In the article, Victory for N.C.A.A. As Panel Strikes Down Pay for College Athletes” by Marc Tracy and Ben Strauss from the New York Times Magazine discusses that the N.C.A.A. limiting compensation to the cost of attendance in exchange for use of the players’ names, images and likenesses was sufficient under antitrust law.
One reason why the N.C.A.A. struck down the pay to play college athletes because they amateurs and will not be receiving any type of compensation to play a sport. According to this quote “The N.C.A.A. countered that college athletes were amateurs and that anything amounting to pay for play would transform college sports into something unrecognizable, professionalizing the players and hurting the business model for college
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
College sports have a big market on the major school levels. These major schools can bring in 30 to 40 million dollars per year to the school through the athletic programs. The players get none of this share of money even though they are the ones who have to put themselves at risk during these tough games that provide the school profit. You may say that these college athletes are getting a free education at their choice of university but some many say they should get paid. Today as much money that runs in and out of these schools there is a huge controversy to whether or not these student athletes should get rewarded for their hard work on and off the
College sports is a multi-billion dollar industry. Each year thousands of high school students are recruited to play college sports, but under strict conditions. Students are required to do well in athletics while keeping up with their academics. College athletes spend up to forty five hours per week on practices, training, and games. In addition, they spend roughly forty hours on their academics. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) does not think it is necessary to pay these athletes because they want to maintain the “amateur sport” status. According to Stanley Eitzen in his “College Athletes should be Paid, “The universities and the NCAA claim their athletes in big-time sports programs
The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many
According to the New Yorker says “The N.C.A.A ideal of amateurism in college athletics has come to border on farce. In the highest-revenue sports-football and basketball-the argument in favor of paying players is so searingly obvious as to seem undeniable. These athletes collectively generate tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars annually for their schools.” (New Yorker)
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
The NCAA feels the athletes should not be paid. Horace Mitchell from the NCAA Board of Directors states
One of the reasons why the NCAA will not pay athletes is because it would compromise the integrity of intercollegiate athletics. Student athletes should be paid for three main reasons: college athletics play an important part in the amount of revenue a university brings in, players drop out and turn to professional sports early because of the money and fame, and it would help with any financial burdens that the student might have while trying to get an education.
Student-athletes should not be paid to play in order to maintain the purity of amateur sports and their obligation to prioritize getting an education. The NCAA was started by Teddy Roosevelt in 1906 in order to implement the safety measures in college sports. Back then, it was “impermissible to recruit athletes solely on their athletic ability, much less to offer athletic scholarships” (Gilleran, et al). The rules behind intercollegiate sports that stand today were set in place for a reason. The NCAA mandates that student-athletes must not receive a salary to maintain their amateur status. Universities favor the athletic department since they tend to bring in the highest revenue, but participants know
College athletics are becoming more like the professional leagues except for one big issue, money. Student athletes bring in a vast amount of revenue for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) not to mention recognition and notoriety regarding the athlete’s university. However, the debate continues as to whether student athletes should or should not receive payment for playing college sports.
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.
Due to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules and regulations no college athlete is able to receive any compensation or endorsement while participating in college athletics. These rules have long been challenged, however no changes have been made by the NCAA. With universities grossing close to $200 million a year college athletics has turned into one of the top industries in the world. The NCAA is a governing body of college athletics, but without people questioning the NCAA and demanding changes to the monopoly that the NCAA is nothing will happen to the unfairness to college athletes like it is currently.
The majority of student-athletes attend college to receive an education. It is a bonus that they are allowed to play a sport that they love a few years longer, before they have to move on and enter the workforce in the field for which they studied for. Advocates for not providing pay for play
In 1906 the NCAA was born as a discussion group and rule making committee. The NCAA is a Non-profit organization, which is why players cannot be paid. For years the NCAA has been using the words “amateur” and “student athlete” in order for them to control and limit the benefits of these players, but while watching these players it is clear to tell they are far from amateur in a skill level perspective, which is shown when they garner the attentions of millions every Saturday during football season or during March Madness. College athletes are money making machines for the NCAA. It is time for the NCAA to get their hands out of their pockets and pay these players like they deserve, paying college athletes has been discussed for years and years now, but with schools like Northwestern being able to unionize and the celebrity of these athletes on the rise this will still be a heated debate. These student athletes put everything on the line for the sport they love, their time, their education, their health, all just to make the NCAA richer when they are just another number to them.
Because of recent court cases such as O’Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the issue of whether intercollegiate student-athletes should be compensated for their athletic appearances on behalf of colleges has been featured in the news and been the subject of much scholarly writing. This literature review will focus on the major themes discussed in peer reviewed journals and law reviews as well as the main judicial opinions on this issue to this point. As colleges and the NCAA continue to battle over the appropriate role of profit and amateurism