Isn't it amazing how one little controversial question can cause so much drama? Take the NCAA for instance. Within recent years the question of weather NCAA athletes should be paid or not has arisen and caused them some unwanted attention. Many coaches and sports enthusiast have been interviewed on their opinion. “Students are not professional athletes who are paid salaries and incentives for a career in sports. They are students receiving access to a college education through their participation in sports, for which they earn scholarships to pay tuition, fees, room and board, and other allowable expenses,” (Mitchell). “There has been major discussion recently if college athletes should or shouldn't be paid while they are in school. The first …show more content…
On a new developed average, it can take up to ten years or more for a student to pay off their debt (Lazarony). Because of this, students have to be more frugal in deciding which school they want to attend. But, students who are athletes can get up to a full ride to the college of their choice if their sport has a team there. For an NCAA athlete, their schooling is paid for in turn for the student to be a dedicated athlete to their sport’s team. For one of the athletes to not only go to college for free, but also be paid extra money just for competing is unjust. Many students who want to attend college but are not athletes, do not have enough money to afford it. In addition, the money that would be used to pay the athletes, could instead be used for scholarships for the students who cannot afford to get their well-deserved education. Parents all across the country would hate to see their straight A student not get into the college that they deserve just because the can not afford it. So, for an athlete to be paid extra money, while getting a free education, would not be fair to other students who do not have the equal opportunity to attend college due to financial …show more content…
So not only do they get to go to college, compete with their sport’s team, they get a place to stay and the living expenses paid for in full. This means that the students get to go to class, go to practice and the go home and not have to worry about bills, loans, or food. For a college kid, those are the main things they think about. Why would athletes need to get extra money when they have everything they already need? There would be no purpose in that whatsoever. For the athletes to have their scholarship cover all that it does, and they get to do all that they do, it is seen as an under appreciated
Some feel that by not paying college athletes that college institutions are thereby exploiting their athletes free of charge, which is unfair. However, this article feels that college athletes are paid very favorably by the large amount of money they receive for schooling through scholarships. Also, since college athletes don’t pay to play or go to school they are receiving a free college degree whether or not they decide to stay in school for four years or not. With the training that they receive from professional trainers and nutritionists for a professional controlled diet they save possibly thousands within the 4 years they attend school and perform in collegiate athletics.
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.
Salvador, Damon. “Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid?” 20 April 2013.Web. 18 May 2014.
Many sports people say that if the NCAA pays the athletes to play, it will encourage them to stay in school longer. The money that the athletes will receive at the next level will be bigger than any amount the NCAA can afford to pay them. Athletes argue that the NCAA and ESPN are making billions of dollars off of them to air their games; why can’t they get compensation for it. This argument is valid, but no matter what amount, free education is far more valuable than any financial amount. You’re talking about giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to
Johnson, Dennis A., and John Acquaviva. "Point/counterpoint: Paying College Athletes."The Sport Journal 15.1 (2012). Questia School. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
Rosenfeld, Evan, and Scarlett McCourt. Opposing Views: Should NCAA Athletes Be Paid? September 17, 2013. www.wildcat.arizona.edu/article/2013/09/opposing-views-should-ncaa-athletes-be-paid-091813. (accessed December 7, 2013).
Thomas, Brennan. "Pay for Play: Should College Athletes Be Compensated?." Bleacher Report. TBS, 4 Apr. 2011. Web. 8 Dec. 2013.
The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many people who are in favor of the change.
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 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.
Daugherty, Paul. "College athletes already have advantages and shouldn't be paid." Sports Illustrated. Sports Illustrated, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/paul_daugherty/01/20/no.pay/
Mitchel, Horace and Marc Eldelman. Should College Student- Athletes be Paid? 6 January 2014. 6 April 2014 .
There is a growing debate as to whether or not student-athletes should be paid. NCAA was much simpler back when President Theodore Roosevelt helped to create it in 1906. Then, it was an institute for regulating certain rules and supporting the sports that everyone loved. Yet now in the 21st century, the NCAA is a billion dollar company that keeps growing. The increasing possibility of the unionization has brought more and more attention to whether student-athletes should be paid. The opinion varies across the board – with some saying that the possibility of a student-athlete seems unfair to those who see the athletes as receiving special treatment with full rides to colleges and universities. “The hope is a union for university athletes concentrates on the competitive environment, not on payments” (Bondy, Web). Many questions are connected to how it would be implemented when college sports create little revenue. There is only profit seen from football and basketball, which would discriminate against the rest of the athletes from other sports. The topic requires an explanation as to where the funds to pay students would come from. Will this be written in a contract or a regular per-hour job? And, if the school were to make little profit while the expenses continued to grow, would the NCAA pay the student-athletes instead of the schools?
First, some people think the college athletes should get salary paid by the college affiliates because they make enormous amounts of money. These people are mistaken sorely. The NCAA r other college affiliates actually put a great amount of money into the student football athletes. Things such as scholarships, financial living assistance and financial benefits from the NCAA all come out of them money they bring in each year. Salary would just replace the working system that is already in place for the college football players. Second, some people think that if college athletes receive gifts from the NCAA and/or gifts from other people in the form of money they should be paid salary instead. If the NCAA gives college football ot college athletes in general salary they are actually committing a crime. Accoring to the NCAA, “Pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 15.01.6.2, member institutions and conferences shall not use monies received from the fund for the following. Salaries and benefits...”(NCAA, 1). This is saying that anyone who receives money from the NCAA or anyone else and uses it for a salary is a punishable crime. If the players receive salary then, rules would have to be changed enormously because of the huge restrictions of receiving money for playing and for salary. The gifts that the NCAA give are not salary they are the equivalent to a bonus a few hundred dollars for reaching a high achievement. Lastly, some people think that the college players risk their lives every game. According to the NCAA, “The NCAA provides all student-athletes at all active member institutions coverage under the catastrophic program, and the NCAA pays 100 percent of the current $13.5 million premium. This program provides $20 million in
The Washington, Post. "Why college athletes should be paid to play." Washington Post, The June 0004: EBSCO MegaFILE. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.