More handpicked essays just for you.
Should college athletics be paid
Essays on whether college athletes should be paid or not
Essay on college athlete pay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There has always been a debate on whether college athletes should be paid in addition to their tuition. Many may believe that the athletes deserve this extra pay, but I certainly disagree. I think that college athletes should not get special treatment because of their athletic abilities. I also believe that it would be unfair to students that do not have the ability to participate in athletics. College athletes should not get paid because only certain players play, some colleges can not afford to pay athletes, school is about getting an education, and it is not fair to the students that are not capable of playing a sport. In college athletics, only a certain number of players actually participate in the sports (Paying College Athletes). Colleges …show more content…
Most colleges and universities have to keep their facilities up-to-date so that they can compete with other colleges and universities across the nation. The way a college looks effects the amount of students that enroll into their establishment. These improvements to their facilities can cost up to millions of dollars. Since these improvements cost so much, colleges and universities may not be able to pay college athletes outside of the tuition. Also, colleges and universities have budgets for all of their programs. If colleges and universities were to pay college athletes, that would mean that they would have to cut another programs budget. This would not be fair because there is not true way to decide which program’s budget will be cut to make up for paying the student athletes. This would be an ongoing problem for many colleges because any way that they would put it, there would be not fair way to make an appropriate decision. Since colleges and universities have to keep their facilities up-to-date and maintain budgets, they will not be able to provide the money needed to pay college …show more content…
Students that do not have the ability to play would be at a disadvantage than students that are capable of playing a sport. Athletes do not necessarily have to apply themselves as much as students that do not play sports. The recruitment process normally tells an athlete where they are going and if they have to pay any money. For a student that does not play a sport, it is more difficult. Students that do not have play sports have to rely on academic scholarships, their ACT and SAT scores, and their Grade Point Average out of high school. According to the article “Paying Student Athletes”, “Basketball coach Paul Hewitt of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta states thats, you'd get a few guys making a lot of money, and others fighting their way onto campus,” (Paying Student Athletes). Also, students that do not play sports normally have to get jobs in order to pay for their food and tuition that a student athlete does not necessarily have to spend their own money ons. Athletes, on the other hand, just have money handed to them because they are playing a sport. This is why it would not be fair to students that are not capable to participate in sports if student athletes were to get
They do not face problems of debt and tuition to the extent that the normal college student faces. Student-athletes are fairly compensated through publicity and financial benefits, and the NCAA should continue to refrain from paying them. The varying size and interest levels of universities makes it almost impossible to fairly pay all athletes. In order to avoid problems like those exhibited by Northwestern’s football team, who recently tried to unionize, all athletes would need to be paid equally. The excitement brought on by college sports is immense, and problems created due to paying athletes would only hurt the tradition and charisma that college athletics offer. In conclusion, College athletes are students and amateurs, not employees. “Remember student comes first in student-athlete”
Tyson Hartnett of The Huffington Post once said “Even with any type of scholarship, college athletes are typically dead broke.” This quote regards a tremendous controversy that has been talked about for the past few years. He talks about whether or not college athletes should be paid for their duties. Despite the fact college athletes are not professionals, they should most certainly be paid for playing for their respective schools due to many factors. These factors include health risks and the income bring in for their colleges as well as to the National Collegiate Athletic Association.
Should college athletes receive pay for what they do? You’ve probably seen this pop-up a million times, and thought about it. You’ve probably figured why should they? Aren’t they already receiving benefits from a full-ride scholarship? But then an athlete will get caught up in a scandal like Johnny Manziel, where he signed footballs for money.. then you think well why shouldn’t he receive that money? And you then contradict yourself. But shouldn’t they receive money from outside sources, and then the benefits from the school. Not get a salary from the school just the benefits they’re already receiving, and money from sponsors. Wouldn’t that make sense considering the money they’re making the school? According to an ESPN report Alabama University makes $123,769,841 in total revenue from sports. (College Athletics Revenue) Yes ONE HUNDRED & TWENTY THREE MILLION. Yet an athlete from Alabama can only receive benefits from a scholarship.. That doesn’t seem right. You would want to be payed when the opportunity arises. It should only be fair these players get a piece of the revenue pie, after all they are the ones creating the revenue. The players should be getting benefits to allow them to pay for basic college needs, grow up to be responsible adults, and allow the NCAA to thrive. This would allow for the NCAA to truly thrive as a sporting association.
... 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.
Athletes everywhere complain and gripe about how little money they have. What they don’t realize is, it’s not just them. Most college students do not have a sufficient amount of money that they can buy whatever they want. It is outrageous that athletes believe they are entitled to accommodations because they play sports. To play a sport at the collegiate level is a privilege (Top 10 Reasons College Athletes Should Not Be Paid). Students that participate in athletics should not receive any payment because they are receiving tons of benefits, free tuition, and this would extend the talent gap.
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 best argument against paying players is that it diminishes the value of an education" (qtd. in Zimbalist). State University has breached its academic standard by allocating unnecessary expenditures to athletically advanced students. Student athletes should not be paid at State University, because it focuses on an extracurricular activity as a means of profit, praises athletic ability over merit/ scholastics, promotes a bridge between players and regular students, and creates hierarchy between universities.
One of the strongest arguments against student athletes getting paid is that many people feel they already are getting paid, through their financial aid package. Sports Illustrated author, Seth Davis, states in his article “Hoop Thoughts”, that “student athletes are already being payed by earning a free tuition. Which over the course of four years can exceed $200,000, depending on the school they attend. They are also provided with housing, textbooks, food and academic tutoring. When they travel to road games, they are given per diems for meals. They also get coaching, training, game experience and media exposure in their respective crafts” (Davis, 2011). This is a considerable amount of income. While the majority of regular students are walking out of school with a sizeable amount of debt, most student athletes are debt free. Plus they get to enjoy other benefits that are not made available to the average student. They get to travel with their teams, t...
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!
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.
In the article “Pay to Play: should college athletes be paid?” the article states, “College athletes should not be forgot their main purpose at school is to learn and study, not receive money” (Birkenes and Akash). One can take from this that athletes should not be paid because they are normal students. College athletes are not making playing sports their only purpose for attending college; they are attending to pursue a more concrete degree that offers financial stability. Birkenes and Akash also write, “Paying college athletes would take money away from college budgets…” If athletes were to be payed then college would lose academic opportunities. The payment of athletes would cause academic cuts for things; such as math and science research. Payment of college athletes will cause a decline in college academics and cause the players to focus less on being a
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).
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.
Paying college athletes is a bad idea because of the cost associated with it. According to equal rights policies and other rules by the NCAA, colleges are required to pay all athletes, regardless of gender, sport played, publicity for the college from the sport, or proficiency in the sport. This means that colleges like the University of Tennessee, which has over 500 student athletes, would have to devote a large portion of their athletics budget to paying student athletes. According to Jim Walker, these massive costs may cause colleges to close less profitable activities like tennis or golf in an effort to save money for the big, money-making sports such as football and basketball (1). Women’s sports would likewise be targeted, as they usually operate at a higher cost than they bring in revenue (Walker 1). For colleges operating with lower budgets, having sports programs may become completely impossible. As sports editor Al Dunning said “Where are athletes going to play- and receive scholarships- when all but the richest schools go broke?” (1).