'Moral Issues in college football as a commercialized sport
When sports become overly commercialized it is not seen as immoral, however, athlete’s, coaches, and sport administrators may let the non moral values of money, success, or fame influence their ethical decisions. In these moments we see a school or organizations true nature of character. According to Practical Ethics in Sport Management, “Principle-centered leaders in sports say the purpose of sport at these levels is to develop character traits such as dedication, sacrifice, responsibility, and group spirit” (Ethics, 216). But we all know this is not always the case. In this paper will discuss four different ethical issues centered around college football as a commercialized sport.
…show more content…
Second, will talk about the ethical issue of how winning becomes more important than shaping a sport morally. Third, how pressuring college athletes are morally wrong, and lastly, discussing the moral issues on how much money power house college football coaches make.
When all know that money is a major driving force behind why we get up and go to work everyday to make a living. But should it be our main focus? More importantly, should making money be the main objective in a college sports? If the purpose of the college is to prepare young men and women to be better people when they leave school, shouldn’t there be balance in the lessons that each student learns morally and knowledge they acquire? According to Practical Ethics in Sport Management, “Making money is not immoral; commercialization is not immoral. When sports become overly commercialized, however, athletes, coaches, and sport administrators may let non-moral values of money, success or fame influence ethical decisions” (Ethics, 216). If we as school know this to be true, then why are we setting the model as universities that profit is our primary focus. This chapter in Practical Ethics in Sport management goes on to say, “The economic realties of their sports programs
…show more content…
According to the video, “The Business of College Football, Nick Saban makes a little over five million dollars a year to coach the Alabama Football Team. This is more money yearly than the universities chancellor. Yet Alabama’s profits have tripled ever since the coach has been leading the universities football team, many feel that his role as head football coach is not as important to developing these student athletes as other university positions. Sabans argument, “You almost have to look at what return has there been on that invest.” Furthermore, Alabama Football has been chosen many years to have national televised games due to their football success. This leads me to ask, do you think athletes should be able to receive national notice and exposure all for playing a game? Many would ague that this focus should be given to citizens who live as examples to moral value and principles. People such as solders, doctors, and political leaders. These are all options of course, but still these are moral issues that should should be addressed today and for the future. Should television rights and ticket sales be the main the main objective for how we use our student athletes, or should more focus be centered on how we are preparing these athletes for the next step of their lives both physical and mental. Should
Ethics is a big part of football today, and how each team is different when
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”
While college sports play a valuable role on university campuses, it is important for administrators to not lose perspective. That some football coaches earn more than university presidents, for example, is clearly wrong. Essay Task Write a unified, coherent essay in which you evaluate multiple perspectives on college support for sports teams. In your essay, be sure to: • analyze and evaluate the perspectives given • state and develop your own perspective on the issue • explain the relationship between your perspective and those given
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 ...
In my previous two speeches I explored the issue of paying college athletes and the ethical and moral implications it has. In this paper I will formally address the issue using historical background, and, after showing both sides of the argument, I will convince you, the reader, that paying college athletes is a moral justice through the ethical theories of Deontology.
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.
Throughout the country young men and women are losing their priority for an education. To attend a university should be a highly cherished privilege, and it should be an even greater honor to play athletics for the university. Therefore, the writer supports the decision that the “student” comes before “athlete” in student-athlete. Playing for pay should be considered a job for “professionals”. In the rulebook, the NCAA views college athletes as armatures. This statement sums it up best. When athletes go to college, not all of them go in with the mindset that athletics is going to be their future job....
If there’s one thing we dread in the summer more than the heat, it’s the afflicting sentiment that surrounds oneself when one is inhibited from experiencing the thrills of football for six long and gruesome months. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football is a part of many Americans’ Saturdays, but to fewer does it mean their lives. Recently coming under debate, many sporting fans and college athletes believe that players should be paid more than just tuition, room, board, and books. Two articles on this issue that bring up valid points worth discussing are Paul Marx’ “Athlete’s New Day” and Warren Hartenstine’s “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” From these articles I have found on the basis of logical,
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.
Even the waterboy gets paid! NCAA football is a billion dollar a year empire, in which coaches, executives, school presidents, board members, athletic trainers, athletic directors, equipment managers, Waterboys, towel boys, ball boys, and even team mascots all receive a chunk of the revenue. Everyone gets paid except the athletes, who don’t receive a dime of the money. That’s because it’s against NCAA rules to pay college athletes with anything other than an athletic scholarship; anything else, and it’s deemed as an improper benefit, thus making an athlete ineligible if he/she were to accept. The NCAA defends its rule of “no-pay” by claiming that all its student-athletes are “amateurs” and not employees; therefore, they’re legally not compensated. The argument over whether student-athletes should be paid or not, is particularly unsettling within the sport of football, because NCAA football is the most popular and profitable sport of all college athletics. The NCAA’s discrepancy over whether it should pay its players or not, currently has the association fighting a lawsuit filed by former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon, who’s suing for compensation on behalf of former Division I football and men’s basketball players. The lawsuit challenges the NCAA’s use of student-athletes’ images and likeness for commercial purposes (PBS.org). In recent months the argument has been geared more towards whether current student-athletes should be paid or not, particularly football players, who like former Texas A&M star quarterback Johnny Manziel, provide the athleticism and entertainment that makes NCAA football the million dollar empire that it is. So, should college football players be paid?
Zimbalist, Andrew S. Unpaid Professionals: Commercialism And Conflict In Big-Time College Sports. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
The Health and fitness industry have many ethical issues involved which was very interesting to me. I have never purchased a membership at a health club, but from the reading I learned a lot about how they operate. It amazed me that health clubs push their sales representatives to get 200-300 new members a month (Amend, 1992). This is a large amount of people for such a short amount a time, which means some members are not fully aware of the fine print of the membership agreement. Also the reading mentions that more than half of instructors at these clubs do not have valid certification (Copeland et al, 1988),. This is unethical because the members pay each month for the service of a qualified staff member to assist them in exercise and fitness. Safety of the members could also be at risk working out with a non-qualified trainer. Learning how these companies do business make me want to hold off as long as possible to join a gym.
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.
I believe that college sports should be considered a profession. Athletes deserve to be paid for their work. College athletics are a critical part of America’s culture and economy. At the present time, student-athletes are considered amateurs. College is a stepping-stone to the professional leagues. The NCAA is exploiting the student- athlete. Big-time schools are running a national entertainment business that controls the compensation rate of the players like a monopoly (Byers 1).
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.