Summary: College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and

When it comes to college athletics, there always will be a problem that arises. It is one of the most controversial topics there is. One of the main issues within athletics is the idea of whether to pay college athletes or not. Several studies have been done along with articles from various sources. This has been on the rise especially since “March Madness” is coming up. “March Madness” may only consist of three weekends, however, an 11 billion dollar deal is made to televise the games (Wilbon). This is when you have to take the time to sit back and contemplate whether these college athletes really are getting the fair end of the stick. Under NCAA laws it is forbidden to pay these athletes for their performance yet at the same time they

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.

“A partner from the St Louis - based firm Bryan Cave says that athletes go to college to get a degree. Some just end up playing sports.” (Cooper et al.1). Many people tend to think that college is all about sports. Attending college is a privilege. (Cooper et al.1) there fore, athletes are already being rewarded by attending college.

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

Many people believe that the college athletes are just like the professionals because they train and work just as hard as hard as the pros. First of all college students are working and training so hard because they want to make it to the major-leagues some day. “Students are not professional athletes who are paid salaries and incentives for a career in sports. They are students receiving access to a college education through their participation in sports, for which they earn scholarships to pay tuition, fees, room and

The article responds to the debate about if college athletes should be paid on top of their scholarships/benefits. Critics of college sports argue that these student athletes are being exploited because it is possible for schools to generate revenue from TV contracts and other beneficial arrangements. Ackerman and Scott, both commissioners of a conference/sport, respond by stating “College is a time from learning, and college sports provide young men and women alike a chance to learn, grow, graduate, and achieve great things in life.” The purpose of this article is to educate the audience, critics of

My first reason why NCAA athletes should not be paid is that they already receive compensation in the form of scholarships. In a survey conducted by John Dennis in 2013, he found that 69% of the public is opposed to paying college student athletes in addition to their scholarships. If college universities began to pay their student athletes, this would raise the cost of education for non-athletes wanting to attend that university. Some may suggest taking away scholarships and giving salaries to

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.

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

The argument of whether or not the NCAA should pay its athletes has been debated for around 8 years now, and right when it seems like there may be a breakthrough another reason comes up for the issue to be put on hold. College athletic programs are multimillion dollar programs and the athletes who make this revenue possible are getting the bare minimum to make it by in these college programs. Last year the Texas A&M athletic program was at the top of the NCAA revenue list bringing in $192,608,876. A third of that revenue comes from ticket sales alone, which leaves the rest to television rights, licensing and other donations. In the NCAA there are 26 colleges which are bringing in over 100 million dollars in NCAA revenue (USA Today 1). But still, Horace claims that “there is a misconception that athletic programs in general are profitable and are making hand-over fist. While truly most operate at a cost to the institution”.

During the last several years, there has been a concern regarding paying college athletes. On “5 Reasons Why NCAA Athletes Should Be Paid,” Dominic Alessi explains that college athletes needed an organization to make regulation and rules for them instead of them policing themselves. It led to the operation of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Now, it helps support the universities by bringing in billions of dollars per year. However, the NCAA did not allow college athletes to be paid because from the NCAA’s point of view, students are amateurs. There specific reasons Alessi gives for paying college athletes are they spent most of their time at practice; during reason, they are out of class too often; and they are employees of NCAA.

The authors begin the article discussing the creation of the NCAA and how they came to the creation of their amateurism laws, providing a background to as to why college athletes are not allowed to receive any form of monetary payment. Johnson and Acquaviva then present five arguments as to why college athletes should not be compensated. These arguments are that athletes are being paid with their education, new issues would arise with fair pay if college athletes were compensated, college athletes are receiving more than just an education, paying college athletes would eliminate competition, and that college athletes already know what to expect when they sign to play for a university. The authors then provide counter arguments that help to prove that college athletes should be paid for their play. These are that the cost of living is not covered in college scholarships, college athletes don’t understand that they will be set aside if they are injured or benched, and college athletes do not receive more than an education due to their full schedules. The authors then explain some of the plans that could help to fairly compensate college athletes, such as allowing them to receive endorsement deals. Finally, Johnson and

Imagine yourself watching College Football on a Saturday afternoon, but then you realize that most of these players won’t even get to play in the NFL. NFL players get paid millions of dollars a year while college athletes don’t get paid at all. Every college athlete dreams of playing at

The NCAA makes plenty of money to pay the athletes because in 2013 the NCAA’s total Revenue was $912,804,046 and studies show that