Some may say that paying college athletes is a poor idea considering they have the reputation for being cheaters or only interested in what they want. “...The argument against allowing pay to student athletes arises mainly from greed and self-interest” (Text 1 lines 41-42). Regardless this is not always the case as some students need money and that the greedy ones are actually the coaches. Scholarships can be taken away, forcing students to look for jobs and struggle to find a balance between school and work. Last, The NCAA has an awful reputation for going against the law and not giving financial assistance to students for impractical reasons. It should be noted that by these reasons athletes should be paid for their participation in sports. …show more content…
Most students need these scholarships as they may not be able to pay for schooling or housing. So it is their priority to do well, otherwise all their effort was for nothing. “Most scholarships are revokable, so if an athlete doesn’t perform well on the field, he can, in a sense, be fired from college. But academic work for some athletes is secondary: during men’s basketball and football players spend 40 hours per week on their sports, easily” (Text 2, lines 8-10). If they became lazy and didn’t do as well as the school expected, not only do they lose their scholarship but sometimes their housing and their dream. The only way they can stay in school is if they do well in their said sport. At least by being paid, athletes would not need to rely solely on their scholarship. They would be able to pay for their tuition, housing and other expenses. Although, if they wanted to, they could leave at any point in time and pay for the rest of their college experience but sometimes it isn’t really a choice. “Recruits jump on the offer of tuition, room and without hesitation… A scholarship athlete at a university can leave anytime he wants to, free to become a tuition-paying student like anyone else” (Text 3 lines 12-15). “Freely” is more of an understatement here. Yes, students could leave …show more content…
law that what it does is illegal and makes unsound claims, putting most athletes under one narcissist stereotype. Not being able to pay the players directly is an immense problem that could end the NCAA which would also decrease the salaries of the coaches. “Not only are the NCAA rules that prevent colleges from paying student-athletes immoral, but they also are likely illegal. Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, in pertinent part, states that “every contract, combination… or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce… is declared to be illegal.” Applying this language, any agreement among NCAA members to prohibit the pay of student-athletes represents a form of wage fixing that likely violates antitrust law. In addition, the NCAA’s no-pay rules seem to constitute an illegal boycott of any college that would otherwise seek to pay its student-athletes” (Text 1 lines 24-30). Considering this it gives evidence as to why this organization should be shut down in the first place. Not only does it not support paying its players, but it is also under the influence of being illegal. This paired with outlandish arguments like how if the athletes get paid they would be creating a title IX problem is an annoying problem. The athletes would not encourage the problem as Division 1’s male basketball coach is paid twice as much than the Division 1’s
What most people don’t is that not all athletes get the full-ride scholarships that people think of. Most collegiate sports don’t even offer full-ride scholarships; instead they have a set amount of money that they can do whatever to give scholarships. According to a U.S. News article, “The average athletic scholarship is about $10,400. Only four sports offer full rides to all athletes who receive scholarships: football, men’s and women’s basketball, and women’s volleyball” (O'Shaughnessy). Just to put this into perspective, there are twenty-four total college sports, and only these 4 offer full scholarships. This showcases the rarity of a full-ride in college athletes. Looking into it even more, most of those college athletes come from low income families, “86 percent of college athletes come from below the poverty line” (Hayes 1). A college athlete's schedule is also very hectic. In an article showing the schedule of a football player, it lists, “6am-7am: Wake up,
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
With college basketball and football originating in the 1800’s, the game has had much time to adapt. Over the years, the sports have become more and more popular, gaining a bigger fan base, which has resulted in substantial profits from the sale of merchandise representing the teams and players. There is one thing that has not changed; all of the athletes are still not being paid. The National Collegiate Athletic Association, or NCAA, is an organization that regulates most aspects of
College athletes should be paid because of the hard work, dedication and effort they put into their respective sports. These athletes are a major source of income for their schools and they are not receiving a penny for it. These college athletes deserved to be paid, colleges are using these athletes to get money and they are never given anything but a pat on the back and a good job. College athletes work and train extremely hard to perform at the highest level possible. In most cases, they spend more time training and preparing for their sport than they actually do learning and studying. They put so much on the line to play and they get nothing in return. These college athletes literally make their schools millions of dollars every
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 popularity of college athletics have risen immensely over the past few years. The idea of paying college football athletes has been a continuous debate since the early 1900’s. This paper will debate whether college athletes should be paid a monetary compensation outside of their scholarships. This will be done by examining reasons for and against the monetary revenue for the athletes.
