College athletes have become the foundation of many colleges and universities. The landscape of college sports is changing daily. Without college athletes, certain colleges and universities would not be recognized. This being said, this writer believes that athletes deserve to be paid. Paying football and basketball players will not ruin college sports or cost them to become “subcontractors.” Indeed, the way big-time college sports are going, paying the players may be the only way to save them (Nocera “Let’s Start Paying College Athletes”).The NCAA for instance is taking advantage of college athletes that sign to a certain college or university. The NCAA produces nearly eleven billion in annual revenue for college sports (Edelman“21 Reasons Why Student-Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed to Unionize”). Many colleges use their athletics as core marketers of the university (Edelman“21 Reasons Why Student-Athletes Are Employees and Should Be Allowed to Unionize”). If not for certain players, certain colleges would need to spend a lot of money on building name recognition to prospective students.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has many restrictions planted down on their college athlete which prevents them from making any outside income not established by the school. A student can apply for a summer job but the amount an athlete can make is capped. The NCAA prevents student-athletes from allowing their likeness to be used for promotional purposes (Hartnett “Why College Athletes Should Be Paid”). That includes earning money from video games, magazine endorsements, autographs, player jerseys etc.
The list goes on. Some people might put up an argument and say that student athletes get enough by receiv...
... middle of paper ...
...be-allowed-to-unionize/
Funk, Laura. “Extra Benefits: Student-Athlete Violations and NCAA Punishment”
Redlineproject.org 22 March 2012.
http://redlineproject.org/jacksonncaa.php
Hartnett, Tyson. “Why College Athletes Should be paid” Huffingtonpost.com 21 October 2013.
Web. 1 February 2014.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tyson-hartnett/college-athletes-should-be-
paid_b_4133847.html
Jeannes, Ryan. “Athletes deserve payment in multi-million dollar industry.” Star.txstate.edu.
Web. 2 February 2014. https://star.txstate.edu/node/712
Nocera, Joe. “Let’s Start Paying College Athletes.” Nytimes.com. 30 December 2011. Web. 1
February 2014.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/lets-start-paying-college-
athletes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Some feel that by not paying college athletes that college institutions are thereby exploiting their athletes free of charge, which is unfair. However, this article feels that college athletes are paid very favorably by the large amount of money they receive for schooling through scholarships. Also, since college athletes don’t pay to play or go to school they are receiving a free college degree whether or not they decide to stay in school for four years or not. With the training that they receive from professional trainers and nutritionists for a professional controlled diet they save possibly thousands within the 4 years they attend school and perform in collegiate athletics.
The proposal of payment toNCAA student-athletes has begun major conversations and arguments nationwide with people expressing their take on it. “This tension has been going on for years. It has gotten greater now because the magnitude of dollars has gotten really large” (NCAA). I am a student athlete at Nicholls State University and at first thought, I thought it would be a good idea to be able to be paid as a student-athlete.After much research however; I have come to many conclusions why the payment of athletes should not take place at the collegiate level.The payment of athletes is only for athletes at the professional level. They are experts at what they do whether it is Major League Baseball, Pro Basketball, Professional Football, or any other professional sport and they work for that franchise or company as an employee. The payment of NCAA college athletes will deteriorate the value of school to athletes, create contract disputes at both the college and professional level, kill recruiting of athletes, cause chaos over the payment of one sport versus another, and it will alter the principles set by the NCAA’s founder Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. Under Roosevelt and NCAA, athletes were put under the term of a “student-athlete” as an amateur. All student athletes who sign the NCAA papers to play college athletics agree to compete as an amateur athlete. The definition of an amateur is a person who “engages in a sport, study, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons” (Dictonary.com).
College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for playing sports. Another argument is that if student-athletes were to get paid then it would ruin the amateurism of college sports. People who are against paying the athletes do not want to see the young people become focused on money. “Paying student-athletes would dramatically shift their focus away from where it should be - gaining knowledge and skills for life after college” (Lewis and Williams). This is very understandable because one of the biggest reasons college sports are so popular is because the athletes play for school pride and for bragging rights. They play because they enjoy the game, not because it is their job. Most people that disagree with the idea of paying the athletes fail to realize what really goes on behind the scenes. At most Universities around the country the bulk of the income the school receives is brought in through the athletic programs. In fact the football and basketball teams usually bring in enough money to completely pay for the rest of the athletic programs all together. To get a better understanding of how much has changed in the world of college sports a little history must be learned.
Should college athletes get paid an additional salary? They are an important assets to universities and colleges, so why should they not? How else would universities justify taking advantage of these young men and women? These are questions that arise when pondering the issue. This has been a large controversy over the years of rather or not college athletes should be paid, more specifically football and basketball players. However, they fail to mention that colleges are only considering paying a select few, the stars of the sports. Every single sport in colleges is making revenue for those campuses, making colleges money hungry. Thus, if they decide to only pay a select few, would that leave out women sports all together? Why pay college athletes more on top of everything they already receive? Most college athletes receive free tuition, medical care, meal plans and room and board, which can acquaint to more than a quarter million dollars for their entire college career (Scoop, 2013). Why ask for more? What is this teaching our youth? They should appreciate their chance to do what they love and value the education they are receiving, because that education is far more valuable than a potential sports salary. Even though colleges and college athletes have a few good points on why they believe they should get paid, over all the issue is larger than that, college athletes already make their share of “money” through free education and much more.
