More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of student athletes getting paid
Benefits of paying college athletes
Why college student athletes should be paid
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Imagine getting paid to play the sport you love while still being in college, well that could be possible in the near future. As of right now, college athletes cannot receive a salary for playing a sport due to all of the resources they already receive, as well as still being a college student. College athletes can now sell their own memorabilia, but receiving an actual salary is a goal for the near future. In recent years and debates there has been controversial issues on deciding whether or not college athletes should get paid. To most, not giving a college athlete any type of payment or salary is what is best for the athlete. However paying college athletes will be beneficial for the athlete. Paying college athletes can help prepare them for their future if they choose to compete at the professional level, or will help …show more content…
pay off student loans and debts. College athletes should be paid because it will help them pay off student loans and prepare them for the professional level. The question of how much does the NCAA make per year and where all the revenue goes has been a wandering question around college sports for years. Many people have the belief that the NCAA hoards the money for themselves to make themselves a richer company. Mark Schlabach, a senior writer for ESPN found that 96 percent of the NCAA’s annual revenue is given back to colleges for scholarships and grants for athletes. While only 4% of the yearly revenue is used to pay all of the NCAA staff members. That 4% only consists of around $30 million (Schlabach 1). After Schlabach found the information it is clear that the NCAA does not actually attempt to keep the money for themselves. Out of the billions of dollars the NCAA makes, only 4% is kept for NCAA employee’s salaries. While 96% of that billions of dollars goes back to the schools through scholarships and grants for college athletes. However, some of that money is also used to help build the school up, so not all money goes back to the athletes. After realizing that the NCAA does not actually keep much money, it gives many the reason to believe that college athletes should not be paid, but are wrong because some money goes strictly to the school. A majority of people will argue that college athletes should not be paid at all.
People have a reason to believe this because of what writer for the Daily Local News, Kieran McCauley explains that the majority of college athletes will get a free education and tuition as long as they can represent the school in that sport. Since colleges do this, is it allows the athletes to not have to stress about textbook costs and meal plan costs (McCauley 1). McCauley acknowledges that college athletes should not receive a salary due to the fact that it is believed it is fair if colleges give athletes free tuition, textbooks, and meal plans, in exchange for the college athlete to represent that school in his or her particular sport. A large controversy inside of the issue of paying college athletes is which athletes would get paid and approximately how much would these athletes be paid? A lingering question when arguing whether college athletes should be paid or not is how much would each athlete actually be paid? In a study recorded by writer for Business Insider, Tony Manfred reports that “Right now the average player earns just $23,204 in scholarship
money. The study is fairly simple. In the NBA, players receive 50% of all revenue, and in the NFL players receive 46.5% of all revenue. If you used that revenue-sharing model in college sports, football and basketball players would collectively receive $6.2 billion” (Manfred 1). What Manfred explains is that when it comes down to how much a college athlete should be paid, they must be compared to the professional leagues. If college football and basketball used the same system as the NFL and NBA then the NCAA would have $6.2 billion to spread around to those college athletes. Spending that much money on just two college sports is unrealistic, however, there are many alternatives to somehow pay college athletes. It is close to impossible to find the perfect way to pay college athletes, but that does not mean there are not many ways to finding alternatives to paying these athletes. Sports business major for the New York Times, Jay Nocera, suggests that “Every Division I basketball and football team would have a salary cap, just as the pros do - except the amounts would be vastly lower. In basketball, the cap would be $650,000. In football, it would be $3 million” (Nocera 1). What Nocera argues is that adding a salary cap to college sports is very simple. It would be very similar to the system professional leagues use, with this salary cap, each college would get to pick how much each of their players make. Football would get so much more in their salary cap because there are many more football players in Division I than basketball players. There are many benefits to paying college athletes that do not just include helping them in their future for professional sports. Many will argue that college athletes are already paid in what they have access to. Jeffrey Dorfman, writer for Forbes Magazine, argues that, “Beyond that, however, what is commonly overlooked is that student athletes also receive free professional coaching, strength and fitness training, and support from athletic trainers and physical therapists. Football and basketball players pay $2,000-$3,000 per week for similar training in the weeks leading up to their pre-draft workouts” (Dorfman 1).. So even though college athletes are not physically receiving money, they receive a different type of treatment from professors, and having access to different athletic facilities. Dorfman argues that college athletes actually will gain much more publicity without receiving pay at the college level, because professional sports teams will be able to decide how valuable they actually are when they do not receive pay. This is because professional scouts know they are working their hardest to make it to the professional level to receive money (Dorfman 1). This belief that college athletes are already paid is wrong, they are not physically receiving any type of pay in actually dollars. After looking deeply into the issue, there can be many benefits and detriments to paying college athletes, but ultimately, paying these athletes is the better decision. Many believe that it is detrimental to pay college athletes because they are just college athletes. Sports writer for “The Onion”, Kahlil Felder, explains to us that it can actually be detrimental because, athletes already get so many free resources with the access they get to training centers, indoor facilities, and medical attention that it could be questionable to actually pay a college athlete. Also he states the idea that the NCAA only has so much to pay every athlete and some athletes are not as talented as others (Feldner 1). However Feldner counters that idea by telling readers that even paying athletes a few thousand dollars a semester is extremely beneficial and can help them greatly with day to day expenses. As well as earning some amount of money can help them follow the correct conduct that it takes to be a professional athlete where one gets paid up to millions of dollars (Felder 1). So even though some may believe that college athletes are still students and students should not get paid, it is beneficial to pay them because it can help them prepare for a future where they make much more