We all know that college sports are a very corrupt system. From Drugs, to sex, scandals, academic fraud, and pay-for-play schemes and on and on. College sports is a runaway train at this point from all of the corruption it has. One thing that could help solve much of this corruption is paying the college athletes a base pay. College athletes deserve at least a base pay for all of the effort and time they put in to these sports. And let’s face it, many athletes in these high end division one schools go to the college for the sports, not the education. College athletes deserve compensation for all their time and effort in their respective sports.
College sports are sports funded by colleges in order to give students a chance to play their desired sports while still attending college. The students are able to participate in these sports and still receive a full education through the college.
The athletes participate in these sports and each sport produces about 80,000$ of revenue for an average D1 school. This shows that college sport don’t only help the student-athletes but the colleges as well.
The advantages of competing in college sports, for the athlete’s sake are both immediate, or while there in college, and also lifelong. Participating in college sports provides the athletes opportunities to learn, compete and succeed in their respective sports. Student-athletes receive top-notch academic support from the college, regular access to outstanding coaching, facilities and equipment, and quality health care through the college. It is shown that student-athletes as a group graduate at higher rates than their peers in college and feel better prepared for life after college. (http://www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/future/want-play-c...
... middle of paper ...
...informs us, college athletes are legally ruled to be “employees”, and subject to workers compensation claims of their “employer” the university that employed them. This is now the first players union in player’s history.
The college sports world has rules set in place to not give players compensation. Many people believe that since most of the athletes get huge scholarships, they don’t need compensation. Others argue that the main purpose of a college is to educate not entertain. The problem with theses scholarships is that they don’t even cover for all their expenses such as tuition, food, boarding, traveling, books, and other living expenses. The only reason many of these college athletes even attend college is too get noticed by scout and eventually go to the pros. College athletes deserve compensation for all their time and effort in their respective sports.
Those who play popular and highly competitive college sports are treated unfairly. The colleges and universities with successful sports like football and basketball receive millions of dollars in television and ad space revenues, so do the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which is the governing body of big time college sports. Many coaches are also paid over $1 million per year. Meanwhile, the players that help the colleges receive these millions of dollars are forbidden to receive any gifts or money for their athletic achievements and performances. As a solution college athletes ...
These professors argue that student athletes, under common law and NLRB’s (National Labor Relations Board) employee criterion, do in fact fall under the classification of an employee (Cooper). Under common law, four tests determine if someone is an employee or not. Three of these rules are as follows: “(1) the right of others to control a person's activities; (2) whether that person is compensated; and (3) if that person is economically dependent on that compensation.” According to these guidelines the employer-employee relationship is plainly synonymous to that of coaches and student-athletes. For one, coaches have a significant amount of control over their student-athletes’ activities, two, athletic scholarship money is considered compensation, and third, student-athletes are highly dependent on these scholarships for their food, living, and education. Even after realizing that a student-athlete falls under what the law defines as an employee, we can agree that any D1 student-athlete who works upwards of 40 hours a week to perform at a high level of competition for the universities benefit is essentially working a full time job on top of school work
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 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 players have become employees of the NCAA as much as students -- employees with no compensation, which not only violates common decency but perhaps even the law.
Paying College Athletes The main place where student athletes can express themselves and show off their skills through college athletics. A century has passed and student athletes now feel like they should get paid on top of the benefits they already receive studying at a university. In the event that that happens, the only beneficiaries would be the athletes of the largest sports programs like football and basketball. It would create unneeded chaos between universities and smaller colleges and the more and less popular athletic programs. In the end, it would mean the end of college athletics.
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.
Howard-Hamilton, Mary F., and Julie Sina. "How College Affects College Athletes." New Directions for Student Services (2011): 35-43.
Over the years, the debate on whether or not to pay collegiate athletes, specifically Division 1, has increased greatly. With athletes bringing in millions of dollars to their respective schools, many believe it’s time to make a change. The debate has been ongoing since the 70’s, maybe even earlier, but it really came to the attention of many in the early 90’s, specifically 1995. Marcus Camby, a basketball player for the Toronto Raptors, admitted he took money and jewelry, from somebody who wanted to be his agent, while he was playing at the University of Massachusetts. This was one of many incidents that involved a player accepting money and other gifts from an agent and/or booster. I believe that college athletes deserve to be paid in some fashion. They devote their whole life to their sport, whether or not they are the starters, and most will not go on to the pros, even though they contribute to the team. They sell tickets, jerseys, T-shirts etc. for their school, and see none of the money. Coaches sign six figure deals with shoe companies, like Nike, Reebok, Converse, and the players are the ones wearing the shoes and jerseys, the coaches have on whatever they want. Even though just recently the NCAA Committee allowed athletes to get a job; between schoolwork, and practices, they don’t have enough time to find a job. Most of the kids come from poor backgrounds, and don’t have enough money to do normal college things, like going out to eat, going on a date, or out to the movies.
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 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 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.
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.
Published. Edelman, Marc. “21 Reasons Why Student Athletes Are Employees And Should Be Allowed To Unionize.” Forbes.com.
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.