Paul Dietzel, former head coach of LSU, once said, “You can learn more character on the two-yard line than anywhere else in life.” Ever since the beginning, not only children but also college athletes have been playing sports for the love of the game and have used it as a way to grow character, teamwork, and leadership. Although when playing for a University an athletes job is to bring in profit for the school, this is not why these young men and women have continued with these sports they love. It is usually these students passion, a way for them to express themselves like others have art and music. The question has been up whether these college athletes should be paid for their loyalty and income for the University but by paying these students more than their given scholarship, it would defeat the purpose and environment of a college sport versus a professional sport, cause recruiting disputes, and affect the colleges benefits from these school athletics.
Fans have such a love for college football, completely different from NFL but paying athletes just like professional ones would change that different environment for both players and fans completely. Fans love the idea that they are watching these young men play with passion and love for the game. University alumni like to see these players have the same loyalty to the schools that they had when they attended. It resembles a big family, which is so different than a professional team that is technically playing simply for money for the organizations. Collegiate sports is not a career or profession. It is the students' vehicle to a higher education degree (Mitchell). Like many say, “you play for the name on the front, not the back.” It is a common argument that that professio...
... middle of paper ...
...whole different world from professional sports considering they supply men with a family to help grow character with, supply them with a free education, and create a whole community of people that are loyal and generally remain loyal to one school. This bridge between the two sports could be majorly affected if college athletes were to be paid and would then bring up the issue about paying even high school athletes eventually. It is merely opening a can of worms and has been a tradition for so long that it should remain one for years to come. College athletes might not be receiving a full salary but that is not the point of it and they know what they are getting into when they commit to playing a sport. This long-standing barrier between professional and college athletics should remain how it is for the good of everyone but mostly the athletes and college programs.
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.
The schools should not be paying them a salary, but rather allowing their athletes to receive money for their likeness, and/or time. Now not every player is good enough to be promoted like others, it would raise the playing field in college football. It’s very selfish of the NCAA to promote these players and making money off of them with compensating them. When you look at it; it’s si...
... being paid. Many people prefer watching college sports over professional sports based on the idea that money isn’t involved in college sports. They are competing and giving everything they have for the love of their teammates, the love of their school, and above all, their love for the game. Paying athletes would ruin this standard of intercollegiate athletics. For all these reasons, college athletes should not be paid beyond their full ride scholarships.
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.
Student athletes should not be paid more than any other student at State University, because it implies that the focus of this university is that an extracurricular activity as a means of profit. Intercollegiate athletics is becoming the central focus of colleges and universities, the strife and the substantial sum of money are the most important factors of most university administration’s interest. Student athletes should be just as their title states, students. The normal college student is struggling to make ends meet just for attending college, so why should student athletes be exempt from that? College athletes should indeed have their scholarships cover what their talents not only athletically but also academically depict. Unfortunately, the disapproval resides when students who are making leaps academically are not being offered monetary congratulations in comparison to student athletes. If the hefty amount of revenue that colleges as a conglomerate are making is the main argument for why athletes should be paid, then what is to stop the National Clearinghouse from devising unjust standards? Eventually if these payments are to continue, coaches, organizations, and the NCAA Clearinghouse will begin to feel that “c...
College athletes should be paid! College athletes are often considered to be some of the luckiest students in the world. Most of them receiving all inclusive scholarships that cover all the costs of their education. They are also in a position to make a reputation for themselves in the sporting world preparing them for the next step. The ongoing debate whether student athletes should be paid has been going on for years. These athletes bring in millions of dollars for their respective schools and receive zero in return. Many will argue that they do receive payment, but in reality it is just not true. Costs associated with getting a college education will be discussed, information pertaining to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), and benefits student athletes receive. First, I’ll start with costs associated with college and most of all why student athletes should be paid!
The idea of paying college athletes has been up for debate for some time now. With NCCA football to march madness basketball games, there is now a “voice” for compensating both football and basketball players
College athletes should not be paid it will ruin college sports forever. Some people believe that college athletes should be paid by the school because of all of the hard work they put in however they shouldn’t be paid because there is no fair way to pay every college athlete. There are many reasons that college athletes shouldn’t be paid one of the main reasons is that colleges don’t have enough money, the second reason is that they already get money in the form of scholarships, and there is no fair way to pay each college athlete.
A question that has been rising to the surface lately is “should college athletes be paid a salary?” One cannot get on the internet now a day and not see some kind of college sport headline. The world of college sports has been changed greatly the past decade due to college athletes. These athletes make insurmountable amounts of money and an unbelievable amount of recognition for the universities. The athletes that provide and make a ton of revenue for the colleges also spend a huge amount of their time practicing and staying committed to sports, and have to maintain good grades in school which requires quite a bit of overtime. Because college athletes generate massive amounts of revenue and put in massive amounts of personal time for their individual universities, colleges need to financially compensate players for their contributions. The colleges that these superstars represent are reaping all of the benefits of the accomplishments the athletes have, yet the big named players are making nothing from what they do.
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.
The payment of NCAA student-athletes will deteriorate the value of an education to the athletes. The value of an education for a young man or woman cannot be measured. It is our gate way to success as...
On the issue of college athletes getting paid, I believe they should. When I mean getting paid I only mean a stipend or weekly check, not thousands or millions. All the hard work and dedication they put into their sport and academics are worthy enough. I have had a chance to play collegiate sports and it takes a lot out of you mentally and physically. The student athletes deserve at least enough money to have a normal student life. $300-$400 a month should give athletes enough money to get the required necessities. All this does is replace the notion of the athlete getting a job for a source of income. This will also help reduce the rate at which athletes accept money, cars, and gifts from boosters. When athletes get caught accepting something from a booster it looks bad on the athlete and the college. So, in my opinion yes college athletes should get paid, there is too much money that the universities have earned floating around going unanswered for the athletes not to get their cut.
...ecks and be treated as a farm system for the NFL, NBA, or MLB. If these athletes started getting paid now, at the college level, then the major leagues of these sports would suffer tremendously and lose marketability and money. A final solution to not having players get paid or receive certain benefits is maybe these head coaches of certain universities should not be getting the average 2 million dollars a year to be a coach, in some cases more than the presidents of these universities.(Chicago Tribune) There could be major strides made by simply merging that athletes shouldn’t get paid in whole dollars, but should receive paid benefits in which they would not have to worry about starving, losing scholarships due to injury or sub-par play. That I think would make the world for college athletes a better place, where both the schools benefit and the players benefit.
For decades there has been a debate on student athletes and their drive to succeed in the classroom. From the very beginning of organized college level athletics, the goal to want to succeed in athletics has forced students to put academics to the back burner. In spite of the goal to want to succeed over a hundred years of attempts to check limits of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards still seems to struggle to this day. This brings to surface one of the most asked questions in sports, “What effect does college sports have on academics and economics?” Herbert D. Simons, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington, authors of “Academic Motivation and the Student Athlete” researched the topic on whether athletics and academics benefit each other. Bryan Flynn, the author of “College Sports vs. Academics” poses the question “Should institutions of higher learning continue to involve themselves in athletic programs that often turn out to be virtual arms races for recruiting talented players who bring big money and prestige, but put academics to the back burner?” Although both authors agree that sports have an impact on an athlete’s academics, the focus of their argument differs.