Greg Bell
26 November 2013
Mrs. Myszkowski
English 1101
Paying Players Shouldn’t Be in the Playbook
In recent years, the argument about whether or not to pay athletes playing at the college level has become a matter of national debate. Currently, the ruling is that college athletes cannot be paid. This is a stance that should be maintained. Paying athletes to compete at the collegiate level is unfeasible because it would cost colleges too much, influence student’s educational decisions and create an unfair financial atmosphere between athletes and non-athletes.
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).
The promise of a paycheck could definitely be a deciding factor in rising students college decisions. A quarterback with the ...
... middle of paper ...
...he issue will argue heatedly for their case. Every time, the decision must stand against paying players. As the director of the NCAA Mark Emmert said “This is our direction. We cannot waver. We cannot back down.” (1).
Works Cited
Al Dunning, Sports E. "Paying Athletes would Bankrupt most Colleges." The Commercial Appeal: 0. Jan 09 1995. ProQuest.Web. 26 Nov. 2013 .
Emmert, Mark. "Paying College Athletes is a Terrible Idea." Wall Street Journal Jan 11 2012. ProQuest. Web. 26 Nov. 2013 .
Lewis, Jason. "Paying College Athletes is Not the Solution." Sentinel: 2. Apr 2011. ProQuest. Web. 26 Nov. 2013 .
Plaschke, Bill. "PAYING COLLEGE ATHLETES AN UNEDUCATED DECISION." Pittsburgh Post - GazetteNov 21 2010. ProQuest.Web. 26 Nov. 2013 .
Walker, Jim. "Paying College Athletes Debate Continues." McClatchy - Tribune Business NewsJun 08 2011. ProQuest. Web. 26 Nov. 2013 .
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.
First lets explore the history behind the paying of college athletes. Over the past 50 years the NCAA has been in control of all Div.1, 2 and 3 athletic programs. The NCAA is an organization that delegates and regulates what things college athletes can and can’t do. These regulations are put in place under the label of ‘protecting amateurism’ in college sports. This allots
Posnanski, Joe. “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” Norton Sampler: Short Essays for Composition, 8th ed. Pages 584-590. 2013.
Salvador, Damon. “Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid?” 20 April 2013.Web. 18 May 2014.
“Should NCAA Athletes Be Paid?” US News. U.S. News and World Report, Apr. 2013. Web. 05
Hypothetically, as athletes recognize that they can get an education, play college sports, and also get paid like an employee, they will start transitioning away from the lesser schools while creating a pool of players in the top schools. Not only would that turn out to be a horrible situation for minor schools, but this also means that college sports’ would not be exciting to watch when the top four schools fight it out, in the tournament each year. Eventually, ratings and ticket sales would go down due to the loss of unpredictability in games. College athletics are only a portion of the negatives that come out of paying student athletes, the athletes themselves are also in virtue of disorder. Not only would college athletics find itself in jeopardy, another negative of giving a college student a paycheck comes to mind.
Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.
Thomas, Brennan. "Pay for Play: Should College Athletes Be Compensated?." Bleacher Report. TBS, 4 Apr. 2011. Web. 8 Dec. 2013.
PR, Newswire. "Economically Speaking, College Athletes Should Not Be Paid." PR Newswire US 23 July 2012: Regional Business News. Web. 8 Apr. 2014.
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.
In today’s society, one of the big controversies with sports is, should student athletes be be paid a salary? Some people believe that they should be paid and others would completely disagree. Even though they technically are being paid, they really are not. The only type of way the athletes would be paid is through financial aid or if they have a job. Only their education is being paid by the school. Although some people believe that they should be paid, it would not be a good idea at all. So college athletes should not be paid at all because they are basically being paid to study and play a sport.
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.
Daugherty, Paul. "College athletes already have advantages and shouldn't be paid." Sports Illustrated. Sports Illustrated, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/paul_daugherty/01/20/no.pay/
Mitchel, Horace and Marc Eldelman. Should College Student- Athletes be Paid? 6 January 2014. 6 April 2014 .
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.