Its time to end the “amateurism” I believe that the current system of compensating Division I NCAA athletes is outdated, inefficient, and most of all the cause of an on going problem in NCAA sports. The aforementioned problem, and what I would like to address today is the ongoing, overwhelming trend of NCAA violations taking place by major NCAA programs/schools. So much so that significant NCAA violations by major NCAA programs/schools has become an almost common place in the current landscape of Division I NCAA sports. There is a debate over who is to blame — is it the NCAA system enabling violations to happen — or should the sole blame go on the schools and administrators allowing for their violations to take place? Regardless, of who …show more content…
What amateurism entails for NCAA athletes is that they…. It is the existence of this rule that has caused such intense debates over if the treatment of Division I NCAA athletes is fair and justifiable. It is of my belief that forcing Division I NCAA athletes to abide by amateurism is completely unreasonable and must end. Although, I get the theory/thinking behind amateurism, in that Division I NCAA athletes are students first, and are welly compensated in receiving their scholarships — amateurism does exceedingly more harm than good for NCAA sports. In many cases it is not about the compensation for the Division I NCAA athletes, but instead it is what their friends/family receive, or actually do not receive as compensation that causes such great problems. I believe that the overwhelming majority of NCAA violations relating to amateurism fall into two categories — petty crimes, and an athlete trying to help their family. Neither of which I believe are any where near being significant enough to cause the negative impact they do on NCAA sports. So why do we let this happen? I believe the answer is due to a flawed, broken …show more content…
In 2011 five players on the Ohio State football team were caught taking free tattoos from a local tattoo shop in Ohio. To be clear, in no way did the players steal the product, or illegally force the shop to perform the tattoos. Contrary, they were given the tattoos for free as gifts. This may seem to be a innocent act, but in the eyes of the NCAA it was anything but. As history would tell the NCAA ended up putting forth penalties against the Ohio State football team as a result to them violating the amateurism clause. Such penalties even included a post-season ban for the 2012-13 season. This ended with the 2012-13 Ohio State football team being unable to play for a national title disappointing not only their fans and players, but fans all over the
As the Joker once said in The Dark Knight, "if you are good at something, you should never do it for free." That statement, despite being said being a crazy man who quite literally burnt millions of dollars to the ground and has no regards to human life other than himself is what people deeply generally feel on the inside, what is the point of being at good at something when they are not being paid at all to do so, especially if its set within a major setting, where millions of people are watching college players pouring out their blood, sweat, and tears in order to get a chance to be successful within their respective field of sports. This is where the NCAA controversy comes into play.
The 2012 Heisman Trophy winner, Johnny Manziel, began the 2013 season sitting on the sidelines. Due to a half game suspension handed down by Texas A&M University, Manziel was only allowed to watch as A&M took the field versus the visiting Rice Owls. To “Aggies” fans, this half game suspension came as a huge relief. It had been feared that Manziel may receive a multiple game or year-long ban from the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) for violating NCAA Bylaw 12.5.2.1. The bylaw prohibits athletes from allowing their name or picture to be used in a commercial matter (Berkes, 2013). Luckily for him, a half-game suspension would be his only punishment. Manziel was put into this predicament after reports surfaced that he had accepted money in return for autographs. No proof of this was ever found, but it was proved that someone, probably a memorabilia collector, profited from his signature (Berkes, 2013). So wait, a man can’t receive money for signing his own autograph? The answer is “no”, if he is a student athlete following the strict rules of the NCAA. The only benefits he can accept are those included in a lucrative scholarship given by universities. As more incidents like Johnny Manziel’s have occurred, it has been debated by sports analysts and the news media whether or not these scholarships are a fair payment. Another Heisman Trophy winner, Cam Newton, was accused of trying to sell his services to Mississippi State University after his decision to transfer from a community college following his junior year. While an NCAA investigation would find that his father had indeed tried to shop Cam to prospective schools, Newton was cleared to play (Wojciechowski, 2010). The 2005 Heisman Trophy winner, Reggie Bush, was ...
Those who play popular and highly competitive college sports are treated unfairly. The colleges and universities with successful sports like football and basketball receive millions of dollars in television and ad space revenues, so do the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which is the governing body of big time college sports. Many coaches are also paid over $1 million per year. Meanwhile, the players that help the colleges receive these millions of dollars are forbidden to receive any gifts or money for their athletic achievements and performances. As a solution college 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).
In my previous two speeches I explored the issue of paying college athletes and the ethical and moral implications it has. In this paper I will formally address the issue using historical background, and, after showing both sides of the argument, I will convince you, the reader, that paying college athletes is a moral justice through the ethical theories of Deontology.
Over the past 20 years, there has been a major increase in the popularity of college athletes. From 1989 to 2004, there was a 27% increase in ticket revenue (Brown). Despite the rigorous schedules the athletes had, they are still considered just a student. The NCAA cannot continue to allow these schools to work the athletes as much as they do without giving the athletes what they deserve. This is a horrible oppressive system that must be fixed.
People believe that paying college athletes will ruin the tradition and innocence of the game. However, people forget that Olympians get paid, and most of them are amateur athletes. "Gold medallists from the United States receive a minimum of $15,000 for their success (from the U.S. Olympic Committee and the national governing body of the winner's sport), USA Today, Final Ed." These Olympians can also capitalize on endorsement deals and other additional bonuses, most of which are illegal in college athletics. The innocence of the game is already in jeopardy, in a June 24th, 1996 issue of The NCAA News, " Studies indicate that 75 percent of underclassmen have received cash or gifts from an agent." That’s a pretty high number, three out of every four are involved in illegal activities involving agents, and 90...
In the beginning of inter-collegiate competition and even now the governing body the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) wanted athletes to maintain their amateurism. Being an amateur means, to remain unpaid why competing and performing a c. Athletes were to come from the student body and off-campus recruitment of athletes was prohibited. The problem with the many rules and regulations of the NCAA early on was that they expected schools to police themselves and uphold a certain amount of morality, but without checks and balances corruption was sure to take place and did so. From the late 1920’s and into the 1940’s big-time athletes would be “sponsored” by alumni in order to get them to play for that schools team. The alumni would usually just pay the tuition for the athlete and usually it was seen as a loan but rarely got paid back.
Abstract: Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.
Paul Dietzel, former head coach of LSU, once said, “You can learn more character on the two-yard line than anywhere else in life.” Ever since the beginning, not only children but also college athletes have been playing sports for the love of the game and have used it as a way to grow character, teamwork, and leadership. Although when playing for a University an athletes job is to bring in profit for the school, this is not why these young men and women have continued with these sports they love. It is usually these students passion, a way for them to express themselves like others have art and music. The question has been up whether these college athletes should be paid for their loyalty and income for the University but by paying these students more than their given scholarship, it would defeat the purpose and environment of a college sport versus a professional sport, cause recruiting disputes, and affect the colleges benefits from these school athletics.
There has been a lot of athletic scandals in colleges in most parts of the world. These scandals have been as a result of the coaches and the directors of athletics in the colleges failing to take the full force of the law and giving their players freedom to do everything even if it is against the law. One of this fatal scandals is the Baylor university basketball scandal that occurred in the year 2003. This scandal involved the players and the coaches of the team. The scandal left one player dead and the other imprisoned for thirty five years. The team was subjected to a lot of punishment by the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The NCAA is a non-profit organization comprised of 1281 institutions, organizations, individuals and conferences and that organizes the athletic programs of most of the colleges and universities in the United States and Canada (The New York Times, 2003).
According to the NCAA regulations an athlete will lose his/her eligibility if they are paid to play; sign a contract with an agent; receive a salary, incentive payment, award, gratuity educational expenses or allowances; or play on a professional team. The word amateur in sports has stood for positive values compared to professional, which has had just the opposite. The professional sport has meant bad and degrading; while the amateur sport has meant good and elevating. William Geoghegan, Flyer News sports editor writes, “Would paying athletes tarnish the ideal of amateurism? Maybe, but being fair is far more important than upholding an ideal” (Geoghehan 1).
College athletes are manipulated every day. Student athletes are working day in and day out to meet academic standards and to keep their level of play competitive. These athletes need to be rewarded and credited for their achievements. Not only are these athletes not being rewarded but they are also living with no money. Because the athletes are living off of no money they are very vulnerable to taking money from boosters and others that are willing to help them out. The problem with this is that the athletes are not only getting themselves in trouble but their athletic departments as well.
Student athletes should not be paid more than any other student at State University, because it implies that the focus of this university is that an extracurricular activity as a means of profit. Intercollegiate athletics is becoming the central focus of colleges and universities, the strife and the substantial sum of money are the most important factors of most university administration’s interest. Student athletes should be just as their title states, students. The normal college student is struggling to make ends meet just for attending college, so why should student athletes be exempt from that? College athletes should indeed have their scholarships cover what their talents not only athletically but also academically depict. Unfortunately, the disapproval resides when students who are making leaps academically are not being offered monetary congratulations in comparison to student athletes. If the hefty amount of revenue that colleges as a conglomerate are making is the main argument for why athletes should be paid, then what is to stop the National Clearinghouse from devising unjust standards? Eventually if these payments are to continue, coaches, organizations, and the NCAA Clearinghouse will begin to feel that “c...
For decades there has been a debate on student athletes and their drive to succeed in the classroom. From the very beginning of organized college level athletics, the goal to want to succeed in athletics has forced students to put academics to the back burner. In spite of the goal to want to succeed over a hundred years of attempts to check limits of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards still seems to struggle to this day. This brings to surface one of the most asked questions in sports, “What effect does college sports have on academics and economics?” Herbert D. Simons, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington, authors of “Academic Motivation and the Student Athlete” researched the topic on whether athletics and academics benefit each other. Bryan Flynn, the author of “College Sports vs. Academics” poses the question “Should institutions of higher learning continue to involve themselves in athletic programs that often turn out to be virtual arms races for recruiting talented players who bring big money and prestige, but put academics to the back burner?” Although both authors agree that sports have an impact on an athlete’s academics, the focus of their argument differs.