The Pros And Cons Of Student Athletes Paid

The debate about college athletes getting paid has divided people into different opinions on this topic. College athletics has become extremely popular and has turned into a job for many students. Playing a sport in college can make the players more likely to go to the pros. However it could also be a bad thing because the player could be likely to be injured while playing in the sport and ruining their whole career. The articles “College Athletes getting paid?” by Tiffany Patterson (2017), “Should college athletes be paid”by ??? (2017), “A way to start paying college athletes” by Joe Nocera (2016), Hearing held on bid to form first college athlete union. By associated press (2014) discusses the debate about college athletes getting paid it centers around scholarships, money made off of college sports and playing the sport is like having a job.

Division 1 schools have generated a total of $9.15 billion in revenue during the 2015 fiscal year. (2) That's a lot of money for students to make. College athletes will go straight from highschool to going to another 4 -12 years of college. They are using their adulthood to do more school. Not start a family, or get money for their family. Should the NCAA pay them a small cut of it? If student-athletes make all of this money for the league, they should at least get a piece of what they have made for them. Could we possibly be seeing college players make more money than the average adult? Sometimes players have injuries. Who would pay for that? Would the school or league pay for it?

The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a business that keeps expanding while the players it supports make nothing. This year the NCAA announced that they are on the verge of reaching the one billion dollar mark in annual revenue. Last year they pulled in an astonishing nine hundred and eighty nine million dollars. Most of its profit growth comes from the division one men’s basketball tournament, which accounts for eighty to ninety percent of their success. With all this incoming profit some players feel as though they are entitled to a piece of the pie. There are currently lawsuits pending and some players have even gone as far as attempting to unionize. Although they are receiving scholarships and get a lot of other assistance,

LeBron James makes 19.07 million dollars a year, Kobe Bryant makes 30.45 million a year, Peyton Manning makes 18 million dollars a year, the average college athlete makes no money at all. Why do college athletes that put in just as much work get paid differently? This is the way many people feel about NCAA's decision to not pay college athletes. There are always people who think teams should pay their athletes but there are just as many who people who disagree. Paying college athletes continues to be a huge debate in the sports world there are pros and cons for both and both need to be considered in the big decision that the NCAA has to make.

Imagine being one of the best employees working for a billion dollar industry, but despite that, you aren’t paid. That is the reality for college athletes, who should be paid for their athletic ability. In the United States, four hundred thousand athletes are part of the NCAA. Yet, none of the athletes are paid. College athletes should be paid because they make the events possible, and those events generate billions of dollars in profit.

Just about everyone would assume that colleges would pay their athletes, but unfortunately that's not the case. In fact colleges are ripping off their student athletes. Athletes that are still in college are risking their bodies, just like players that made it professional and though nothing is really done to compensate them for that. Also almost all colleges rank in their money through sports sales, and the players get none of it even though they are the reason the money comes in. And most athletes have a crammed schedule, most of that is due to the sports too.

A college education is the most valuable education that most only dream of, a dream not made reality due to not being financially fit to pay for college. Instead of paying full tuition, students are able to pay for college with an athletic scholarship. Whether it be a full ride or the scholarship paying part of it students can play sports while their studies are being covered. But a scholarship doesn't cover necessities like living, food, and travel expenses, but the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) overlooks the problem that college athletes face everyday. “The governing body of big-time college sports, the NCAA [National Collegiate Athletic Association], is caught in a huge contradiction—trying to reconcile a multibillion-dollar industry while claiming it is really an amateur activity. That it is a huge money making industry is beyond dispute” (Stanley).

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.

“As soon as they are paid they are treated differently than normal students” (Block). Which makes sense if think that athletes are normal students. Athletes are not normal students I say this because they often take way easier classes than normal students. This means that sometimes their degrees are worth less and can have a hard time looking for a job right out of college. And their schedules demand almost constant practice time which makes working a job while in school that much tougher.

Blake LeDoux Mrs.Longest Composition 1 October 2, 2017 Should Student Athletes be Paid? College athletics is a multi-billion-dollar industry that continues to grow each year. College sports are not just games; they are a form of entertainment. Fans of college athletics follow, watch and cheer on their favorite college sports team.

Athletes attending universities across the country spend long hours at their sport everyday, some spending hours equivalent to a full time job. The majority of athletes use their talents in order to receive their education for free or for a reduced fee. However, some college competitors use their time at a university as a vehicle to play professionally as a career. With the NCAA and university athletic departments making billions of dollars in revenue each year, a question has arisen. Should college athletes receive compensation for their play?

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and major division one programs are reeling in millions of dollars from the performance of students at their respective institutions. The athletes are compensated with scholarships in tuition, books, housing, and meals. Even though the athletes are receiving compensation from their universities, student athletes deserve to be paid because of the time devoted to being an athlete, the business behind the NCAA, and the profitability of the athlete’s own image.

900 million dollars. College athletics today are a large part of American society in entertainment. This directly results in enormous revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and the participating colleges which currently fuels the debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. College athletes do not deserve any extra payment by any means because they are already receiving large amounts of payment through large scholarships, and extra payment would demoralize the integrity of collegiate sports.

“Over 460,000 NCAA student-athletes – more than ever before – compete in 24 sports every year,” (NCAA). Many college athletes are well-known by sports fans, their names are used in advertising, and they generate millions of dollars in revenue to the schools. Because of this they must receive an unimaginable amount of compensation. They don’t – not even a cent for their time. The label “amateur” put on these athletes allow schools to refuse student-athlete compensation.

Professional athletes were paid less than average wages and would frequently work multiple jobs. The reason student athletes would play their sports was for the spirit of competition and the desire to be better than their rivals. However it wasn’t long before these friendly competitions became more and more heated and teams would do whatever they could to gain an advantage over their opponents. In 1840 “Harvard University sought to gain an undue advantage over its academic rival Yale by obtaining the services of a coxswain who was not a student.” (R. K. Smith, 11) It was at this time that some regulation to college athletics would have to be set in place. In the beginning college athletics were monitored by the faculty of the universities until 1905 when “over eighteen deaths and one hundred major injuries in intercollegiate football” occurred President Roosevelt called for the formation of what eventually would become the NCAA. (R. K. Smith, 12) The NCAA, the governing body behind all college athletics, is ultimately the deciding force behind not paying student athletes today. From humble beginnings the NCAA’s focus has been to preserve “the collegiate model of athletics in which students participate as an avocation, balancing their academic, social and athletics experiences.” (NCAA) In an attempt to preserve this core value the NCAA states in its rules that any student athlete is “not eligible for participation if [they] have ever taken pay, or the