money. Or for example, a player who does not advance to the professional level can use the pay to help pay off any college debts that scholarships did not cover. Many alternatives have been tried but the majority of them have not or will not work. Many NCAA officials believe that using an alternative to paying college athletes will work or make the issue disappear. In reality, none of the actual alternatives that have been attempted have worked at all. Co-Host of ESPN’s Pardon the Interruption, Michael Wilbon examines that, few conferences in the NCAA have received a large sum of money to give the players and athletes resources for what they need, whether it be for athletic reasons or for academic (Wilbon 1). This process that these conferences have tried has not at all helped with the issue of paying college athletes. The NCAA has repetitively tried to find alternatives to paying college athletes that have not yet seemed to work. Most of the time, the money being invested goes to the school and never makes its way to the athletes. It was not until 2014 when a game-changing rule was changed to help athletes finally receive pay. For years in the past, college athletes were never allowed to receive pay, but they have always deserved to make some type of money. Writer for the Huffington Post, Steve Siebold explains a new rule that was released in 2014 that allows college athletes to sell their own memorabilia or their in-game attire for money (Siebold 1). College athletes have never been allowed to make money off their own attire In the past, athletes have been suspended and stripped of awards for doing such thing. The new rule that was passed is revolutionary because athletes that struggle with simple day to day expenses, like gas money for example, can easily handle those expenses. This is especially helpful to football and basketball players in college because in the past, the most suspensions from illegal selling came from these sports (Siebold 1). Where now, this will no longer be an issue. The only issue is that selling their own memorabilia will not help with big expenses, like paying off student loans that were not covered by scholarships. Compensating college athletes would be a very large help to paying college athletes. As of now these athletes are not compensated and writer for USA Today sports, Jared Walch explains that “many of these athletes are on scholarship, which pays for their tuition and room and board in most cases, and we’ve covered the stipends, which average between $2,000 and $5,000 annually. Let’s get real. How many of us can live off of $2,000 a year?” (Walch 1). Walch argues that is nearly impossible to live off of $2,000 a year, and that is what these college athletes are having to do. Walch also explains that paying college athletes can also help keep them in school by stating “If college athletes were paid for the talents that they possess while in school, they might be more willing to finish their degree, just on the off chance that the sports path doesn’t work out for them” (Walch 1). Even if these athletes were not pursuing their athletic careers at the professional level, if they were payed to play their sport they would stay in school and get a degree. Even players that will play at the professional level, they would stay all four years because they are already getting payed and would not feel rushed to make money at the professional level. If college athletes are not paid, they will continue to leave school early and not receive their full degree. If every college athlete in Division I were paid in any way, it would highly encourage them to stay in school because they will not feel rushed to go to the professional level to receive a large amount of pay. If the NCAA can use any amount of the revenue they receive to use for college athletes it can even help prepare them for their future, even if it is only a few thousand dollars a semester. Based off the research, paying college athletes will bring benefits for the NCAA and the athletes themselves.
How does Seward expand the antislavery argument beyond the moral appeal of the abolitionist? acknowledging his argument and appreciating his position.
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.
Critics feel that the term amateurism is only a term used in collegiate sports to show the distinguish the difference between professional and collegiate so that they don’t have to pay college athletes. College athletes are just as talented and just as exposed as professional athletes. The argument is for there to be a share in the profits for wage compensation amongst players is know as pay-for-play. College athletics is a corporate enterprise that is worth millions of dollars in revenue. Pay-for-play is an assumption that colleges and universities receive huge revenues from marketing their collegiate sports programs and that the profits from these revenues are not shared with players who perform in the arena. Which some feel that they should.
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 should not be paid it will ruin college sports forever. Some people believe that college athletes should be paid by the school because of all of the hard work they put in however they shouldn’t be paid because there is no fair way to pay every college athlete. There are many reasons that college athletes shouldn’t be paid one of the main reasons is that colleges don’t have enough money, the second reason is that they already get money in the form of scholarships, and there is no fair way to pay each college athlete.
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.
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.
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.
Imagine this you are the star player on your college football team and you get your fifth concussion causing you to be out of sports the rest of your life due to health reason and when you are 40 you get alzheimer's causing you to have life brain problems and having to spend lots of money in rehab and you never feel the same ever again and are in major det and only your are in and out of jobs because of your brain so your wife has to support you with the money to help cure it while you get lost easily when driving and can't remember stuff from the day before like why am I one this plane while heading to get therapy for your brain. This is why college athletes should be paid they should because they are too busy to have a job, The NCAA has enough money and They can put in salary caps so everybody get paid fair. But other say they shouldn't because it ruins their sentimental values and family history.
... 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.
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.
...whole different world from professional sports considering they supply men with a family to help grow character with, supply them with a free education, and create a whole community of people that are loyal and generally remain loyal to one school. This bridge between the two sports could be majorly affected if college athletes were to be paid and would then bring up the issue about paying even high school athletes eventually. It is merely opening a can of worms and has been a tradition for so long that it should remain one for years to come. College athletes might not be receiving a full salary but that is not the point of it and they know what they are getting into when they commit to playing a sport. This long-standing barrier between professional and college athletics should remain how it is for the good of everyone but mostly the athletes and college programs.
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! 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!