College football is the staple of any good Saturday. More than 216 million viewers decided to spend their Saturdays watching college football during the 2013 season (NFF). The NHL (national hockey league), on the other hand, had a feeble 1.73 million in its best year (Bibel). Now it seems almost ridiculous that these hockey players are getting million dollar payouts while the college football players are competing for free. This brings up the hotly debated discussion of whether or not college football players should get paid. According to how much money the college football industry makes compared to other paid sports, the college players should clearly be getting paid. From just 2004-2009 there were over 41,000 injuries in college football (NCAA). That means over 41,000 student-athletes had varying medical expenses to pay while still enrolled in college. College athletes simply don’t have time for jobs because of the demand of collegiate level sports; therefore, these athletes need a source of income to cover imminent medical bills. Colleges offering players a small salary would give injured players the financial support they need to get healthy. …show more content…
The Flutie Effect is a well-documented phenomenon that correlates the success of a football team to higher alumni donations, graduation rates, and even higher SAT scores of incoming freshmen (Economist). This basically means, the better talented football players a college has, the more good students it has. This fact entices colleges to find new ways to lure a good college player to attend said college. The most convincing tactic is offering players a paid salary. Paying college football players would increase players will to win; therefore, the college would have more applicants, higher SAT scores, and receive more in
College sports is a multi-billion dollar industry. Each year thousands of high school students are recruited to play college sports, but under strict conditions. Students are required to do well in athletics while keeping up with their academics. College athletes spend up to forty five hours per week on practices, training, and games. In addition, they spend roughly forty hours on their academics. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) does not think it is necessary to pay these athletes because they want to maintain the “amateur sport” status. According to Stanley Eitzen in his “College Athletes should be Paid, “The universities and the NCAA claim their athletes in big-time sports programs
NCAA College Football Makes Money then so should the college players. The NCAA and its most well-known teams make a profit along with The University of Texas made over $100 million in profit in just a year of 2011. With so much money coming in you would think at least 25% would go to the players, the players are expected to do slave labor without a cut? This whole debate is coming down to fairness. The logical reason why the college football athletes don't get paid is that most of them got full ride scholarships to college, I understand that they are there for education, not money and the sport doesn't have enough money to pay the college athletes but even a small percentage of some kind of income would be generous. There are athletes that get their jersey sold for mounts of money but get nothing from it. The jersey they bleed, sweat and cried on gets sold to the
College sports can determine a person’s lifestyle. Determines whether or not they can go pro or get a job. Paying athletes can give them a better sense of money. They can learn how to save their money up, learn how to spend it correctly, and a great sense of financial awareness. The problem is that many
Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.
College athletics are becoming more like the professional leagues except for one big issue, money. Student athletes bring in a vast amount of revenue for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) not to mention recognition and notoriety regarding the athlete’s university. However, the debate continues as to whether student athletes should or should not receive payment for playing college sports.
While people may have the opinion that college athletes should be paid, the debate for
Bennett, Dashiell. “Only 22 Of 120 Division I Athletic Programs Made Money Last Year.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc., 15 Jun. 2011. Web. 28 Oct 2014.This supports Frank Crumley’s claim that most athletic programs “work in the red.” The author also shows how football is the big money maker. Not all departments can pay their players. Therefore, it would be unfair for departments that can pay their players to do so. The figures come from the NCAA annual report of revenue and expenses for Division I sports. This is one of my main arguments against paying football players.
Over the last few years there has been renewed controversy about whether college athletes should be paid. The idea of paying college athletes goes back to the early 1900s with one of the first inter collegiate competitions between Harvard and Yale. The modern position of the National Collegiate Athletic Association is that athletic scholarships provide a free college education in return for participating on the university team. Many college athletes dedicate more than forty hours of training per week. College is expensive. How can we expect college athletes to pay for books and other basic necessities if they are busy practicing or participating in home games or traveling to away games? The NCAA needs to start paying these athletes to supplement
The first president of the NCAA, Walter Byers, once stated, “All of this is not fair, and I predict that the amateur code now based on a forgone philosophy and held in place for shear economic purposes, will not long stand the test of the law” (Schooled-The Price of College Sports). So why has it? This controversial issue on whether college athletes should be compensated or not has been debated for years, but still has not been resolved. Although the highly disputed debate on whether to pay college athletes or not is very intricate, evidence clearly shows they should be further compensated.
In recent years mixed feeling have been discussed over college student athletes getting paid. Some feel that players should be rewarded for the huge amount of revenue generated on behalf of their play. Especially when coaches are receiving huge multi million dollar contracts. Currently, NCAA rules do not allow players to receive any compensation. The non-fiction article, “Should College Player get Paid?”, written by Michael Gonchar, explains how NCAA classifies Division I football players as amateurs, not professionals, student-athletes, not employees, which is how colleges get away with paying them nothing. With respect to how hard and how much time college athletes put in, college football players should not get paid due to scholarships, playing is a privilege not a job, and money allocation . They should how ever be compensated, such as
One of the most controversial subjects we as individuals hear about this day in age is whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid. Many people argue that these athletes do intact, deserve to be paid for their time and hard work. NCAA athletes create a name for themselves by playing and performing well on their college teams. The better these athletes perform, the more publicity the school revives. This then leads to higher ticket sales and stores around campus selling jerseys and other clothing items with athletes names and numbers on the back. NCAA schools have become comfortable with using athletes’ names to bring in a revenue for the school, and yet the athletes never see any of that money. On the other hand, many people believe that these athletes do not deserve, nor should they expect to receive payment in return. They believe that these scholarships and the education are payment in itself. Some even bring up the question on if it is affordable or even realistic to pay college athletes.
While catching up on some game day scores for college football, an article popped up on the side with a title reading, College Athletes Deserve To Be Paid. I noticed it was written by Michael Wilbon, one of the hosts from the ESPN show, Pardon the Interruption. Already disagreeing with the title before even reading it, I was skeptical, but I clicked on the link and started to read. Wilbon brought up a number of decent points throughout the article, but for some odd reason, they didn’t seem to add up to me. This is why I took the opportunity to do a little more research behind the points made in the article and came up with a concept of my own. Wilbon’s reasons why to pay the athletes don’t have a
Although College athletes should not be paid many people think the opposite, No, college athletes should be paid because Not all colleges have enough money to pay their athletes, Playing college basketball isn't technically a job so they should not be paid, and if college athletes get paid they would be worried about spending it and not be worried about their school work.
One of the best things about college sports is the player`s energy. The love/passion the players have for the game is unforgettable. There’s some people that don’t think a college player should be getting paid. Some people say paying college athletes would be unnecessary, unfair, as well as unfeasible. Some say college players shouldn’t be paid just so players can keep a clear divide between amateur as well as professional sports. Paying college athletes would create a whole new playing field, the consequences would be
“Heading to the NFL, Michigan’s Jake Butt Says College Players Should Be Paid” exemplifies the reasons why college athletes should be compensated for their hard work. As explained by Jake Butt, “I should be the example of why college athletes should be getting paid in college or why I can't use my name to benefit off my likeness in college”(Butt). This college athlete’s chance of becoming a NFL player was ruined all because of an injury to his ACL. Though he may have diminished his career, the University of Michigan still receives payment based off of his name. The university gains money from their players, hurt or not. The revenue that the college/coaches receive come from the fans. This money is sometimes never given to the players that were