Should College Athletes Be Paid?

The NCAA dates back to the early 20th century when president Theodore Roosevelt encouraged reforms to college football practices, which had resulted in a lot of injuries and deaths. Henry MacCracken of New York University arranged meetings about the football rules and regulations. On December 28, 1905 in New York, 62 education institutions became members of the IAAUS (Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States), which is now better known as the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). The NCAA started out as a rule making body. Finally in 1921 the first NCAA championship was born: the National Collegiate Track and Field championship. Later more championships were formed, including the big “March Madness” basketball tournament in 1939.

When will loving a sport be enough to play? When will athletes feel like their work is being recognized? When will athletes quit demanding more: more chances, more freedom, and now, more money? When will student-athletes truly become “student-athletes”, without putting athletics before academics? Do student-athletes deserve to be paid a salary, in addition to their scholarships? How would a salary effect the way collegiate sports are being played now? Paying a college athlete a salary goes far beyond simply writing a check to the student. Paying a college athlete would consist of determining the rate of pay for all athletes and all sports, the changes it would bring to the athlete’s life, and even the overall academic commitment of these athletes.

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 ).

What college athlete would not want to be paid to play the sport that he or she loves? The real question is, though, should college athletes be paid for their roles in a college’s athletics? They are many points to each side of this recent controversial topic, which is why this has been made into such a hot debate in the past couple of years. As of right now, these athletes are not getting paid, but many of them truly believe that they should. Others believe that they already are being paid through certain types of scholarships and don’t deserve anything more than that. With that being said, there are two sides of this topic that have quality points.

Centuries ago in the 1770s the first sport known as cricket originated in England. As time passed by more sports began originating in England such as football and basketball. These sports became very popular worldwide and were incorporated in Universities as extra-curricular activities. As more students started playing some students demonstrated more talent than others. One of the sports students played was football which in the United States college football became a national obsession. More people became intrigued by football and this sport began bringing a lot of money by filling up the stands. The issue of paying these athletes began arising, so the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) decided to give them a free education

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 University makes $123,769,841 in total revenue from sports. (College Athletics Revenue) Yes ONE HUNDRED & TWENTY-THREE MILLION. Yet an athlete from Alabama can only receive benefits from a scholarship. That doesn’t seem right. You would want to be payed when the opportunity arises. It should only be fair these players get a piece of the revenue pie, after all they are the ones creating the revenue. The players should be getting benefits to allow them to pay for basic college needs, grow up to be responsible adults, and allow the NCAA to thrive. This would allow for the NCAA to truly thrive as a sporting association.

College athletes have been giving their all on their respective fields for decades without reasonable compensation. Often times, these athletes have been training since elementary school and some even before that. Each and every day they train and compete while risking their potential future career without any pay. These athletes deserve to be rewarded for their hard work, dedication, and most of all, profitability.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association is one of the biggest sports organizations in the United States. One of the most divisive issues relating to the NCAA over the last several years has been the issue of athlete compensation. There are many sports—particularly football and basketball—that bring in incredible amounts of revenue to colleges across the country; therefore, whether or not athletes should be compensated for their role in college sports has become a topic of debate. While scholarship athletes are already compensated by their access to tutors, meals and a free education, the concept of the student-athlete has deteriorated over time and thus athletes should be able to make money by signing autographs or making public appearances while they are in school. In addition, the big four American professional sports do not give amateurs an opportunity to play aside from Major League Baseball, which funnels athletes to college sports and in turn ushers them into a place where they cannot profit from their athletic ability. The issue is clearly a complex and unethical one. It would be difficult for schools to pay athletes fairly as certain sports would appear entitled to more money based on profitability; however, players should undoubtedly be able to benefit from their athletic prowess by selling merchandise and profiting from their stature in general. The NCAA’s stance hindering players’ ability to sell autographs and other memorabilia is just as important to this

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

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.

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

The hot topic in amateur sports has been as to whether or not college athletes should be paid. The NCAA amateur rule states that an athlete in college sports cannot be paid other than their athletic scholarship. These athletes spend a tremendous amount of time at school practice and then working on schoolwork after practice. The NCAA is an organization that oversees all of the athletes that make up the basic unit of intercollegiate sports. The success of the NCAA whether it’s through the sale of merchandise, game day revenue or NCAA tournaments that each individual sports has, despite the absolute success of these tournaments these athletes receive any monetary compensation .Some of the main reasons why the NCAA lack of payments are that it wants to maintain its amateur status and

There are a few things that separate professional athletes from college athletes. What separates them is that professionals receive money for their hard work and dedication to their specific sport. When you think about it, the professional athletes get paid for what they do best while the college athletes juggle academics, social life, jobs, etc. To me, that is absurd. However, college athletes are receiving pay for the time they spend playing their sports. The college athletes pay is actually an education. Therefore, despite the salaries of college coaches, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) annual income, the responsibilities of

Being a college athlete myself, the one question that tends to be asked by most of the

Student athletes commonly go to school for one reason: their love for the sport they participate in. These student athletes get scholarships from large Division 1 schools, which means things such as schooling, board, and food will be paid for by the school so the student athletes do not have to pay for these benefits themselves (Patterson). If college athletes are to be paid, it will cause unfair compensation between players who are valued or played more than others. When student athletes are rewarded with a scholarship, they have nothing school related that they would need to pay for. This can lead them to blow all of their income on unnecessary or dangerous things such as drugs and alcohol which could get them removed from the team they