should agree on a term for scholarships, paying athletes additional money would undermine the value a college education.

Although student-athletes are noticed, scouted and recruited by colleges for their athletic abilities, the colleges’ main priority, to educate the students, does not change. According to Krikor Meshefejian, “[this is] the main problem with paying student-athletes… it is not the college’s primary function” (“Pay to Play”). However, when debating pay for play in college sports an individual must consider the hypocrisy of the current system. One could question the colleges’ chief concern when they look at the scheduling of games, as well as game times. The National College Players Association argues that the N.C.A.A. could do a better job at not scheduling games during the week when classes are in session because this stresses student-athletes scholastically (“College Athletes”). Unfortunately, many people that oppose college athletes being paid have ignored the underhanded ways of the N.C.A.A., as well as the colleges when they state what their central goals are with student-athletes. According to the New York Times, “Last August, [federal] Judge Claudia Wilken ruled against the N.C.A.A. and in favor of O’Bannon, who argued that college athletes should be paid for their names, images and likenesses” (“ N.C.A.A.”). This ruling is a gigantic stride in the right direction. Because of the requirements, the revenue produced and the restrictions, college athletes deserve to be paid.