Over the past few years there has been a huge controversy to take place in the college sports world. Should athletes get paid to play in college? Is the benefit of a free education enough for college athletes? Many experts have argued both sides, in which both are valid but neither one has come up with a deciding factor on why or why not a college athlete should get paid. There is a huge amount of positive and negative outcomes that can be pulled from the situation. College Athletes should not be paid to play because it’s completely unfair to other athletic programs, it would take away the passion and intensity of the sport, and they receive enough compensation as it is. Whether you choose to play football, basketball, baseball or any other sport at a college, is there anyway to pay all these athletes and satisfy each party? There’s not one sports program in the United States that has equal players in every sport. Therefore every athlete can’t be paid the same amount. It’s unfair to athletes and would just bring more problems to school athletics. At most colleges the football and basketball programs bring in the majority revenue. Any money made from these two programs help with the funding of the other sports. More importantly, colleges have other expenses that must be handled first before signing off a check to their athletes. Paying athletes would take money away that could be used to hire more faculty members, supplying students with the newest or more efficient
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.
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 ).
Only 2% are drafted into the NFL for instance, while the other 98% are getting a $200,000 education for free. There are eighty scholarship players on each of the 112 Division 1-A teams. This costs a university $16,000,000 to pay for an entire roster over four years (1 “College Athletes Shouldn’t Be Paid”). With all of that money being thrown around, it would be difficult for a college to determine which athlete gets paid how much, and if one sport deserves to get paid more than another.
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.
Recently, one of the most prominent and controversial topics in sports is whether college athletes should or should not be paid to play. Many experts tend to argue that college athletes should not be paid to play in schools. I disagree with this argument due to various reasons. A key source of income that is seen to exist in different institutions is college athletics. It largely attracts many students into institutions. Moreover, many universities worldwide depend on athletes in order to produce as well as maintain the institution’s name and popularity. Therefore, college athletes play a significant role towards promoting their schools in achieving their different goals such as an adequate income acquisition. Thus, my question is, why do college athletes not get paid?
Every athlete has experienced winning and losing, and most can tell you that money is the last thing on their mind after a win. “About two percent of high school athletes are awarded athletic scholarships to compete in college” (NCAA, 2011). Common sense tells people that it is a privilege to get to play at the collegiate level as well as to be awarded an athletic scholarship. Being given such an opportunity should not be taken for granted. College athletics are driven by passion and desire to succeed, through research this paper will address a lot of different issues, from if college athletes should be paid and why, as well as the consequences of them being paid for everybody
At a time when colleges all over the country are having to cut back on educational expenditures, justifying spending additional amounts of money on collegiate sports, as well as the players, has become a very hot pressed topic in which the collegiate athlete is losing out on much of the money generated by their performances either on the field or the court. Because many of these players help bring in money to the university, they believe that a portion of that money should be given back to them. Millions of dollars are made each year in collegiate sports but few of those dollars have been given back to the players, who are the one’s actually playing the sports colleges participate in. Merchandise with players names, video games using a player’s likeness, and all the obligations involving media interviews, as well as maintaining ones grades can cause a collegiate athlete to believe that their efforts are not being rewarded in a monetary sense. Now colleges and universities around the country are rebutting that argument by having all of the college athletes expenses paid for. They believe giving them a free education should be enough. Colleges believe that being a student should trump all other obligations, including sports, so helping a young adult pay for college is something universities hold in high regard. Universities are a place for higher learning, not a place where athletes are supposed to come and make money. Also, many colleges would have a burden paying their
For over a century, college athletics have thrilled generations of fans; from alumni gathered in stadiums to armchair quarterbacks, the fervor of team loyalty reaches spiritual proportions. This popularity is evident from the gigantic economy college athletics have created, with the NCAA raking in nearly eleven billion dollars last year (Edelman 7). A problem overlooked in spite of this boom is the exploitation of the people who make this venture so profitable: the players. Although it has not always been the case, the majority of players now are grossly undercompensated for contributions to their alma maters, the sport, and the burgeoning economy created by the two. College athletes are exploited when universities refuse to acknowledge
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 sports wherever there is people, there will also be sports. Sports have played a major role in American history. To some people sports is all they have. It is just the way that things are. The issue in sports now is that the NCAA exploit the sports world and the very backbone of the corporation is the poorest. It is an issue that has been around for quite some time now. The issue is that the sports world face is the fact that college athletes are not paid, although they perform in a multibillion dollar industry. The NCAA basically has a monopoly on college athletics, and generate about one billion dollars a year. College sports are extremely demanding both in and out of season, and these athletes put their future on the line. The NCAA should be legally obligated to compensate athletes, based solely on the fact that the money made, is from their performance.
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
“Should college athletes be paid” is an issue that is very controversial. Some people say “yes sure it’s a great idea”. Others say “no not at this time”. Paying college athletes for participating in sports is a bad idea. Athletes getting paid to play sports could take the focus of education away, it would cost way too much for universities, take the love and passion of the sport away, and many other reasons. Mostly all athletes get scholarships anyway which pays for their tuition, dorm, meals, etc. As the athletes receiving scholarships have a full ride through college their payment is in the form of education benefits as opposed to direct compensation. As the majority of Division I and II schools are higher scale colleges in general this
Paying student athletes has become a growing disputation among college athletes in recent years. College athletes have gained immense popularity among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its participating colleges. This often fuels the ongoing debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. Because of the amount of income student athletes bring into schools, student athletes should be paid based on the amount of success, revenue, and popularity they bring to the school.
As of today, there are over 460,000 NCAA student-athletes that compete in 24 different sports while in college throughout the United States (NCAA). Over the past couple decades, the argument for paying these college athletes has gained steam and is a hot topic in the sports community. However, paying these college athletes is not feasible because most universities do not generate enough revenue to provide them with a salary and some even lose money from the sports programs. These collegiate student-athletes are amateurs and paying them would ruin the meaning of college athletics. Also, playing college sports is a choice and a privilege with no mention or guarantee of a salary besides a full-ride scholarship. Although some argue that
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