The Importance Of Sports In College Sports

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

Collegiate athletics have long played an integral role in higher education in the United States. The popularity of collegiate football in America is unprecedented. “The fan frenzy surrounding teams, games, and the sport itself, is borderline barmy. Aptly described as the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat, fan emotions in college football are rampant” (Moore, B., 2010). Football programs are able to generate a great deal of revenue through gate receipts (Groza, M. D., 2010). Football game day attendance is also an excellent proxy for other revenues such apparel sales and concessions.

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

For about a decade, the debate between whether collegiate athletes should be paid while playing has been contemplated. Now, the focus has moved from all sports to two specific areas, football and men’s basketball. Sprouting from many court cases filed against the NCAA to some ugly sandals dealing with the athletes themselves. In the 2010 – 2011 time frame, this controversy really sparked up chatter; eventually leading the current pled for sport reformation. Our student athletes are the ones who are at the expense here stuck in between this large argument. Over the past 10 years, there has been minor things done for either side and the players themselves have started taking things into their own hands. The year 2010 a total of 7 student

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.

Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.

In college sports athletes perform on the big stage in front of thousands of people every week and receive no money for their performances. These athletes receive no money for their performance because it is made illegal by the NCAA for any student athlete to receive any type of reward for their performance. In the last five years there has been a heated debate on whether the NCCA should start paying college athletes. People responded to this situation with mixed views and opinions. The first reason that people have shown views against pay for play is because scholarships pay for college athlete’s school either fully or partially. Secondly people believe pay for play would create jealousy and hypocrisy on college

Since the beginning of organized sports athletes have been pouring their heart and soul into playing the sport their hearts desire. It has always been the love of the game, the hard work and dedication that student athletes to the collegiate level. When athletes reach the collegiate level it is more or less a business, and their job is to bring in a profit for the university. Over the past few years students and others have wondered: should college athletes be paid? Student athletes shouldn’t be paid because they do get scholarships and it would be harmful to the university budget as a whole. In this essay I will discuss the effects of paying student athletes on the university and other athletes. Also, addressing issues such as exploitation and showing how much athletes are really receiving.

For the longest time, college athletes have poured their heart into their sport and worked very hard every day of every week. These athletes have proven themselves enough to able to show off their ability and talents at a university. These college athletes have a job and work too. Their job is to bring in money for the university they are playing for. In order for these athletes to play well enough to be considered able to bring in profit for the university, they must play a sport that they love to play and not a sport that they are forced to play. Over time, the main question that is on everyones mind is should students that play the sport they love for a university get paid simply because they are a college athlete that is displayed on television. My goal for this paper is to inform you of the reasons I believe they should get paid.

Over the last couple years, college athletics have hit their peak in revenue and have gained immense popularity in every state across the U.S. With millions of viewers and thousands of athletes, college sports have become a huge part of American society. But with this popularity also comes the controversial question of college athletes being paid more than their athletic scholarships for the revenue, admissions, and excitement they bring to their universities. With both sides having valid viewpoints about the idea of college athletes being paid or not, the argument is debated more and more every year as college sports popularity continue to rise. But for the meaning of this paper and for everything college athletes do for their schools, they should be paid for the money they bring to their school, that they receive none of in return, the 43.3 hours a week they put into their dedicated sport, which is an average work week, and the countless other abuses they are put through by their universities to play the sport they love.

Over the last several years, college athletics have gained monumental popularity in the United States. With the rise in popularity, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its colleges have also seen a rise in revenue. Some college athletic programs have revenue in the millions. Yet with this large sum of money, no college athletes are legally compensated for their work. According to NCAA rules, “You are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever: Taken pay, or the promise of pay, for competing in that sport” (NCAA Regulations 1).

The primary sources for these revenues are from ticket sales, sponsors, broadcasting, apparel sales, and donations which all generate that money (Chait 1). Athletes are recruited to colleges because the coaches think they have the talent to help the team succeed in their sport. At Auburn University, Cam Newton received a full ride scholarship. He became the “star” quarterback for the team, which produced a lot of revenue for the football team and the university (Belson 1). The school thought of additional methods to create more profit, so they put Newton’s number on jerseys, sweatshirts, hats, and other wanted apparel. Those sales alone increased the profit margins enormously (Belson 1), and it all went to the team and the university. All the extra money that resulted from promotional efforts generated even more controversy. Questions arose, such as where to spend the additional funds, whether the school needed new athletic facilities, or even whether the star quarterback should receive a portion of the profits, and were debated. Both sides held passionately to their opinions, and the topic generated a strong response from people on both sides of the debate (Belson 2).

Over the past few decades college sports has grown in popularity across the United States. But it hasn’t been until recent years that many Americans have started to argue about the big revenues generated by many of the elite sports programs. However the big question that stands out is: should the athletes generating millions of dollars worth of profit a year for their University receive any of the money for their performance? Even though student athletes don’t receive a big paycheck at the end of the month, in one way or the other they do receive rewarding benefits through scholarships and grants because of their ability to be successful on the playing field. Thus, college athletes should not be paid because they are receiving a free education through scholarships and earning countless other benefits for being part of the university’s athletic program.

The “contradiction at the heart of big-time college football,” as Michael Oriard describes it, is the competing demands of marketing and education. The 1890s proved to university administrators that there was an enormous market for collegiate football, which postulated opportunities for university building. Since this ubiquitous realization, there has coincided this blatant, yet unchanging contradiction that academic institutions are permitted to profit off of the services provided by its student-athletes while the athletes must idly accept that they are amateurs, donating their efforts to their respective schools. The schools then direct this revenue toward strengthening their athletic departments, and thus continues this seemingly endless growth of big-time college sports, all while athletes remain uncompensated and academics continue to take a backseat.

Even though student athletes work hard and receive pay for their athletic abilities some people deny that student athletes are employees. Some people believe that student athletes are students first because that is what they are, students then athletes. The college tries to say that the sports are just for fun and that they are allowing them to do these sports for recreation. The college tries to emphasize they offer more tutoring opportunities if students are on one of the colleges sports team. The college pays for these tutoring opportunities because they are trying to let people know that they want all the money earned by the athletes goes directly to their studying. Even though the student athletes earn money, the money does not belong to them for spending it belong to them for school. For instance, “The 20-year-old sophomore from Hawaii helps the school earn millions of dollars through ticket sales, advertising, and TV deals. But like all college athletes, Mariota doesn't earn a penny” (“Fair Play”). Like student athletes, even though someone works hard to help the college earn millions of dollars they don’t get to see any of it in their personal bank account. Although student athletes receive pay for their hard work some people do not believe the athletes are employees.