The Network Of Institutions And Discourses Governing College Sports

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

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

The NCAA has been around and evolved since the beginning of college sports. This organization is a non-profitable organization, but ironically makes more than millions of profit per year. Branch states “that money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contract”(pg. 228). Meanwhile, the student-athletes do not receive any of this money. This is the start of an unsubstantial business between universities built around amateurism.

For example Josh Huff a former wide receiver at the university of Oregon, states, “it’s ok for the NCAA to make money off my name and likeness, but once I go charge people to get in my party it’s a problem.” COLLEGIATE ATHLETES: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN NCAA AMATEURISM AND A STUDENT ATHLETE'S RIGHT OF PUBLICITY is an article that explains the unfairness in this situation. Because of his displeasure with the non-compensated and amateurism rule, josh began to shed light on the truth of that student athlete’s right are being violated. The NCAA alone makes millions of revenue of the hard work of these student athletes, names and participation in collegiate athletics. While the only thing justifies the decision, keeping them from being paid is that they already are receiving free education as well as college stipend. Looking at the meaning of amateurism and its purpose this article is to back up student athletes and recognize that their work and role in the NCAA is a little deeper than amateur status. Universities are making money of these students hard work and while the names on the team roster are what generate the demand, the ones in the backgrounds get compensated very handsomely. As stated in this article “The NCAA’s purpose is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body and, by so doing, retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports.” But this clear line is already crossed when universities allow their students to become personal sales pitches and promotional puppets. See a lot of schools athletic revenue thrives of the backs of these students, literally using the names of these students and their success to uplift their school

In the essay “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch examines the flaws of the National Collegiate Athletic Association in college sports regarding “amateurism” (Branch 227) and the “student-athlete” (227). In doing so, Branch discusses the history of college sports and the National Collegiate Athletic Association while emphasizing certain regulations such as allowing multinational organizations to advertise their brand on athletic gear but athletes cannot use any of their memorabilia to get cash or a free tattoo at a tattoo parlor (227). Branch also argues that athletes are being manipulated for their skills and fame from the National Collegiate Athletic Association and universities and further irritates that they make money off the “unpaid

When people hear of college athletics, all they think of is a game. Most people do not realize that there is a million dollar industry going on around these athletes. Eric He, a sports fanatic who writes for the Daily Trojan, states, “The NCAA is a nonprofit, tax exempt organization that just happens to be a billion-dollar industry, raking in $740 million per year from March Madness alone” (par. 7). When the NCAA is generating that much money, how can it not go to the players? It is not the

Many student-athletes can have their whole career, their passion, and love of their respected sport taken away from them with just 1 play. The student-athletes are representing their respective school and making the school more popular and more students will want to enroll there and the student-athletes are making the NCAA millions of dollars, but the NCAA will not give the student-athletes just a little allowance because it will “ruin the integrity of college sports”. Student athletes-athletes should get paid because students could get hurt in one play, the NCAA makes millions of dollars on the the players, and it will make the players do smarter things with their money.

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

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.

“College Athletes for Hire, The Evolution and Legacy of the NCAA’s Amateur Myth” written by Allen L. Sack and Ellen J. Staurowsky. In their book, the authors enlighten the reader on such issues as athletic scholarships, professionalism in college sports, and favoritism for athletes as well as many more important legal, and ethical issues that we as a country need to address. In this paper I will not do a standard book report by simply regurgitating the information I read in their book.

The NCAA states that the student athletes are paid in the form of an education, but this is not always true. There have been many instances in which student-athletes have graduated with grade school reading levels or never graduated because they were not directed to pursue any specific degree path (Marquette sports law journal). The emphases of winning in collegiate sports use to be for moral. College sports now are a very lucrative business and a lot of it comes from being on television and through sponsorship. Nike is going to endorse the teams that win over the teams that lose. College athletics has been estimated to be a $60 billion industry (McCormick). Universities are all too willing to try and get a piece of this huge industry.

The argument of paying college athletes outside of the scholarships they may be receiving is becoming a rather popular topic. “Should College Athletes Be Paid?”, an article in Santa Clara Law written by Ron Katz, Isac Vaughn and Mike Gilleran weighs both sides of paying student athletes. They argue the point that regardless how you look at the situation, a handful of college sports have become a business. Sports such as Men’s football and basketball being broadcast on television now generate approximately $750 per year for colleges. It is acknowledged that the ones who are bringing in this money (the student athletes) are not receiving revenue from the sport they are playing. The idea of treating all sports the same was possible back in the day but today you cannot deny that one sport may bring in much more than another. Therefore Gilleran et. al. concludes that each school should be able to choose if they want to start using the business idea and paying the athletes for their work. “Alabama head coach, Nick Saban’s contract extension calls for him to make $45 million over the next eight years. His players, on the other hand, receive only the NCAA scholarships that does not even cover their basic living expenses.” (Gilleran et. al. par. 27) How is it that

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.

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) makes over $871 million dollars a year on college athletics. Some studies estimate as much as one billion dollars each year. A college university can make anywhere from several million dollars up to $120 million from their athletic programs. A college athlete gets paid nothing and yet a majority of their time and schedule is dictated by the sport they play. In the book Student Athlete’s Guide to College, author Hillary Abramson says, “If you’ve gotten to the college athletic level, you 're accustomed to making sacrifices to benefit your athletic career. In college these sacrifices only get harder.” (Abramson 8). In Dominic Alessi’s 5 Reasons Why NCAA Athletes Should be Paid, he points out that student athletes schedules are much harder than regular students schedules. “By late afternoon they have already put in a 10 hour work day.” (Alessi). Even though they are considered student athletes, the NCAA actually has rules which allow the athletes to miss class in order to fulfill their team obligations. College athletes should be paid because they spend a majority of their time with their sport, many colleges in the NCAA make a large amount of income from the sports programs, and it would help many athletes learn to be financially stable and help them in the real world as only a small fraction of college athletes turn professional and make a career

The NCAA following with courts have addressed the issue that student athletes at the collegiate level are not employees therefore they should not get paid to play. “The NCAA believes that student-athletes are not employees, under the law, and that they should not be treated as employees either by the law or by the schools they attend.” (Should college athletes be paid to play? pg. 12-13 ).