The Importance Of Paying College Athletes

College sports are a phenomenon that keeps viewers coming back for more. Stated in an article on Money Nation the NCAA makes an estimated $1 billion per year and this number is still growing. What really is insane is that all that money is made off of college athletes, who don’t get a penny from that total number. The debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid has been around for decades and probably will still be here for years to come. Paying college athletes would make the teams unfair, change how hard players will work to get better, affect the amateurism of college sports, and lastly influence the athlete's willingness to participate in college sports.

Should college student-athletes be paid has become a much debated topic. The incentive for a student-athlete to play a college sport should not be for money, but for the love of the game. It has been argued that colleges are making money and therefore the student-athlete should be compensated. When contemplating college income from sporting events and memorabilia from popular sports, such as football and basketball, it must not be forgotten that colleges do incur tremendous expense for all their sports programs. If income from sports is the driving factor to pay student-athletes, several major problems arise from such a decision. One problem is who gets a salary and the second problem is how much should they be paid. Also, if the income

After high school, some students decide to make the decision to go to college to further their education, earn a degree, have fun, and some, to play sports. College sporting events bring in money through tickets, jerseys, shirts, and other gear. The money made for all of these items and expenses go to paying coaches, the school, charities, utilities, and other expenses a school has to pay to have a sports team. Most college athletes are given scholarships to allow them not to have to pay for college or anything that comes with the college experience. Some athletes, that are good enough athletically, do not ever pay for tuition, living expenses, meal plans, books, and everything else a normal student would have to pay for. For some college athletes that is not enough. Some college athletes believe that they should get a paycheck based on the money that the school makes on putting on sporting events that these athletes are participating in. Other college athletes are satisfied with the scholarship given to them and do not seek additional money.

Remy, D. (2012). Why the New York Times ' Nocera is wrong. NCAA News, 5.

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.

Now and days people are starting to consider paying college athletes but that may not be the best idea. College athletes should not be paid because universities are already paying for education and scholarships which should already be enough, also there is no fair way to pay athletes, and playing in a colligate sport should be a privilege.

Recently, the topic around college sports has been whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many student athletes have threatened to unionize and have demanded to be paid, for everything from video game royalties and jersey sales, to their god given ability. College sports have become extremely profitable throughout the years, but the athletes who perform all the spectacular dunks and jukes that keep us wanting more, see none of that money. College athletes should be paid as there are many benefits that would come with it.

Paying college athletes can have a lot of positive effects, it can teach these young athletes how to handle money, it gives them some form of income especially if some of the athletes do not have job, during the football/ basketball season etc. And they can kind of see what it will be like in the pros as far as being paid to play, I’m not saying pay them like the pros like $5,000 a game but I’m saying like pay them $100 a game, just something, and a lot of people will say isn’t a scholarship enough, well sometimes it’s not. Most athletic scholarships only cover a portion of the cost and you are supposed to cover the rest on your own. And if you don’t have a job during the season or your barley are able to work, it can be hard for athletes to make ends meet obviously. Like in the case of this basketball player Shabazz Napier stated, "I don't feel student-athletes should get hundreds of thousands of dollars, but like I said, there are hungry nights that I go to bed and I'm starving,". I mean there are players that are really struggling just to be able to eat, and colleges want these same athletes to be at their very best at all times, but how can they, when they cannot even meet their own nutritional needs.

With debate on whether or not to compensate the college athletes in monetary terms due to the students’ sports talents help their various colleges to receive awards both rewards and cash money, it is important to look at criticisms of the National Collegiate Athletic Association with regards to the association’s advertisement deals of approximately more than a billion shillings profits yet no athlete is being compensated for his or her hard work. That according to Zimbalist (2013) is because the critiques are using the very developments to argue in favour of the payment of the student athletes since the opportunity for education and exposure to earn a professional contract is enough compensation since the cost of paying the student athletes would be too high.

The NCAA’s annual income of over 900 million dollars is a considerable amount of revenue, however, the players themselves do not deserve to receive any portion of this cash (Thellin). If payment is given to just a certain sport or a certain gender of sports, such as Division 1 men’s football or basketball, players of other divisions and sports will most certainly want a share of that as well. This would also create a monopoly-type of business in collegiate sports, causing players to be drawn to certain colleges who will pay out the most. Paying athletes would undermine the primary role of universities which is to offer education. The experiences and education that athletes receive while in college cannot be equated to the amount they would receive were they to be paid.

Cody Kessler is the quarterback for The University of Southern California and he is the face of that school. They sell his jersey number, posters of his face and even just his name draws attention the school. Fortunately for Cody he has a good chance to play professional football but others might not be so lucky (He). There are many athletes at their school who can draw in a profit and still get nothing in return and it is time for a change. Although college athletes are not professionals, they should be paid for their contributions.

One more factor related to this issue is the rise in number of college athletes leaving school early to turn pro. While this may not damage the purity or integrity of the game, it does damage the quality of it. The loss of these might turn out to be more costly than the cost of giving student-athletes some compensation. For example, a college bowl game can bring in up to 13 million dollars to a university. Instead, by not paying their athletes, a school may lose players to the pros that would have greatly increased the school's chances of winning the championship or getting to a major bowl game. This actually happened in basketball recently. Duke University, known for its basketball superiority, had three players leave early for the NBA. Duke still made the tournament but failed to make it to the final rounds. The fact that the players wanted or needed the money cost the university a

Millions of people watch sports every day. College Sports are very important to society and college players should not get paid. Growing up it is every athletes dream to make money playing the sport they love. That's what professional sports are for. College is for learning. If college players receive money then they wouldn't play as good. The NCAA tournament wouldn't be as exciting as it is, and there would be fewer viewers.

One of the most widely debated and discussed issues in the world of college sports, has been whether or not to pay National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I (NCAA DI) student-athletes. There would be many effects on the college sports world if the decision was made to pay them, but those effects may pale in comparison to what is currently happening to the student-athletes.

With a salary, the passion of the sport would diminish. College sports would no longer be a privilege, nor a dream. Children don’t dream about money figures, they dream about playing their hearts out doing what they love until their the finest they can be. Money will corrupt the sacrifice one should be willing to make for the game. College athletes perform for competition, lifelong friends, the demanding but gratifying work, and the devotion. Granting players with an hourly wage would turn their beloved sport into a chore.