Why Do Student Athletes Get Paid?

There have been much controversy weather universities should pay student athletes. The nation is divided into two groups, financially compensating the student-athlete or not. One side declares Division I and Division II schools make millions of dollars off ticket and merchandise, therefore, the athlete should receive a salary. The argument arises when for instance in football or basketball, schools make millions for winning bowls or tournaments, which the money awarded to the schools goes far beyond a four-year education. Video games along with last names on jersey have been banned for sale since college athletes were used without receiving financial compensation. On top of this are the multimillion dollar sponsorship deals universities are making with athletic apparel companies. The other side argues student athletes receive a free college education from prestigious schools and therefore should not receive financial gains. They declare a student-athlete receives free national exposure and paying them will uneven the playing field in college sports. In addition, a student will be deducted income taxes from their salary if paid. Most imply, some of the students come from inner city neighborhoods and some cannot read or write at a college level. As a result, these athletes are assigned tutors and therefore pass the courses with ease. In all, college sports have become huge money makers, but the question arises whether an

Division 1 and Division 2 colleges provide over 2.9 billion dollars a year in scholarships to student athletes. Student athletes should not be compensated for participating in college sports. College athletes can receive full ride scholarships for playing their sport of choice. Is the 40,000 dollars they are receiving in scholarships not compensation; thus prompting the question is the top tier education they are being provided with, not compensation enough? Most of the thousands of students that participate in college sports compete for the love of the game, not for a paycheck. Furthermore, college athletes understand that they may not compete at the pro level, in fact, only 2 % of college athletes go on to play professionally. The main part of the term student-athletes is student. Students do not go to college expecting a check at the end of every month or to land a spot in the first round of the draft, instead the purpose is to receive an education. All things considered, student athletes should not receive compensation for playing sports in college because it would be almost financially impossible, some are already provided with money from scholarships , and finally they are being provided with an excellent higher education.

It is mid-February and for college athletes and fans everywhere that means that the College Football “Bowl” season is over and “March Madness” is around the corner. The “Bowl” Season is a series of college football games from the elite teams, sponsored by various corporations and “March Madness” is a 68 team single elimination tournament to decide who the best team in college basketball is. For the students involved they get a chance to have their legacy live on forever and for some it is a chance to show professional teams they have what it takes to compete on the next level, but for the universities it is a chance to bring in millions of dollars in revenue. As a student-athlete, and a volunteer basketball coach, I believe that it is unfair that student athletes across the country have decided to give their lives to these sports in hopes that they get lucky and “win the lottery” by making in into professional sports. I believe that student athletes have earned the right to be compensated for their hard work, dedication and commitment to these universities across the country.

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.

Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.

A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.

In the United States, college athletics are growing larger by the minute. College athletics contribute not only to the recognition of colleges and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), it also contributes to the income of colleges and the NCAA. Without student athletes, these colleges and the NCAA would not reap the benefits of college athletics, such as: increased awareness of colleges, higher application rates, and of course the revenue brought in from game and event tickets, apparel, and contracts for licensing and television rights. Since the student athletes, who devote a great deal of time to their sport, are the cog in the machine that is the NCAA and college athletics, they deserve the fair and rightful compensation that they certainly do not currently receive. Here is exactly why student athletes in the NCAA should be compensated for what they do for their colleges, on and off the field of play.

Tyson Hartnett says, “Contrary to what all the opponents believe, being an athlete is a full-time job. On a typical day, a player will wake up before classes, get a lift or conditioning session in, go to class until 3 or 4 p.m., go to practice, go to mandatory study hall, and then finish homework or study for a test.For a little extra money to see a movie or go out to dinner once a week, my freshman roommate worked a job at the university, earning about $7/hour. He would work his butt off all day, with two or sometimes three basketball training sessions, plus classes and homework, and go to that job for a few hours late at night. He would come back exhausted, but he needed whatever money they would pay him. However, once the season started up, he couldn 't work that job anymore.” Student athletes should be paid due to school and playing a sport taking up all of their time. This is basically the same principle as having a job and going to school. Playing a sport and going to school is equal to working and going to school.

The idea of paying college athletes to compete is not new, unlike most people think. This debate has been around since the 1800’s. The college sports industry makes about $11 billion in annual revenues. Fifty colleges report annual revenues that exceed $50 million. Nationally in 2010-11, the top 15 college basketball programs generated roughly $293 million, less than a third of what the top 15 football programs generated, baseball makes very little money compare to basketball and football according to Jeffrey Dorfman. These revenues are coming from multiple sources, such as ticket sales, sponsorship, and broadcasting rights. The National Collegiate Athletic Association recently sold broadcast rights to its annual men 's basketball tournament for upwards of $770 million per season. At the University of Alabama, the head football coach, Nick Saban, recently signed a contract paying him $7 million per year; more than 91 times the average wage of an Orange County public school teacher. However, the facts I have mentioned so far concerns football only. Football and basketball are the biggest sources of athletic revenues in the majority of universities. So with all this money involved, should student athletes get a percentage of the revenue their sport brings to the university?

The question whether “If college athletes should get paid or not?” has been debated for many years. The debate is brought up every year during the NCAA men’s basketball, March Madness competition, and starts again when football season begins. College athletes do provide entertainment for sports fans, but all the benefits that they do receive should limit them from being paid. The benefits student athletes obtain is free tuition, health coverage, and an opened opportunity for their future.

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

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.

After my interview with a former security officer at the 9/11 memorial, I learned a whole new perspective of the site. In comparison to what I had observed in my short time there, my informant, Ricky who worked the site for years was able to give me an insight on what I was not able to observe. At first, I was hesitant to bother my friend for an interview since I knew he was busy with his own family or even work. My plan was to interview officers at the memorial while they were on the job during my lunch break. After getting denied by countless officers at the memorial, I gave up and sent Ricky a message on FaceBook, asking if he had time this week for a couple of questions about his time spent working at the memorial. Since I have known him since I was a child along with his brother, without hesitation, he agreed and invited me to watch our favorite show “The Walking Dead” at his house on Sunday. I arrived at his house and I treated his family to dinner as a way of saying thanks for helping me with my assignment. However, during my interview, I didn’t feel like it was much of a formal interview, instead, I felt like it was more of a friend to friend conversation about his past experiences at a job. (I was literally laying down on his couch, petting his cat while interviewing him questions off my laptop).

The third conversation took place on February 17, 2016; the length of our conversation was 25 minutes and the topic we discussed was emotions.

Students who do sports and extracurricular activities budget their time more wisely than students who don’t and overall tend to do better than kids who don’t. I believe that students who do activities outside of school tend to do better in school than students who don’t. Those students also learn valuable skills like working in groups. Doing activities outside of school makes the students want to work hard to get good grades in school because if you don't have good grades you cant do sports. According to, the US Dept. of Education in 2005, high school athletes are more likely than non-athletes to attend college and get degrees. EY Women Athletes Business Network in 2014 did a survey of 400 female corporate executives and found that 94% of them played a sport and that 61% of those women say that sports have contributed to their career success.