Why Do College Athletes Get Paid?

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

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.

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

The NCAA dates back to the early 20th century when president Theodore Roosevelt encouraged reforms to college football practices, which had resulted in a lot of injuries and deaths. Henry MacCracken of New York University arranged meetings about the football rules and regulations. On December 28, 1905 in New York, 62 education institutions became members of the IAAUS (Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States), which is now better known as the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). The NCAA started out as a rule making body. Finally in 1921 the first NCAA championship was born: the National Collegiate Track and Field championship. Later more championships were formed, including the big “March Madness” basketball tournament in 1939.

The NCAA is an organization, founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, led by a group of board members who’s goal is to have college players succeed both athletically and scholarly; coined the term ‘student athlete.’ The sport of football was having many problems in the late 1800’s/early 1900’s and President Roosevelt said, “reform the game or it will be abolished.” Thus, the birth of the NCAA was formed and rules were set to make the game safer to the athletes. The NCAA currently has three different divisions: Division I, Division II, and Division III. Each division has its own set of rules on what restrictions are placed. Division I is said to be the most competitive division where the top talent goes and where a lot of professional teams pull from. The NCAA is the main headline for all college sporting events and “runs the show” telling what people can, and cannot, do. The

The National Collegiate Athletic Association is one of the biggest sports organizations in the United States. One of the most divisive issues relating to the NCAA over the last several years has been the issue of athlete compensation. There are many sports—particularly football and basketball—that bring in incredible amounts of revenue to colleges across the country; therefore, whether or not athletes should be compensated for their role in college sports has become a topic of debate. While scholarship athletes are already compensated by their access to tutors, meals and a free education, the concept of the student-athlete has deteriorated over time and thus athletes should be able to make money by signing autographs or making public appearances while they are in school. In addition, the big four American professional sports do not give amateurs an opportunity to play aside from Major League Baseball, which funnels athletes to college sports and in turn ushers them into a place where they cannot profit from their athletic ability. The issue is clearly a complex and unethical one. It would be difficult for schools to pay athletes fairly as certain sports would appear entitled to more money based on profitability; however, players should undoubtedly be able to benefit from their athletic prowess by selling merchandise and profiting from their stature in general. The NCAA’s stance hindering players’ ability to sell autographs and other memorabilia is just as important to this

Since March 31st, 1906 , the day the NCAA was found, it has been making a hand full of money off of their athletes. College athletes are the face of the organization. The reason why most universities are very well known. Why college athletes aren't getting paid for their sweat, blood and tears, is the number 1 argument in today's sport world.

The excitement of Bowl week in The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is again upon us. This week brings out the die-hard fans all excited and tailgating, but with it comes big business. This business in 2010 broke the $1 billion mark in profits for colleges as reported by CNNMoney.com. With those kinds of profits always dangling in the wind it leads to a question that is asked and argued year after year. Should the stars of the show “the collegiate athlete” be paid for his/her services?

How would you know what you are really good at if you don’t try everything? You would never know what you are really good at until you have tried everything. Although some people believe that limiting extracurricular activities will help you to stay on track, I think it is better if I decide how I want to spend my time because no one knows what I am really capable of better than myself and because some people are looking forward to getting athletic scholarships for college.

Universities establish their reputation in their accreditation, the success rate of their students, and believe it or not, their athletic achievements. Upon applying to colleges, an applicant will almost always base their interest in the institution on its educational value, location, student feedback, and sports. Many of these universities grant extremely generous scholarships to student athletes, offering them a practically free education. While some agree with this method of accommodation, others argue that these athletes are being taken advantage of. They contest the college’s intentions by claiming that it is simply profiting from the labor of its football and basketball teams. The current question at hand is whether or not colleges and universities should pay their student athletes. However, I believe that doing so would devalue the university’s education by insinuating that athletics are greater than or come before academics. This would also be an unfair advantage, given the countless other students that get academic scholarships and take part in collegiate clubs but receive no additional monetary help. There are also the students of the arts who participate in numerous performances and events that are equivalent to the work put forth by sports players. Therefore, in its simplest of terms, paying student athletes would just be inequitable.

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.

How the Universities can pay college athletes? It is a very complicated question. Athletes earn their schools hundreds of thousands of dollars, and increase the enrollment. Top NCAA executives are getting $1 million per year, for example Mike Kryzewski, Duke’s basketball men’s coach is making $7 million a year. There are a billion dollar television contracts for NCAA tournament s, while an athlete can't earn $50 from signing a few autographs. Still paying college athletes are not that easy and there is many problems needed to be addressed before example, where would the money come from? How could you pay college football or basketball players but not soccer players or members of the women's golf team? And how can anyone pay men in a way that

“Unless you’re finding a cure for cancer or creating world peace, I don’t know if anybody deserves to get that much money.” That is coming from a NFL quarterback, Drew Brees. Take for instance, Jimmy Garoppolo, which is only 26 years old , just signed the biggest contract in NFL history. The contract was for 5 years and worth $137.5 million. He is making on average $27.5 million per year! Now, look at the average salary for a Georgia State Trooper. Once they graduate from trooper school, they can earn on average $35,741 a year. The athlete makes nearly 770 times the amount of the troopers’ salary! The people that keep the roads safe have a salary that is no comparison to an athletes. Professional athletes get paid too much to just entertain the general public. Public service jobs, military

“Defeat is not the worst of failures.  Not to have tried is true failure.”  -George Edward Woodberry.  This quote is relevant to the question because if you have a bad GPA you're not trying, thus losing.  High school athletes should have to keep their grades up to play a sport.  There are three reasons for this.  First, if they have good grades and are good at sports, there’s a better chance of getting into college.  Second, grades keep them motivated during sports.  Lastly, it helps lessen the stress of paying for college.

College can be an overwhelming experience for some people, and for others not so much. If a student is armed with a powerful work ethic, and a will to succeed, college may seemingly be quiet straightforward. On the other hand, for the student who is not as fortunate to be equipped with those skills, the journey through college may not be as successful. This is one reason why the collegiate student athlete may tend to carry a higher grade point average than that of a non athlete. From a young age most athletes have been trained and disciplined to become the best they can be at their sport. Along with that training, most of them have developed a desire to outwork the competition, and be successful in everything that they do. This happens to fit right in with what it takes to be successful in academics as well. Not only are they equipped with a desire to succeed, they are also held accountable by the athletic department, coaches, and athletic association to maintain their good grades to keep eligibility. This is why there may be a chance that the collegiate student athlete may do better, on average, in the class room, than that of the non-student athlete.