For years many people have argued whether collegiate athletes deserve to be paid or not.Although this topic has been a big issue for collegiate athletes and those who support those athletics, the rules have yet to be changed. This essay will argue why collegiate athletes deserveto be paid by addressing the revenue produced by college athletics, considering the hours of dedication athletes spend at their sport, and acknowledging what the NCAA considers “amateurism”. Some of the most known schools in America are known for its athletics programs not academics. Although some do have good academic programs when someone says the nameof a school like the University of Alabama or Clemson many people immediately think about football. Also schools like the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill or Duke, people oftenthink about basketball. All of these “big name” schools wouldn’t have their “big names” without the athletes that participate in the athletics of those institutions. So why aren’t these athletes being paid?In 2014 a legal writer named Marc Edelman contributed an article to Forbes entitled “21Reasons why Student-Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed To Unionize.” In his 7threason he states “The NCAA currently produces nearly $11 Billion in annual revenue from college sports -- more than the estimated total league revenues of both the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League” (Forbes). Of this $11 Billion produced none of the money is given to
Thousands of 18-21 year olds slave away for 60 hours or more every week. They are expected to work tirelessly hard to pass classes but at the same time dedicate most of their time to athletics. College athletes are used to create a billion dollar business, industries rely on them constantly working away and receive little to no compensation. College athletes should be compensated for being the working force behind a multi billion dollar industry and receive little to no payment for their time, while at the same time have to pass college classes.
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
College sports are one of the largest and fastest growing markets in today’s culture. With some college sports games attracting more viewers than their professional counterparts, the NCAA is one of the most profiting organizations in America. Recently there has been controversy in the world of college sports as to whether the college athletes that are making their universities and the NCAA money should receive payment while they are playing their respective sport. Many believe that these athletes should be paid. Others argue that they are already receiving numerous benefits for playing that sport from their universities. Many of the proponents of paying college athletes are current or former college athletes who believe their hard work and hours put into practice and competing go under appreciated. They feel that while the athletes are making the university money, the athletes do not receive any cut of these profits. Opponents feel that athletes already receive numerous perks and should not receive extra compensation on top of the perks they already receive.
For about a decade, the debate between whether collegiate athletes should be paid while playing has been contemplated. Now, the focus has moved from all sports to two specific areas, football and men’s basketball. Sprouting from many court cases filed against the NCAA to some ugly sandals dealing with the athletes themselves. In the 2010 – 2011 time frame, this controversy really sparked up chatter; eventually leading the current pled for sport reformation. Our student athletes are the ones who are at the expense here stuck in between this large argument. Over the past 10 years, there has been minor things done for either side and the players themselves have started taking things into their own hands. The year 2010 a total of 7 student
How much harder would athletes work if they were paid for their performance on the field, track, or court? College athletes are put to the test each and everyday, they risk their health to entertain millions day in and day out. College athletes deserve part of the money due to the revenue they bring in for their schools and for the NCAA, they deserve the money because they do not have time to get a job because they are practicing and training at least 40 hours a week, they should also get paid because they are used as marketing models for the ncaa and for their universities. College athletes also should not get paid because they are already getting paid in scholarship money. College athletes deserve to get paid because they are putting their bodies on the line just so the NCAA and their sponsors can make money.
With the universities pulling in more than twelve billion dollars, the rate of growth for college athletics surpasses companies like McDonalds and Chevron (Finkel, 2013). The athletes claim they are making all the money, but do not see a dime of this revenue. The age-old notion that the collegiate athletes are amateurs and students, binds them into not being paid by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This pay for play discussion has been talked about since the early 1900s but recently large steps are being made to actually make a change. There are many perspectives on the payment of collegiate student athletes coming from the NCAA, the athletes themselves, and the university officials.
Throughout the years college sports have been about the love of the game, filled with adrenaline moments. However, the following question still remains: Should college athletes get paid to play sports in college? Seemingly, this debate has been endless, yet the questions have gone unanswered. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) plays a vital role in this debate. The NCAA is a billion dollar industry, but yet sees that the athlete should get paid for their hard work and dedication.
Sports have been a big part of culture in the United States since the 1900’s. Sports has become a multibillion dollar business of sort, with spots such as baseball, basketball, and football captivating americans.With american sports gaining popularity, the growth of college sports went on the rise. In 2013, The National Collegiate Athletic Association statistically generated $912,804,046 (Alesia, 2014). With all of this income that the NCAA brought in, one has to raise the question, should college athletes be paid? Even though college athletes are student athletes, they should be paid because they are practically employees to the college without compensation.
College athletes have much more responsibilities to worry about than pros, and scholarships don 't help athletes that much and they often don’t even finish college. The problem is college athletes don 't get paid when they have twice the responsibilities of pro athletes. college athletes have to juggle their sport practices and games, being on the road a lot of the time, going to classes everyday, and going to work so they can have money to eat. The solution would be to take out of all the money college athletes make from games, and memorabilia. NCAA is a billion dollar organization and they don 't pay the very people who make them the
Remy, D. (2012). Why the New York Times ' Nocera is wrong. NCAA News, 5.
I was asked to conduct an interview with someone who had knowledge about my research topic, to help provide me with information. My research topic is whether college athletes should receive pay, therefore, I conducted an interview, over email, with one of my high school coaches Mike Zarger. Not only is Mike a coach, he was also a student athlete at Penn State University. Zarger was a phenomenal athlete himself, striving in both cross country and track. He is also a father of two girls that went to West Virginia University and the other went to Virginia Tech University to run cross country. I decided to conduct my interview with Zarger because he was a college athlete, a coach, and not to mention a parent of two college athletes himself.
Some may say student – athletes have it easy because they get to go to school for free and live the life of a college athlete when that is not the case in most situations. College athletes are in the business of marketing at a young age without playing professional sports which is a business. Which is why I believe student – athletes should be paid to play college sports. My reasons for this argument are that the student athlete may need spending money and money to support their families, secondly the schools along with their sport profits off of the students athletes names, and lastly for big events some student athletes are required to miss schools due to these events.
Abstract: Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.
College sports is a form of entertainment for students, former alumni and the rabid sports fanatic. The NCAA gives sports fans the opportunity to see up and coming talent blossom and mature well before the player is eligible to join a pro league. While the NCAA benefits monetarily off this talent, the players themselves receive nothing of value accept for a scholarship to the university. Recently student athlete have organized and decided to fight for the rights to establish players unions similar to the pro league. Players have been meet with a backlash against the movement because of the lack of understanding. Although college athletics are considered amateur sports, student athletes should be paid for their services. Student athletes should receive compensation in order to pay for college expenses, to replace lost revenue from lack of endorsements and cover the impending probability of serious injury.
College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and