Should College Athletes Get Paid Essay

Central Idea: College athletes should get paid because of the unfair lifestyle of a student-athlete, these athletes make millions for their universities and billions for the NCAA, and the finances are just as up to par as professional sports.

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 the op-ed “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid,” written by Warren Hartenstine analyzes the issue on college football players being paid for their performance on the field. This op-ed article was published in The Baltimore Sun, which is a major newspaper in Maryland. Warren Hartenstine was an assistant dean at a large East Coast school and was playing Division I football while attending one of the Big Ten institutions. While playing football he was also very involved in extracurricular activities with school, such as being in a fraternity, Kappa Sigma. Warren Hartenstine was involved in his school and the schooling system majorly, he believes in having self discipline and dual success in a student’s favorite institution and their higher education.

In April of 2013 the article by Seth Davis titled, “Should College Athletes be Paid? Why, They Already Are” was published in Sports Illustrated. In this article Davis goes over why college athletes shouldn’t be paid because they already are being paid by scholarships. Over the course of his article he uses different audience appeals to help with the effectiveness of the points being made. Seth Davis does an outstanding job at informing readers of Sports Illustrated about his opinion of the way college athletes are already getting paid. Davis gets his point across by using Pathos and logos effectively. Not only does Davis use pathos and logos effectively but he uses another article by Taylor Branch to help support his argument even further.

Day in and day out college athletes work endlessly in practice, school and work without any type of reward. Over the past couple of decades universities have attempted to get the NCAA to allow these universities to give student athletes some type of money for their work and dedication. In John Nocera’s NY Times article, “A Way to Start Paying College Athletes,” he uses strong logical reasoning and credible sources to effectively educate his audience. However, he drastically changes his tone when discussing certain ideas, by indirectly calling out those who do not believe in his way of paying college athletes.

This paper debates whether Division 1 athletes should be paid or not. I explain the situation to the readers that do not have much background knowledge of the topic. I go on to say that Division 1 players should be paid because they do not have much money to buy necessities. The NCAA does not allow players to get jobs due to the workload required for their particular sport. The athletes also cannot sell their items or autographed items for revenue. My next reason athletes should be paid is because they are the core of the collegiate sports. Without the players, there would be no revenue period. My next point is that the scholarships are not enough to compensate or the time the athletes put into their sport. Although the

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,

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

In the professional leagues or sporting activities, sportsmen get pay for their efforts and talents in entertaining the public. Sports acts as a source of income to the participants in the league. It is a different scenario when it comes to NCAA management league. Students do not obtain pay for their services, efforts, talents, and entertainment show to the public. College athletes display their talents to the entire public who enjoy watching them perform. Some scholars argue that students should obtain pay for their efforts and talents while others maintain that college athletes should be contented with what they have as participants. College athletes' payment issue drags the development of the game within the association (NCAA). The debate of whether college athletes should obtain payment for their services needs to rest by extensive solution. The perfect way to solve the issue at hand involves additional payment for the services of the college athletes. This would supplement the scholarships and accommodation fees university and college athletes enjoy currently. College athletes are not gaining payment for participation in the NCAA league because of benefits they acquire from colleges, the act would add to issues in the budget that colleges would not be able to afford. College athletes should obtain payment for their talents and efforts because everyone in the sporting career enjoys payment and wages, to satisfy their needs as human

A very long debate in college sports is if the athletes should be paid. Author Jared Walch, talks about both sides of the issue, but later in the article it seems he sides with the argument that they should be paid. In the beginning of the article, he talks about why the athletes shouldn’t be paid. Walch first argues that this is all a choice for the athletes. They choose to put themselves in harms way of possible injury and not every athlete gets injured. Another argument that the author discusses is how to pay the athletes. Who pays the athletes and how do you distribute the money? The two programs to bring in the most money are football and men’s basketball. Women’s golf athletes are still college athletes. So even though they don’t make as much money, will they still be paid? Most athletes are already at school for scholarships. If you already have everything paid for by the university, what more would you need paid for? The author later goes into the morality and how paying the athletes would take away some of the entertainment of watching college athletes play. Towards the end of his article, Walch

“Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?” Issues in higher education, v28 n10 p12-13 June 2011: Cox, Mathews. 7 May 2013.

The purpose of this research is to identify why college athletes should be given money in return for their involvement in sports. This research sources from several authors from different backgrounds and specialties. The research includes many aspects of college athletes, numerous reasons for paying athletes in college, and many other solutions other than paying college athletes. This information will likely be used to support the cause for athlete pay or the improvement of the college experience for a college athlete.

Also the NCAA has a wide range of cash or gifts they label "improper benefits." These include essentially anything that rewards the athlete for playing at a certain college. Even though these rules have been discussed with all collegiate athletes and possible recruits, the rules get broken every single year. In this paper there will be an explanation on why collegiate athletes should be paid. Information will be presented with facts, from websites, statistics, observations, films, documentaries, and interviews. First reason why college athletes should be paid is because a free education is not enough payment for their services. Being a student athlete is a full-time job, all the hard work and long hours you sacrifice to your craft with school on top of that is ruly an amazing feat. The fact that you only get paid in education, books for school, and food from school is almost

All around the United States, millions of people can be found in front of their televisions for any type of collegiate athletic event. Between the winning buzzer-beater shots to the large rivalry games that remind people of their love for college sports, it should be no surprise that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) brings in billions of dollars yearly through their respected institutions. As collegiate sports have dominated the American entertainment industry, the question of paying these athletes is ever growing in today’s society. While the argument has persisted over the last few decades, paying college athletes may be one of the most controversial topics surrounding the NCAA to date.

The assignment required a selection and review of five different literary sources, designating three as resources for an analytical literary review of the subject matter. The detailed review of the three selected resources is a culmination of our written critic. The first source, “Should College Athletes Be Paid?” by Tiffany Patterson, has no firm stance is taken. The article is laid out in a manner to inform readers without prior knowledge of the subject, information that would assist them towards drawing their own stance on the subject. Patterson does this by providing three pros and three cons on the topic and then allowing the reader to decide. In her article, Patterson (2016) proclaims: