More handpicked essays just for you.
Should college athletics be paid
Essays on whether college athletes should be paid or not
Essay on college athlete pay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There has always been a debate on whether college athletes should be paid in addition to their tuition. Many may believe that the athletes deserve this extra pay, but I certainly disagree. I think that college athletes should not get special treatment because of their athletic abilities. I also believe that it would be unfair to students that do not have the ability to participate in athletics. College athletes should not get paid because only certain players play, some colleges can not afford to pay athletes, school is about getting an education, and it is not fair to the students that are not capable of playing a sport.
In college athletics, only a certain number of players actually participate in the sports (Paying College Athletes). Colleges
…show more content…
normally have two to three main players that people come out to see play. The main reason for this is because of the recruiting process. Junior colleges and universities have scouts that they have to go out and try to recruit players that they have an interest in. Once they get the players that they want, they are the main ones that will get to have playing time. Teams also have tryouts to find more people to participate. Majority of the time only the recruits play in the game, but if college athletes were to get paid then all of the players would receive payment regardless of it they play or not. According to the article, “Paying Student Athletes”, “A handful of exceptional athletes would receive large salaries while most players would receive a pittance, and would probably no longer be offered valuable athletic scholarships,” (Paying Student Athletes). According to this, there is no real way to decide how much the highly sought after recruits and the walk-ons will get paid. It would not be fair to the players that do play for the ones that do not play to get paid. Also, if a top player was to get hurt, how would a college decide if he or she should get paid, and if so how much? This would be an ongoing discussion because players get hurt everyday in college sports. Since only a certain number of players get to play, all athletes should not be able to get paid. Another reason that college athletes should not get paid is because some colleges can not afford to pay the athletes.
Most colleges and universities have to keep their facilities up-to-date so that they can compete with other colleges and universities across the nation. The way a college looks effects the amount of students that enroll into their establishment. These improvements to their facilities can cost up to millions of dollars. Since these improvements cost so much, colleges and universities may not be able to pay college athletes outside of the tuition. Also, colleges and universities have budgets for all of their programs. If colleges and universities were to pay college athletes, that would mean that they would have to cut another programs budget. This would not be fair because there is not true way to decide which program’s budget will be cut to make up for paying the student athletes. This would be an ongoing problem for many colleges because any way that they would put it, there would be not fair way to make an appropriate decision. Since colleges and universities have to keep their facilities up-to-date and maintain budgets, they will not be able to provide the money needed to pay college …show more content…
athletes. Athletes are expected to come to school to receive an education. If college athletes start to get paid then they would just come to school for the paycheck. They would not care to get an education. Meshefejian explains that, “The main problem with paying student-athletes is that it is not the college's primary function. The primary function of academic institutions is to educate, and not to hire student-athletes for their contributions on the basketball court or football field,” (Meshefejian). This goes on to explain that if student athletes were to get paid, then they would not be getting paid for their academics. They would be getting paid based on how well they perform on a field or court. It also would not be fair to the students that have to pay tuition. Athletes do not have to pay tuition therefore they do not see the importance in going to class in order for receive their degree. Paying athletes would not be wise because they also would not get anything out of school. Not only would they not go to class, they would not meet the qualifications to play. Since they would be getting paid based on their playing performance, that would be the only thing that they would be focused on. The paycheck would be their main purpose in going to school, therefore they will not see the importance of getting an education. Also, student athletes should not get paid because its would be crossing a line into professionalism (Paying Student Athletes). If student athletes were to get paid, then they would be getting treated as if they were in the NFL, which they are not. This is why athletes should come to school to receive an education and not to get paid. Lastly, if college athletes were to get paid, it would not be fair for the students that are not capable of playing a sport.
