Should College Student Athletes Be Paid

College sports are a phenomenon that keeps viewers coming back for more. Stated in an article on Money Nation the NCAA makes an estimated $1 billion per year and this number is still growing. What really is insane is that all that money is made off of college athletes, who don’t get a penny from that total number. The debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid has been around for decades and probably will still be here for years to come. Paying college athletes would make the teams unfair, change how hard players will work to get better, affect the amateurism of college sports, and lastly influence the athlete's willingness to participate in college sports.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) makes roughly $1 billion in income annually and the athletes do not receive any of it. This topic has been debated for many years and is still being debated. The debate dates back to the 1980s and now athletes are demanding that they deserve to be paid since profits are made off of them. Some athletes such as former and current basketball and football players came together with lawsuits to federal courts asking for rewards from profits NCAA makes gets of them. Research has opened several different opinions on this matter. There are many pros and cons for paying college athletes. College sports provide a huge source of the university’s income. The athletes, however, receive their scholarship

The System for college athletes isnt perfect, and needs to be worked on, a big problem we cannot seem to agree is how to compensate the student-athletes who drive the NCAA. I would like to start off with a question. Are college athletes being compensated enough for the effort they put forth today? Every Day they wake up early and represent their university whether they are putting in work in class or on the field. Each student-student athlete generates tons of money for their university and they don’t see a dime other than their scholarship that may or may not been renewed every year. Keep that question in mind while reading this essay, and form your own opinion.

Some college athletic departments are as wealthy as professional sports teams. The NCAA has an average annual revenue of $10.6 billion dollars. College athletes should be paid because of the amount of revenue that they bring to their college. Each individual college should pay its athletes based on how much revenue they bring to the college in which they attend. The colleges that win their Division title, their Conference title, or the National championship, give bonuses to the Head coach of that team. If colleges have enough money to give bonuses to coaches, that means they have money that is left over for the athlete who gives them recognition to pay them. College athletes should be paid based solely upon the performance and success that they have.

College athletics for some schools are what brings in the most revenues in terms of category. These college athletes that attend these schools are able to generate millions to billions of dollars from viewers, sponsorships, and fans. “The 231 NCAA Division I schools with data available generated a total of $9.15 billion in revenue during the 2015 fiscal year. But while there are 24 schools that make more than $100 million” (Gaines,Cork). This data provides the evidence that the top generating schools has the capabilities to pay their athletes, yet they do not. John Bill an expert believes the NCAA should pay college athletes. Bill explains, “The promise of a free education is not enough anymore if the NCAA wants to act as a money making business, and not reward those who help make it profitable” (Bill,John). The NCAA has evolved to be a professional league on its own. For the amount of revenue they will be earning it is comparable to the

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) makes over $871 million dollars a year on college athletics. Some studies estimate as much as one billion dollars each year. A college university can make anywhere from several million dollars up to $120 million from their athletic programs. A college athlete gets paid nothing and yet a majority of their time and schedule is dictated by the sport they play. In the book Student Athlete’s Guide to College, author Hillary Abramson says, “If you’ve gotten to the college athletic level, you 're accustomed to making sacrifices to benefit your athletic career. In college these sacrifices only get harder.” (Abramson 8). In Dominic Alessi’s 5 Reasons Why NCAA Athletes Should be Paid, he points out that student athletes schedules are much harder than regular students schedules. “By late afternoon they have already put in a 10 hour work day.” (Alessi). Even though they are considered student athletes, the NCAA actually has rules which allow the athletes to miss class in order to fulfill their team obligations. College athletes should be paid because they spend a majority of their time with their sport, many colleges in the NCAA make a large amount of income from the sports programs, and it would help many athletes learn to be financially stable and help them in the real world as only a small fraction of college athletes turn professional and make a career

