Sports Networks : The Surprising Saviors Of American Education

It is true stories like Heather Van Norman’s that make people wish there was more help provided to the hardworking young adults in the college atmosphere. There has to be some way for the colleges to offer more support than they do. Crazy as it may seem, the colleges do not always produce what they say they are going to, whether it be by means of financial support, scholarship promises, or guarantees for professional sports careers. Thus, it should be implemented that college athletes should be paid for participation in college-level athletics or at least receive a voucher to attain a degree upon completion of their four-year (minimum) careers as students.

Collegiate athletics is a multibillion dollar business. Competition across basketball, football, and other popular sports generate just as much money as they do excitement and entertainment to sports fans and the casual viewer. The driving force behind this behemoth are the athletes that don the uniform of the competing universities. These athletes, the most of which are black, dedicated time synonymous to working a full time job on top of being student in order to serve this money machine. What is so damning about this system then? The truth is that the student-athletes do not see a penny of the millions they earn for their schools. On top of that, they are stretched beyond reasonable means in order to serve their athletic program. In return, they are compensated with scholarships to attend the college. However, what might seem like a coveted opportunity is not what it seems.

Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.

A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.

There is currently a major issue in today’s college athletics. Universities and the NCAA make billions of dollars while some student-athletes go hungry. There is a huge debate over whether or not student-athletes should be paid as employees of their respective colleges. Personally, I don’t believe players should receive full-time salaries, but Universities and the NCAA should be required to increase the value of the scholarships that they award to student-athletes. By requiring that colleges provide athletes with an additional $2,000 per semester as part of their scholarship you can greatly increase the well-being (welfare) of the students.

Since 1974, tuition has been on the rise and has reached new heights. One reason why tuition is increasing is because of “the state governments’ unwillingness or inability to raise per-student financing” (Davidson). The government is spending less on college and moving those funds into other categories, such as the military. Furthermore, colleges are spending less on each student than they did during pre-recession (Fox). Even after the recession, the government is continuously cutting more and more from education funds. As the government cuts more from education funds, tuition cost will steadily increase to compensate the loss. Tuition increased from 1994 to 2015 is depicted in the graph on the next page. Drawing a conclusion from the graph, it is possible that if this trend continues, public colleges will approximately reach the same price as private colleges one day. The amount of financial aid given is unable to meet the needs of lower income students,

Many believe that paying college athletes is wrong because they are amateurs, or students first and athletes second. With tuition continuing to raise the average athletic scholarships aren’t covering the costs anymore. There is a misconception that most college athletes on athletic scholarships are getting everything paid for, in reality that’s actually false. For example, a Division I basketball team is granted thirteen scholarships each year. Of those thirteen scholarships the University is allowed to split them up however they feel. These scholarships are for incoming students from high school and returning student athletes that had their scholarship picked up for another year. According to author Mark Kantrowitz, less than 20,000 students a year receive an entirely free ride to college (O’Shaughnessy, 2011). That number is students total, not student athletes, that is a very small number when you see that there were 453,347 NCAA student athletes in 2012-13 (Brown, 2013).

One incorrect argument one hears, usually within the policy community, is attributable due to a design quirk, the year-round Pell Grant program provided 50 percent additional edges than meant as students unwittingly received two full Pell Grants in an exceedingly single year. Costs were thus higher than expected. Perhaps the most misrepresented claims regarding the year-round Pell Grant came from the Obama administration, that argues that the program “has nonetheless shown any evidence” that it inspired students to accelerate their studies. Several perceive that year-round Pell Grants cost way more than budget consultants and policy manufacturers expected, implying that sudden prices were unreasonable. It seems those higher costs were not attributable to some feature of the year-round Pell Grant. Still, several are under the impression that a year-round grant should not increase the cost of the overall Pell Grant Program at all. “After all, students who use two years’ worth of grant aid on two years’ worth of classes theoretically would receive the same amount of Pell Grants whether they take one year or two to complete those course” (2). Despite the fact that summer Pell Grants were cut by the Obama administration starting in 2009-2010, there are no synchronal facts that demonstrate that the grants were not useful. In conclusion, the

