The Pros And Cons Of College Sports

As Academic Performance Ratings and Graduation Success Rates climb, one begins to realize that “student-athletes” are not just “dumb jocks.” In actuality, compared to the general population of students, athletes have a higher overall graduation rate. The national graduation rate for athletes is 64 percent, while the graduation rate for all students is only 62 percent (Lawler). The NCAA has made great strides in making sure schools work to turn out “educated jocks.”

In his article “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch (2011) describes how universities are focused on advancing and receiving money from major athletics and having star athletes, but how the universities are not caring for the “student athlete.” The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has made college sports into an unmerited business. However, as years progress more athletes are getting smart and are taking the NCAA to court. The more students that challenges the rules by the NCAA and take them to court, the secrets and undermining values of the NCAA come out and the closer the NCAA comes to an end.

I feel that college and professional sports share some of the same categories, college is just on a smaller scale than professional. Some of the expenses that both college and professional sports have in common are; travel, salaries, athletic scholarships (college), and facilities just to mention a few. The coaches’ salaries, especially football and basketball head coaches, has become one of the biggest issues in the last few years. These salaries create the largest expense acquired by most athletics programs. They average from $200,000 up. There should be a limitations set by the board as to how much they are paid. Same goes for professional sports. In my opinion, some professional players are over-paid. Although they are great at what

In 1995, several years after he stepped down as the NCAA’s executive director of 36 years, Walter Byers published Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Exploiting College Athletes. The title didn’t belie the book’s content. Among Byers’ confessions was the deception he sought in coining the well-worn phrase “student-athlete” to describe college athletes.

Every year, thousands of student athletes across the world sign the NCAA’s 08-3A Form, also called the “Student-Athlete” form, which waives their right to receive money for the use of their name and image. Like many of us in this class, these college athletes devote their time to their academics while spending additional hours with training and practices throughout the day and receive no stipend in return. This 08-3A form defines college athletes as amateurs, who cannot receive payment for playing their desired sport. While their schools and coaches may make millions of dollars in salaries and endorsement deals and are the highest-paid public employees in many states due to their performances in their desired sport, these “amateurs” can never

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

The ugly truth behind the money machine that is college sports is that, every year, college athletes are deceived by the institutions the compete for into making them millions of dollars, with relatively little in return. Athletes are said to be given a chance to attend college and to attain a free college degree. However, research has shown that this is not completely true for two reasons. For one, the student athlete will spend most of their time in preparation for competition. Secondly, what education the student athlete does receive hardly serves them outside of maintaining eligibility just so

Robert and Amy McCormick, law professors at Michigan State University, believe that some student-athletes attend college to play sports and that due to scheduling conflicts between class and practices they do not have full choice as to what major they would like to take (Cooper, 12 – 13). “The way football and basketball players in Division I programs manage juggling sport and school, the McCormicks maintain, undermines the NCAA’s contention they are student-athletes.” (Cooper, 12-13).

Its no secret that college sports brings in the big bucks, and without the athletes preforming day in or day out universities would lack the funds to support a school needs. The college sports industry makes 11 billion in annual revenues (Mitchell, Horace, U.S. News Digital Weekly). 11 billion dollars made off of college sports alone is enough its self to pay these student-athletes for their contribution to a school’s success because without them there wouldn’t be this much income. They need these athletes and the NCAA should quit exploiting them for their talents and compensate them. Student-athletes are amateurs who choose to participate in intercollegiate athletics (Mitchell, Horace, U.S. News Digital Weekly). Indeed, they are amateur but in sports the word professional has a different meaning since in all sports there is a 1-2-year stint before an athlete can go from the college level to a professional standpoint. Meaning it only takes a year or two

When it comes to football in the college league, many rules have been changed or new rules have been added to make the game safer for those that play it. The Targeting rule was added going into the 2008 NCAA season of college football for safety reasons. This rule has also introduced a new discussion of whether or not the rule is fair. The rule states that if a player strikes another player in an upward motion, striking with the crown [top] of the helmet, then it is a fifteen-yard penalty, and the player is disqualified from the game. This obviously causes controversy between officials and college football coaches. Many believe that the rule is too harsh and that many calls that are targeting, are not targeting after all. And that it is not fair to eject a player, if the player did not even deserve the call “There are other gripes with the targeting rule. Washington State coach Mike Leach called it ‘micromanaging, for lack of a better word,’ citing too many variables and inconsistent enforcement. Stanford coach David Shaw echoed a sentiment shared by Mora and Pickett: that there should be different levels of targeting penalties corresponding with the severity of the infraction” (qtd in Bolch). NCAA rules states that when the targeting rule is implied, then the officials will review the play, and give a final verdict. However, most of the time the call is not overturned and the player remains disqualified from the game. This new rule has also made it nearly

Although college football is the third-most-popular sport, the majority of schools lose revenue on athletics. The National Collegiate Athletic Association, also known as the NCAA, is promoting beneficial ideas to help players in need while increasing academic standards. As stated in the article, “On some LSU teams, Martin said, half of the players are “special admits””, which means multitudes of players do not achieve the same levels of academic success as “normal” students. As long as academic budgets are miniscule compared to athletic budgets, there will always be controversy. This tension increased when “legendary head coach” Joe Paterno, along with Jerry Sandusky, were fired for being involved in a sex-abuse scandal with a minor.

Sports, especially football, are a major part of the universities in the United States. Many times they are valued over education. Many college athletes end up getting a poor education, because they tend to look at how the universities sports teams are doing rather than the level of education they will be getting. Steven Salzburg notices this problem and writes about it in his article “Get Football Out of Our Universities.” He acknowledges the fact that we have prioritized a game used to entertain people over the education of Americans and that this trend has to come to an end. According to him, football needs to be removed from the university system in order to avoid becoming “the big, dumb jock on the world stage” (1). Salzburg uses a combination of ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos in an unsuccessful effort to persuade universities and avid football fans that the interest in football is jeopardizing our advances in science, technology, engineering, and math.

There are these ongoing stereotypes that student athletes are “dumb,” “lazy,” and “privileged.” It’s understandable that people believe these stereotypes, news magazines and reports are always talking about how athletes are “coddled” and “cheat” their way to success. Though it is nowhere near true for the majority of student athletes, a select few situations encourage this negative categorization of us, thus putting student athletes under even more pressure to perform. Student athletes are constantly misjudged and the assumptions are affecting us.

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.

There has been amplified debate on the treatment, education, training of the college athlete. To avoid exploitation of athletes, “The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), formed in 1905, set bylaws requiring college student-athletes to be amateurs in order to be eligible for intercollegiate athletics competition” (Schneider n.p.). Intercollegiate athletics have dramatically changed over the last several decades. Currently, intercollegiate athletics generate tremendous amounts of revenue, remarkably in football and basketball. College sports in America is a