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 NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) makes millions of dollars in revenue from broadcasting and advertising student-athletes. If you take the revenue of the NCAA (all one dollar bills) and stacked them on top of each other, they would easily exceed thirty-five stories in height, which would be the equivalent to the RSA Battle House Tower in the state of Alabama. Meanwhile, the NCAA is sitting on this expansive “lump of cash” and does not have any idea what to do with it, and by no means wants to share their revenue with athletes. The NCAA needs to use this “lump of cash” to, in a sense, pay their employees. Student-athletes work day and night to enhance their on-field abilities to provide high quality performances for their

Before, college athletics was a stepping stone towards the athletes professional future. Now in the 21st century, it is a lucrative business. D-I college athletics is the majority of income for major universities. They collect money from ticket sales, merchandise, T.V. contracts, etc. The athletes, however, receive a scholarship and not much more. Even though receiving a college education is something most people would not complain about, when these athletes practice longer than the average American work week and don 't receive money to sustain themselves, it is time for a change. Athletes dedicate their lives to a sport and train hard to make it big. There has been a lot of controversy whether or not student athletes should be paid, and

Research from “College athletics programs make a lot of money, send little to academics” the University of Texas at Austin brings in a average of 184 million dollars each year through athletics. The question that floats everyone's mind is why are the athletes not getting paid . Some believe paying them will no longer show value of the game. However others believe they should be paid because they dedicate their lives to the sport. The NCAA must recognize the benefits of compensating college athletics because, college athletics work hard everyday , makes the sport more competitive and helps players support themselves financially.

In the course of recent decades, school sports have increased enormous ubiquity over the United States. Whether it be football, ball, or hockey, since the time that the turn of the century, intercollegiate games have acquired an overflow of income to their separate Universities, and in addition expanding the fame of the College 's notoriety. For instance, in a study directed by the Orlando Sentinel, it was assessed that the University of Texas ' Athletic Program had the most elevated income of whatever other University at $120,288,370 (How Much Revenue). Yet with this vast total of cash, no school competitors are lawfully adjusted for their work. As per NCAA rules, "You are not qualified for interest in a game on the off chance that you have ever: Taken pay, or the guarantee of pay, for contending in that game" (NCAA Regulations 1). Because of this law, not just are school competitors experiencing issues in paying off their school educational cost, additionally numerous competitors are being paid under the table through illegal businesses. These novice competitors have no motivation to stay in school and complete their particular degrees, the same number of can 't stand to pay for the undeniably costly school experience. While numerous contend that school competitors shouldn 't be paid as they are just novices speaking to their schools, I contend that competitors must be paid to

One of the things to know is that there is plenty of money generated from colleges. They generated millions of dollars from sports and athletes. According to Forbes, the South East conference generated over $400 million last year. The author stated “last year the conference generated four hundred and seventy-six million between payouts from football bowl games, the NCAA

Many college athletes have trouble with their money throughout their college lives. One of the main reasons that colleges don’t want to pay their athletes is because they think that they won’t use the money efficiently. “The debate over paying college athletes ignores the fact that they are already paid. The real question is, should they be paid more?” (Sack).

Dribble the ball down the court, pass, shoot, SCORE! Everyone loves you; but a more serious issue is at stake, should you get paid for what you just did if you are a college athlete? Yep, that’s right, a topic that not many people discuss, should college athletes get paid? Studies show that college athletes spend over 40 hours a week practicing. However, with college, comes hard work and responsibilities. Many of the students who receive academic scholarships, will put the same amount of time into their studies, but will not get paid for that. I plan to prove that college athletes should not be paid, because if college athletes were to be paid, this would become a financial burden on the school and put the athlete, already receiving a full scholarship above other students.

If you have ever wondered why college athletes are not paid, you are not alone. If you are a sports nut, then you may have even gotten into arguments over the topic. Economic experts do not seem to agree either. If you listen to each side of the argument the answer seems gray, but if you look at the evidence the answer may become clearer. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) should pay Division I student-athletes who participate in men’s basketball and football, because of the amount of money they accumulate for the school and NCAA, because the sport they are a part of is a full time job, and also because many student-athletes struggle financially.