College athletes attend post-secondary schools in order to receive an education and to participate in sports. “Student athletes participate in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which he or she is enrolled. Student athletes must typically balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete” (“Student athlete” 1). Additionally, some people believe athletes should receive a salary. However, paying college athletes hurts the school, the sports, and the athletes.
College athletes juggle busy academic and practice schedules all throughout their stressful weeks, so why shouldn't they be compensated for their time dedicated to sports? NCAA rules strictly prohibits players from being paid for all the hard work they do to protect “amateurism”, but are you really an amateur putting in over 40 hours a week between practice and other activities? Although students earn a college scholarship, that doesn’t cover living expenses, and access to a degree at the end of their career, players should be paid because schools, coaching staffs and major corporations are profiting off their free labor.
Many people can easily picture this scene in their minds: the roaring crowds, the smell of easy- to-eat foods, and the thousands of people all dressed in the same colors. That’s a description of game day at a major college. College sports bring in a lot of money, yet their players don’t receive any money. Many people view this as something that needs to be changed while others believe that only professionals should be compensated. In the essays “Let Stars Get Paid” and “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid”, both authors give their opinions on whether or not college athletes should be paid. College athletes should not be paid because they already receive many benefits from being athletes.
With the way the NCAA has blown up into a billion dollar industry, does it seem plausible for an academic institution to make this amount of money off of amateur athletes and not provide some other type of revenue besides scholarships? This has been at the forefront of debate as the NCAA continues to make billions off of these so called amateur athletes. The NCAA believes that if compensation is given to student-athletes, the amateurism of the game is taken away. However, many student-athletes believe they should get a piece of the revenue that is being generated off of their name and talents. College athletes should in fact be compensated because the NCAA generates enough revenue to provide the money, it could help students pay for all the
Another reason that college athletes should not be paid is because they are, under NCAA rules, to be considered amateurs. In the National Collegiate Athletic Association Rules it states, “College athletes are not to be paid, not to cash in on their prominence, never to cross any kind of line of professionalism.” Steve Wieberg, of the USA Today, studied the rules that the NCAA has placed on paying college athletes. He concludes that, “Athletic programs are meant to be an integral part of the educational program” (Weinberg). The reoccurring theme here should be obvious now —education is the most important part of the student’s time in college and being an athlete should come second.
Today there are over 450,000 college athletes and the National College Athletics Association (NCAA) faces a difficult decision on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many people believe that they should and many believe they should not. There are several benefits that college’s athletes receive for being a student athlete. Why should they receive even more benefits than their scholarship and numerous perks?
College athletes generate millions of dollars for their schools each year, yet they are not allowed to be compensated beyond a scholarship due to being considered amateurs. College athletes are some of the hardest working people in the nation, having to focus on both school courses and sports. Because athletics take so much time, these student-athletes are always busy. College football and basketball are multi-billion dollar businesses. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes beyond scholarships, and it would be tough to work a new compensation program into the NCAA and university budgets. College athletes should be compensated in some form because they put in so much time and effort, generating huge amounts of revenue.
The college athletes of their respective sports today, have the opportunity of showcasing their talents in competition on local and national programming on a regular basis which has lately brought attention this controversy, paying college athletes. The issue was brought on by the athletes over time, then caught onto coaches, sports columnists, and fans. The athletes dedicate themselves to the sport to a caliber comparable to the professional tier. The idea of paying the athletes could be considered as they play major factor in reputation of their schools, as well as funds for their schools. However most colleges do not have profitable sports teams. Thus, paying athletes would prove to be a very difficult endeavor and this could destroy college athletics as we know them today.
Despite the strength of the reasons as to why student-athletes should not be paid, there are certain problems with the current NCAA system which can and should be cured. The gap between a full scholarship and the cost of attendance should be covered by the academic institution, especially when a student athlete does not qualify for a loan. Such a policy will go a long way in ensuring that student-athletes are not leaving school to become professional athletes because they cannot pay their bills. Academic institutions should be able to provide at least that much for their athletes. Ultimately, this is a form of payment, but it is not the type of payment that some individuals are advocating. The primary purpose of these institutions is to educate; it is the coach's job to teach, and not just in terms of the sport a student athlete plays. These schools should facilitate the educations of student-athletes through scholarship grants, but not through a system of salaries dependent on supply and demand, which ultimately detracts a student-athlete from picking a school, and detracts them from attending a school, for the right reasons.
There are many aspects to an NCAA players eligibility, most of them are disputed against. One of these topics is players getting paid. Numerous questions are raised by this topic. The largest of these questions is “Should NCAA players get paid?.” Surprisingly, the pros for paying the athletes outnumber the reasons for not paying them. The athletes are basically workers for their school, they devote hours to their sport, they take time out of their classes, thus making their scholarships less valuable, and the NCAA teams would be more successful.
College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.