“But Whittenburg beats Anders to the ball, retrieves it and with the clock showing 0:02 he heaves a 35-foot desperation shot. Charles, reading the shot all the way, leaps, snatches the ball from the air and slams the ball into the net with a second left” (Espn). Fans all over the world pay hundreds of dollars to view college sports games similar to this one. People are about as entertained as they can get. But how much do they players make for this? It 's an argument that pops up every year approaching the legendary NCAA basketball championships. College athletes should not be paid by the NCAA because it would be too difficult to determine the amount each player earns from the NCAA, schools can have unfair advantages over one another recruiting wise, and athletes who receive full scholarships gain advantages for the rest of their life.
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.
But why should a student athlete be paid in the first place? Their just athletes right? They go to school just like everyone else? What makes them so special? What makes a college athlete different than the average student is the amount of revenue that they help bring to their selected colleges. This type of revenue is made up from ticket sales, merchandise, media rights and contributions. “USA today” reported that the University of Texas generated $167.7 million dollars from their athletic programs, and that’s just one school. With this in mind, imagine just how much money other colleges are making from their athletics. Sure one can make the argument that they should not be paid because they are not professionals, but one can’t ignore the fact that they are bringing in millions of dollars and seeing none of it.
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.
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.
Division 1 college sports like men 's basketball and football bring in an astronomical amount of money every year and the players that help bring in these revenues are not monetarily compensated. Over the years many people have been arguing that college athletes should be paid for playing. Although athletes are not compensated monetarily these players are compensated with an education which is the equivalent of thousands of dollars. Also, many schools can not afford to pay their athletes,the majority of schools barely make any money from their athletics programs, and even if they could afford to pay players it would cause several problems. Remember that a college is established to provide an education, colleges are not established to
For years now there have been the argument if college athletes should be paid to play or not. It is an ongoing debate between many people including the National Collegiate Athletic Association(NCAA), athletes, coach, and other various people. The has debate has gone far enough that a lawsuit has started over it. There are many arguments for college athletes being paid such as; the athletes do not have time to work, their images are being used without any type of pay, and how the NCAA and coaches make millions of dollars off of the players while the players do not make anything. On the flip side of this, arguments that the athletes should not be paid include; they get paid in other varies ways, the average college athletic department loses enough money already without paying the athletes, and the fact that not all college athletes are in school to become professional athletes anyhow so making money from their athletic abilities should not be an issue for them at all.
Helen Hayes expresses that “ the expert in anything was once a beginner.” This quote relates to all athletes in pursuance of making themselves noticeable. Being an amature at sports is an athletes worst fear. Any athlete who is passionate about their sport, wants to succeed in the world of sports; therefore, the rising athletes want to continue their success in college. College is a place where the athletes start to receive fans and begin their journey of success. However, beginning the college experience is like throwing away one’s money because of all the collegian’s expenses. Many college athletes of today are accumulating debt in college instead of collecting money for their dedication and hardwork. The ongoing debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid is starting to raise sport fans and athlete’s attention about the issue. People are starting to realize the true facts about playing college sports and that it is not just fun and games anymore. Athletes are merely performers and the audience is just enjoying the show. With that being said, college athletes are being profited off of without receiving their paycheck. College athletes should be paid because the college they are attending is expensive, businesses are profiting off of them, and the hard work of an athlete is not being paid for.
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