More handpicked essays just for you.
Female athletes should get paid equally
Research study on female and male athletes equal pay
High salaries for athletes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Why College Athletes Should Not be Paid Many college athletes ask for pay in sports and want to know why they are not getting paid. Basketball is just one of the sports for which students are asking to get paid. There are valid reasons for this request but the negative effects of this should prove that these athletes should not be paid. Students should not be paid for college athletics because of these three main negative effects. First, these student-athletes are young adults, most of them in their teenage years or early twenties which means that most of them have little experience managing money in their lives. They may not know how to save money to spend in the long-term and also how to balance that with short-term desires of a normal college …show more content…
student. Next, the logistics of actually paying these players are extremely difficult to lay out without complaints. How would each individual player be compensated? Finally, the system could unfairly burden smaller colleges. Big name schools like Duke, North Carolina, and Kentucky, among others, could pay their players much more money than a small school like Nevada, Montana, or North Dakota State. Ultimately, there are several causes for why college athletes would like to be paid, but in the long-run it would have many lasting tragic effects on the phenomenon of college sports, specifically basketball. Of course, there are a few main reasons on why college athletes think they should be paid.
The argument for their opinion is on the basis that many of these athletic talents come from the streets and have seen their families suffer through poverty, homelessness, malnutrition. Being paid in college could help out many of those who have faced or currently are facing those issues get out of their situation faster. Otherwise, they have to wait and hope that their college student gets drafted into one of the major professional sports leagues. Another solid reason is seen through the amount of money that the NCAA brings in every year and how the players likenesses who make the money for them are not being compensated in return. As seen in the chart (The Economist 1), the lack of compensation for these players is highly controversial based off the fact that they bring in so much revenue for the NCAA and their respective schools. But, unfortunately for the athletes wishing to be paid, the negative effects greatly outweigh any positives of compensating college …show more content…
athletes. The majority of college athletes are financially irresponsible, not because of lack of intelligence, but because of their lack of experience in the real world.
Most of them are very young, anywhere from eighteen to twenty-two. In some cases, they may have never held a “real job,” as many bank on the fact that they will be drafted into a professional league, where they will make millions upon millions of dollars. Also, a great amount of college students do not possess the ability to handle their money in proper and intelligent way. This chart (Bidwell 1) displays how college students are becoming even less financially active and responsible. They tend to spend their money on things other than financial necessities, which the chart shows. Students spend less time focusing on important things like paying bills and balancing their checkbook, and more time dedicated to their other activities in
life. The logistics of actually paying these college athletes would be extremely controversial in terms of how players would be compensated. For instance, would a highly touted Division 1 Kentucky basketball star get paid the same amount as a subpar Division 3 Emory benchwarmer? There is no common solution to this, as either way one side will not be satisfied. The stars will always want to be paid more than the benchwarmers, but the benchwarmers will always want the same compensation as their teammates and fellow student-athletes. If there was a difference in pay, many teammates may become jealous and envious of others who are making more money than them. These questions raise many doubts regarding the legitimacy of giving college athletes a salary. Also, some argue that players are already being paid through scholarships. They don’t need to pay for college, which is such a struggle for millions of people worldwide. The gifts that these athletes earn are well-deserved, but don’t warrant putting even more money in their hands, where money could be spent more effectively elsewhere. Despite some solid reasons, the idea of college athletes being paid seems to be far off, as most people would not like to see them be paid. Smaller colleges that might not have the strength financially as their bigger counterparts might be burdened from funding their teams’, leading to a great gap between divisions as bigger and more endowed schools can offer greater financial compensation. This would result to monopoly of athletic talents, causing lower-end schools to struggle. The big programs would continue to expand their power and will further ruin the sport for some die hard fans who appreciate an underdog story. Those NCAA March Madness cinderella stories that all basketball fans love to see would be no more, as all of the top prospects would play for the big name teams and coaches in order to gain exposure and raise their draft stock. Coaches like Mike Krzyzewski of Duke University, John Calipari of the University of Kentucky, and Roy Williams at the University of North Carolina attract major amounts of talent from the high school level. Shown in the graph (Lavigne 1), the big names schools obviously have more money to spend, and they spend that money on recruiting young high schoolers to come play basketball for them. The lack of competitive small programs would greatly hinder the sport of college basketball and its appeal to fans worldwide. The negative effects of paying college athletes would be too significant to overcome and the causes presented by athletes and their supporters for this issue are not important enough to risk the ruining of a worldwide sport. Paying student-athletes would have poor effects on them, their teammates, as well as the NCAA. Unfortunately for pay-seeking players, compensation is not a viable option and would harm the players and the sport. Works Cited Bidwell, Allie. "Survey: College Students Becoming Less Financially Responsible." US News. N.p., 2 Apr. 2015. Web. 30 May 2017. Lavigne, Paula. "Rich Get Richer in College Sports as Poorer Schools Struggle to Keep up." ESPN. ESPN Internet Ventures, 06 Sept. 2016. Web. 30 May 2017. "Players: 0; Colleges: $10,000,000,000." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 16 Aug. 2014. Web. 30 May 2017.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
Student athletes should get paid by their schools because they generate revenue for various organizations, spend hours practicing and playing their sport, and risk their body of getting injured. Female and male college athletes should get paid from their schools. The female and the male athletes not only go to class, but they also both participate in a school activity that takes away time from their ability to earn an income from a regular job. While some people think college athletes should get paid others think they should not.
Activists that believe student athletes should be paid do not know the real story. They believe that the athletes are being treated unfairly by the school or the NCAA. However, the students agree to their school contracts that they will not be paid what-so-ever. If the students feel they should be paid in a way they should not continue with their sport and get a job. Yes, this seems unfair but nothing in this world will be fair. In a business that makes millions a year not everything will be fair, especially for college kids that are at the school for an education. There are very few businesses and programs that are fair across the board.