Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays about paying college athletes
Essays about paying college athletes
Negative effects of rising tuition costs
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays about paying college athletes
Many people can easily picture this scene in their minds: the roaring crowds, the smell of easy- to-eat foods, and the thousands of people all dressed in the same colors. That’s a description of game day at a major college. College sports bring in a lot of money, yet their players don’t receive any money. Many people view this as something that needs to be changed while others believe that only professionals should be compensated. In the essays “Let Stars Get Paid” and “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid”, both authors give their opinions on whether or not college athletes should be paid. College athletes should not be paid because they already receive many benefits from being athletes.
Even today, the debate is still being continued. During
…show more content…
“Big time athletes do get paid. They get free college tuition.”(Posnanski). College athletes not only get tuition, but they also get room, board, and meals. They also get to be coached by top coaches, train in the best training facilities, travel around the country for free, be treated by the best doctors and medicine, and have their chance in the spotlight (Posnanski). With universities constantly raising tuition prices, having free tuition is a big thing, but most, if not all, athletes waste that by focusing just on their sport. The athletes themselves probably aren’t the only ones to blame. Practices should be cut shorter to allow the students’ time to study more and actually get a college education. While you hear many athletes complaining that they don’t have personal spending money, other college students can say the same thing. While athletes are practicing, others are working to pay off tuition fees, which the athletes get free. In an interview at his trial against the NCAA Ed O’Bannon, a former basketball player from UCLA, said “I was an athlete masquerading as a student. I was there strictly to play basketball. I did basically the minimum to make sure I kept my eligibility academically so I could continue to play.” (Dahlberg). People should be going to college for what it is meant for—education, not sports. College sports are an extracurricular activity that should be …show more content…
These athletes receive free tuition, textbooks, rooms, meal, and training. So they should not be paid extra money on top of that. Athletes may have to train hard, but while they are training, non-athletic students are out working to pay off debts. By paying athletes, it would hurt many smaller universities without much athletic funding, as they would not be able to buy the best players like bigger colleges could. College sports are meant to bring players and fans together to celebrate their school, but sports are becoming too big a part of college life. Colleges were created to help further educate students and all college attendees should be focused on education and not extracurricular activities like
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,
Woods, Al. “College Athletes Should Be Paid.” Sports and Athletes: An Anthology. Ed. Christine Watkins. Greenhaven Press, 2009. 87-94. Print.
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.
Nowadays, we've seen many universities’ competitions on the television as a leisure performance but we've never concerned whether they receive their pay. In Mike Benedykciuk's article "The Blue Line: College Athletes Should be Paid," he argues that student athletes should receive the wage though they are not professional. Like any good writer, he employs special word choices, statistics and rhetorical devices to plead with the audience to take his side. In this article, he demonstrates many such devices, which will be explained further as follows.
Salvador, Damon. “Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid?” 20 April 2013.Web. 18 May 2014.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
There has been an extensive debate over the years about college athletes being paid and I honestly don’t see why there is a debate about it at all. The NCAA has strict rules about players receiving benefits from the school in forms of helping players and their families in the form of paychecks or even helping pay bills. College sports bring in an enormous amount of money for the schools every year and are expected to be given nothing in return. Sports do not only bring in money to schools but also more students and fans. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) have taken several players’ records and rewards from them for the simple fact of getting benefits from the school and that is just not acceptable (Allen 115). Athletes are just like every other student in the way of having to pay for housing, food, bills, and more. Having to balance school and sports gives athletes no time to have jobs which means they do not have a way to bring in money to pay for the essentials of going to
College athletes should be paid because they are basically working for the school. When a student gets a scholarship to a college for a sport they are expected to practice with the team and without the team, so on their free time. College athletes go way over the maximum amount of hours they are allowed to practice with the team. A 2011 survey, from the article Should College Athletes Be Paid?, states “The NCAA has a limit of 20 hours of training per week, D1 football players on average practice 43 hours a week, baseball 42.1 hours a week, and men’s basketball 39.2 hours a week”(Walch). With
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!
For several years many have determined whether or not college athletes should be paid. There are two sides of the equation and a lot of supportive evidence to support both arguments. My personal opinion is that college athletes should be paid. College athletes should be paid by the NCAA because some of them need extra money to pay off college expenses and injuries, academics, and training and hard work.
Should they or should they not pay college athletes? Michigan State law professors, Robert and Amy McCormick, state that Division Ӏ college athletes qualify as “employees” under federal labor laws in the article Should College Athletes Be Paid, written by Kenneth J. Cooper. They think it is definitely a job for football and basketball players who attend a Division Ӏ university. “There are more demands put on these young men than any employee of the university,” says Robert McCormick (Cooper). These young men are employees in terms of the physical difficulties they endure while they are also trying to keep up with studying and getting good grades. Usually student athletes do not get to choose their major because the classes might conflict with their athletic schedule. Student-athletes say that playing a sport has the same similarities as working a job; there is a lot expected of you, as a boss would want. The common law has three parts: the right of others to control a person’s activities, whether that person is compensated and if that person is economically dependent on that compensation. All college athletes in Division Ӏ sports meet the three components of the law because a coach has so much control over them and everything they