Summary: College Athletes Should Be Paid

College athletes should receive some sort of payment for playing for their college. Many people believe that college athletes should be paid financially, because they are considered to be taken advantage of by the NCAA and most other school systems, because they should receive pay. Most college athletes are the main reason for huge profits from many merchandise sales; live events such as the game itself, and media and live coverage also provide sales increases. Differently from the professional sports, the athletes don’t get any type of cut. College teams may not have the same national expectations as the professional ones, but they are just as important, if not, even more important than professional athletes. Millions of dollars of merchandise,

Sports have been a big part of culture in the United States since the 1900’s. Sports has become a multibillion dollar business of sort, with spots such as baseball, basketball, and football captivating americans.With american sports gaining popularity, the growth of college sports went on the rise. In 2013, The National Collegiate Athletic Association statistically generated $912,804,046 (Alesia, 2014). With all of this income that the NCAA brought in, one has to raise the question, should college athletes be paid? Even though college athletes are student athletes, they should be paid because they are practically employees to the college without compensation.

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.

With the universities pulling in more than twelve billion dollars, the rate of growth for college athletics surpasses companies like McDonalds and Chevron (Finkel, 2013). The athletes claim they are making all the money, but do not see a dime of this revenue. The age-old notion that the collegiate athletes are amateurs and students, binds them into not being paid by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This pay for play discussion has been talked about since the early 1900s but recently large steps are being made to actually make a change. There are many perspectives on the payment of collegiate student athletes coming from the NCAA, the athletes themselves, and the university officials.

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.

The NCAA and the universities represented by it are now making more money than ever through their athletic programs than ever before. However, due to amateurism regulations set by the NCAA, the college athletes that generate the massive revenue the NCAA receives are not paid at all. The article opens with the argument that college athletes should be paid for their play. The argument is supported through information proving that the NCAA undervalues athletes through the money they generate for their school versus the amount of scholarship money the school provides them with. The article also discusses how the NCAA also prevents athletes from marketing their own image and

Do you think that NCAA players should get paid for playing their sports. NCAA players should be able to get paid for playing in games that generate millions of dollars for universities, they can get seriously injured playing the game, their images are used for other people to make money, and they are not able to get a job because of all the hours put into their sport.

An issue that has been a well-known topic of conversation recently is the subject of college athletes getting paid or not. This issue has been circulating amongst sports fans throughout the country. Everyone from the fans, players, parents, and media groups all have opinions on this matter. Over the past ten years college athletics has gained an enormous amount of popularity and income from American audiences. As a result of this, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has been debating about collegiate athletes getting paid for their participation and I am going to discuss the reasons for why people are for it and why people are against it. The real questions most people are wondering is: Is it ethically right to pay college

On Tuesday, March 8th, I attended the book signing for Indentured: The Inside Story of the Rebellion Against the NCAA. The author of the book, Joe Nocera, started by reading a section of the book about Ryan Boatright and the NCAA struggles he dealt with. Next, the audience was able to ask questions. The majority of the discussion was about whether college athletes should be paid or not. Joe Nocera thinks college athletes should be paid because he thinks that being a college athlete is a full time job. He also believes that college athletes should take two courses each semester and be granted a lifetime scholarship. He thinks they deserve to have an education that will last for the rest of their lives. The questions about college athletes

Although college athletes dedicate a lot of their time to their craft and school work, they still are not professionals and do not deserve to get paid. At top schools, many athletes receive scholarships. But some people think the players deserve a real paycheck, especially since some of the sports they play are million-dollar businesses. “Top college athletes already get plenty of benefits, such as free tuition and meals. Even though some colleges profit from sports, many don't have enough money to pay their athletes.”

College athletes are the face of the NCAA, without them it would be nothing. Even though they are the ones who keep it running, they are given no money. It is a corrupt system that takes advantage of its athletes. The athletes bring in millions of dollars to their schools, scholarships do not cover the full cost of attending school, they are forced to go to college before the pros, and the athletes work more on their sport each week, than the average american works on their job, yet they receive none of the revenue.

Numerous of people agreed athletes should be paid why?... Because financially, they are being used and taken advantage of by the NCAA and schools. All Ncaa schools have the option to pay stipends to athletes in other sports. " Jaderon Clowney quoted " Yes." With some athletes having to take care of their family it would have made a difference if I'd have gotten paid" "said" "on the "Jim Rome " probably "Showtime" ."If

When it comes to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), no other topic is disputed more or has been deemed controversial than the question of should these college athletes be paid. The NCAA is consisted of three divisions classified as Division I, Division II, as well as Division III schools. Division I schools, such as Alabama or Ohio State, are in most cases the largest universities, they are also required to compete in at least 14 sports combined for both genders in an equal manner (Pretty Tough, 2007). Furthermore, these schools typically take in the most revenue as well as attract and receive the most attention from the media. Division II schools, such as the University of Indianapolis and the University of Southern Indiana,

Have you ever thought to realize that collegiate athletes are actually employees of the NCAA? On average, a Division I college football player works about 43.3 hours a week either on studies, in class, or during football, which is 3.3 hours more than the average working American. It is no question that collegiate student athletes have a difficult task to handle between playing a sport and keeping their grades up for eligibility. The definition of an employee is “An individual who works part-time or full-time under a contract of employment” (BusinessDictionary.com). Collegiate athletes are hired, or “given scholarships”, by schools to work and play for them to bring in money, so shouldn’t they be considered an employee? Employees earn wages for their work and student-athletes should too.

Although I believe athletes should be paid, not everyone sees eye to eye with me. Title IX is a law that enforces all collegian athletes are not allowed to be paid for playing for the school. They say that athletes already receive money from athletic scholarships