Students that do not have the ability to play would be at a disadvantage than students that are capable of playing a sport. Athletes do not necessarily have to apply themselves as much as students that do not play sports. The recruitment process normally tells an athlete where they are going and if they have to pay any money. For a student that does not play a sport, it is more difficult. Students that do not have play sports have to rely on academic scholarships, their ACT and SAT scores, and their Grade Point Average out of high school. According to the article “Paying Student Athletes”, “Basketball coach Paul Hewitt of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta states thats, you'd get a few guys making a lot of money, and others fighting their way onto campus,” (Paying Student Athletes). Also, students that do not play sports normally have to get jobs in order to pay for their food and tuition that a student athlete does not necessarily have to spend their own money ons. Athletes, on the other hand, just have money handed to them because they are playing a sport. This is why it would not be fair to students that are not capable to participate in sports if student athletes were to get
paid. People who believe that athletes should get paid mainly believe this because of the money that the sporting events bring to the schools. Supporters of paying athletes believe that athletes should get paid because the athletes are making money for other people. According to the NCAA, college athletic programs are big money makers for colleges (PR). One also may argue that television advertisements and stores that sell the school’s merchandise bring money to the schools as well (Meshefejian). Although this is true, this is not fair to students that participate in other activities that bring the school publicity. Sack believes that athletes should be allowed to endorse their items and be allowed to make a salary off of this as well (Sack). This should not be allowed because athletes already have majority of their school expenses paid for, therefore they do not need this income. Also, some might say that athletes should be paid because they will say that athletes do not have time to get a job. This may be true, but it does not mean that it is fair to just pay them. Students that are not capable of playing a sport have to take out loans and pay them back themselves. Even though many may believe that athletes should get paid, there are reasons that they should not. All in all, athletes should not get paid for going to school and playing a sport. Since they play a sport their food, tuition, and many more things are already paid for. It would not be fair for them to get an additional paycheck just because of their abilities to play a sport. Student athletes should come to college to get an education first and foremost, and their ability to play a sport is paying for that. Student athletes should not get special treatment because of their abilities to play a sport. Playing a college sport is a privilege, and it should not be taken for granted by paying college athletes. College athletes should not get paid because only certain players play, some colleges can not afford to pay athletes, school is about getting an education, and it is not fair to the students that are not capable of playing a sport.
To pay or not to pay college athletes, that is the question. It seems like it would be a simple yes or no answer, but there are many underlying factors as to why paying athletes would be a negative. All universities vary in size and popularity, so how would it be possible to pay all athletes the same amount? Student is the leading word in the term “student-athlete”. They are not considered employees, which is what paying athletes would make them. While universities are making some profit off of the abilities of their athletes, college athletes make the personal choice to play a sport. Due to the differing popularity and size of universities and their athletic programs, there would be no fair way to pay all athletes. In addition, many athletes already receive compensation in the form of publicity, scholarships, and access to a high education, and therefore the NCAA and universities should not pay athletes.
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).
Colleges do not have enough money to pay college athletes. according to listland.com " most college sports programs have more money going out than coming In." Although the college programs bring in large sums of
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.
... being paid. Many people prefer watching college sports over professional sports based on the idea that money isn’t involved in college sports. They are competing and giving everything they have for the love of their teammates, the love of their school, and above all, their love for the game. Paying athletes would ruin this standard of intercollegiate athletics. For all these reasons, college athletes should not be paid beyond their full ride scholarships.
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.
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.
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 cost of housing and food, puts a huge dent in college student’s pockets every year. College students need anywhere from five-hundred-dollars to one-thousand-dollars a year for food. Getting all the things you need just to make it through college can range anywhere from four-thousand-dollars to eleven-thousand-dollars a year depending on your needs (Frazier). Athletes have a hard time finding time for a job because the sport they play and academics take up their life. If the NCAA would allow schools to pay their athletes it would not only help the many athletes bringing in money to the school, but it could help the school as well by bringing up grades from athletes. When you don’t have to worry about if your bills are going to be paid or you can afford a place to live, you can focus more on the sport you play and the academics that come with
"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.
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.
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!
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).