The Consequences of Paying College Athletes

Paying these amateurs does not seem too bad of an idea but it has more cons then pros. The National Collegiate Athletic Association formed in 1905 set laws stating that “college student-athletes to be amateurs in order to be eligible for intercollegiate athletics competition” (Raymond). These rules are made not to be broken and to protect. According to the NCAA “college student-athletes to be amateurs protect them from being exploited by professional and commercial enterprises” (Raymond).Collegiate athletics have changed vividly over the past hundred years. Currently college athletics generate a tremendous amount money especially football and basketball players. Students have to understand even though they see their coaches, general managers and other individual gaining money from their work they have to understand that they are working to surpass their earnings.

To pay or not to pay, that is the question. This question, one of disparity, confronts the NCAA all the time today. Football and basketball players generate billions of dollars in revenue for their schools but do not receive any. College athletes cannot be paid because of the “no pay” rules and the “Principle of Amateurism.” The NCAA will not have to deal with as many rule violations and scandals. Plus, the NCAA could still label an amateurism principle without actually crossing the line with professionalism. Because athletes are focusing solely on sports and have no time to do anything else, athletes need money to support themselves. Not only does the school acquire revenue from ticket sales, apparel and sponsorships, but it becomes more

We often forget that playing a sport is not the only way to earn a scholarship. Many students are accepted for exceptional grades, involvement in the band, clubs, or being well rounded. Most of these students just have to study to keep their scholarship, while the athletes have to work hard and be a student. In a competitive market, “workers” are paid according to the value of the output they produce (Heath). It does not seem right that the college journalist can sell their piece to a paper for extra cash, or the local band can play for a few dollars at the bar Saturday night, or the biology major that takes an internship at the school lab can be profitable yet college athletes cannot. Under the NCAA they are not allowed to make any money of their skill. Any college student should be able to endorse products (Wilbon). This is why the idea of going to school for free should not be an argument against paying athletes, because that is not the case and they have earned it.

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

If the student-athletes are paid a salary, in addition to receiving a scholarship, which includes, tuition, books, housing and meals, it would be grossly unfair to non-student-athletes because tuition costs would be increased dramatically and ultimately be unattainable for the non-student-athlete. Without reasonable tuition costs, less students will attend and in turn this loss of

The NCAA feels the athletes should not be paid. Horace Mitchell from the NCAA Board of Directors states

College athletics is a very diverse organization involving a lot of students, mainly as the players, and non-students such as officials, coaches and others. The leading governing body for college athletics is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA. College sports is itself a big industry involving sponsorships, TV networks, endorsements, retail products and marketing. But in spite of it being a big business, the players are not compensated for the work they deliver. This opens up two opinions: should players be paid, or should they not? Kristi Dosh’s article, “The Problems With Paying College Athletes”, (UNCLEAR)discusses where the coaches’ money come from to pay student athletes. On the other hand, Mark Cassell’s article, “College Athletes Should Be Able To Negotiate Compensation”, debates how athletes should be able to negotiate their compensation. This paper will evaluate the evidence of both Dosh and Cassell in order to determine which argument is more effective.

Every year in the United States, thousands of collegiate student-athletes participate in a variety of different sports, and currently they do not receive paychecks for their performances. College athletics have attained an extensive popularity increase among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA] and the participating colleges, which has fuelled the debate of whether or not college athletes should collect an income. College athletes should not be paid to play because it will negatively affect their college experience. Rather, they should be compensated for their dedication to the sport. Many student athletes accept scholarships to play at a

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, the NCAA does not make any changes. With universities grossing close to $200 million a year, college athletics has turned into one of the top industries in the world. The NCAA, a governing body of college athletics, currently holds all power in college athletics. Without people questioning the NCAA and demanding changes to the monopoly that the NCAA holds nothing will happen to the unfairness to college athletes in college sports today. College athletes deserve to receive compensation in some way for the

College athletes should be paid to play and schools need to consider compensating these athletes for their talents based on the revenue they generate. Given the fact college sports is a big money maker for many universities and colleges, Kenneth Cooper, author of the article, “Should College Athletes be Paid to Play”?, argues that “college athletes should not be paid due to the fact they are still amateurs who are representatives of the schools they attend” (Cooper). Additional arguments made by Cooper against paying the athletes, include the fact that “these men and women are not just athletes, but students first” (Cooper). From my point of view, this statement would be true only if the emphasis were realistically placed on academics. Therefore,

The concept of college athletes getting paid has been around since college athletics have existed. One might ask why the athletes should get paid if they already have free tuition. The revenue that certain athletes bring to a university can be a substantial amount, beyond that of just a scholarship in some cases. Debated by many and taken action by few, giving the right of receiving benefits to a college athlete has made little progress.

The NCAA is a multi-billion dollar industry that generated over $845 billion last year due to their players’ ability to entertain and perform to their fullest extent at all times. So with all of this money flowing in, why wouldn’t they provide their athletes a stipend? Well that’s a question that today baffles many. What they basically have in place is a corporation that makes tons of money and, oh yeah, they don’t have to pay their employees. Sounds like the perfect business model right? What has continued to be one of the most pressing issues in the world of sports today has now become a matter the NCAA can no longer afford to ignore. The service that college athletes provide to the institutions they attend in addition to millions of spectators all over the world is still not being rewarded in the manner that it should be for their above-average dedication, work ethic, and most importantly money brought in to their employer.

College sports support a multi-billion dollar industry in the United States, yet the principals whose performance on the field or in packed stadiums across the country are strictly amateurs who are forbidden to accept monetary compensation for their contributions, at least technically. Perhaps no better example exists of the tremendous importance of major college sports programs than the current controversy that recently came to light involving the legendary Pennsylvania State University Football program in connection with the apparent long-term tolerance of and refusal to take appropriate action against Jerry Sandusky, the defensive coordinator for the legendary coach Joe Paterno. Had the same types of allegations been levied against a member of the university's academic faculty, the institution surely would have taken appropriate action immediately. Meanwhile, in many respects, college athletes at large institutions competing at the highest levels routinely receive compensation in various forms that are impermissible, far beyond the already valuable full scholarships and room and board to which they are entitled in return for their matriculating at their institutions. That reality has prompted some to suggest that college athletes should be paid for their services. While that approach might resolve the obvious hypocrisy inherent in the system as well as the fiction behind the proverbial "student athlete," paying

Today, sports are no longer fun and games, sports are a business, and college sports are no different. Many division college sports produce a huge amount of universities’ income. The school receives money from ticket sales, television contracts and games, and sport-related merchandise, along with many other sports related revenue builders. The athletes on the other hand, receive their scholarship and little more. While the idea of receiving a free college education is something few would complain about; when the issue is most student athletes are struggling with outside payments from college. Scholarship money is for the athlete’s school not pockets, therefore athletes have hard times wanting to continue college moneyless. Universities are

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.