"College Athletes Should Not Be Paid due to Post-Eligibility ). But this downplays the exploitation. The athletes in major football and men’s basketball programs are disproportionately black, many from poor and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. For many of the college athletes this is the ¨only game in town¨. Paying College Athletes is a huge mistake because it is a quote on quote ¨misdiagnoses the disease but because it suggests that the only cure is to put the patient out of his misery.¨ It fails, to recognize the value of sports as a part of education. This can be seen in the numerous student athletes, from basketball to tennis players, who pour so much time into training and playing games with no hope of going to a major league level. Many of these kids, in even the biggest sports show dedication and determination for long periods of time after it is clear to them that they will never be on the professional level. ¨At many of America's largest colleges and universities, athletics has become overemphasized at great financial, academic, and moral costs. As average for the entire period of 2004-2006, only 16 teams broke even. ¨ ( NCAA Division I Institutions:

Should College Athletes Be Paid? (Final Revision) College sports are a big part of American culture. I along with many other people watch college sports.

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

Since education is so important today and so expensive, the scholarships that the NCAA allows schools to award to student athletes acts as money and compensation. Without scholarships, attending such schools could be impossible. In a report by Stephen Ross, an economist and research professor at Georgetown University, he writes that by the year 2000 college graduates were earning eighty percent more than high school graduates who did not go to college (Ross). Not only does college help one pursue an education but it helps one find a job and make money to help support themselves throughout life. If colleges did not offer athletic scholarships then many individuals would have lost out on an opportunity to improve themselves by going to college and receiving a higher education. Scholarships help bridge the gap between dreams and reality by allowing students to significantly reduce the financial burden that attending a college/university can have on a person or family. The American Dream can become a reality, all the hard work and sacrifices become worth it because through education anything is possible. However this notion that scholarships are the solution to the problem of paying student athletes is not well thought out. Firstly, scholarships cost the NCAA nothing. Secondly, scholarships fail to address the fact that the NCAA makes millions off the student athletes. Also, most student

In my previous essay, I chose to address one of the biggest debates in collegiate sports; should college athletes be paid. For decades now school administers, alumni, boosters, and student athletes have been torn between the two sides, and I, for one, am in agreement with the idea of student athletes be compensated financially for all their time and dedication to their respectable sport. As you can imagine, there are many who oppose the idea, but as I stated in my previous essay there are great benefits for allowing student-athletes to be compensated. However, this is easier said than done. Deriving to a solution that fairly compensates all student athletes on every level of competition is no small feat, and will possibly take a few years of deliberation before actually being implemented. In this essay, I will make attempt in providing solutions on how student athlete can be compensated for their hard work. My proposal will include what actions need to be done first, and by whom could assist in the issue. Along with my resolutions, I will provide financial statistics to give support to my proposal and the realness of how compensating college athletes can actually be made possible.

Presently, the availability of educational opportunities at the college and university level is a critical state and personal interest given the needs of the state for a well-educated workforce which has never been greater. Too many, the focal point of attending college is receiving a high paying job in the future. Unfortunately, in most states, tuition is on the rise and students who come from low-income families find themselves struggling to fund their education. According to legislatures, “The cost of college in New Jersey, as in the nation, continues to grow faster than the rate of inflation.” (State of New Jersey 1). In the national financial aid policy resources that are typically given to the neediest families are shifting towards

It is an age old debate on whether a college athlete should be paid. It is a high school student 's dream to play sports at the collegiate level. Many people question why the NCAA, coaches, and administrators are allowed to earn large amounts of money while the student athlete’s hard work and efforts are limited to a scholarship. Others feel that is should be considered a privilege that a college athlete can earn a college degree while enjoying what they love, by playing collegiate sports. Student athletes should not receive payment because they are already receiving payment in the form of an expensive athletic scholarship and are also able to receive the new cost of attendance stipend to assist with further financial burdens.