More handpicked essays just for you.
Pay for play should college athletes be paid to participate in athletics
Research objectives of paying the college athlete
Benefits of paying college athletes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many high schools today face the dilemma whether to have their student athlete’s pay-to-play or cut all funding for sports. Tremendous amounts of high schools across the country have put the pay-to-play act into effect. All schools should put this act into action for many reasons. First, it creates more capital for the school’s athletic budget. Second, students can set up fundraisers to reduce the fees charged to play each sport. Lastly, high school sports are a privilege not a right.
A significant amount of high schools today face budget problems with athletics. For example, Athletic Director Peter Shanahan of Haverhill High School said, “The athletic budget in 2000 was about $550,000, and now it is approximately $300,000.”
(Cerling and Herman, 2007). Having all students pay-to-play can help cover the cost of many things such as, transportation, uniforms, and coaches’ salaries. As athletic budgets decrease, schools have the choice to cut all their athletic programs or pay-to-play. Another reason that high schools should adopt the pay-to-play act is because students and parents can do fundraisers to diminish the costs to play. Coaches, parents, and students can set up fundraisers of any kind to help pay these fees. Even if the entire cost is not covered it can still reduce these prices. For instance, a school that has a pay-to-play fee $300 may be harsh on an athlete’s family’s budget, but depending on how hard the student is willing to work to reduce that cost is up to him/her. A final reason why schools should implement pay-to-play is because high school sports are a privilege not a right. Playing a high sport is not a given opportunity, instead it is earned. For example, when an athlete plays a sport they have to earn their spot on the field. How far is a student or parent willing to go so the student can earn the privilege to participate in the sport of their choice? It boils down to whether the family of the athlete is or is not willing to pay for athlete to play. Many people disagree with the pay-to-play act and say that students should not have to pay these fees. The fees can be too much for lower income or financially struggling families. Again, playing high school sports is a privilege not a right. Lower income families have options to reduce the fees such as, fundraisers, boosters and even getting a part time job to help cover the cost of the fees. It is up to the family and the student if they want the athlete to play. Parents can say they want their children to play, but both the parent and child need to put effort into doing so. Should students have to pay-to-play high school sports? Schools everywhere are debating with this issue. All students should have to pay-to-play for many reasons. First, schools already have budget issues to cover the cost of athletics. Second, students and parents can do fundraisers or ask boosters to help pay for these fees. Lastly, high school sports are something you earn, not a given right.
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.
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 ...
After reading " The Case Against High School Sports" by Amanda Ripley started to make me think. There were many strong points about how the priorities of the sports are beginning to be more important to students than their education. Another great point was that the financing and budgeting is unfairly distributed throughout school districts and is spent more on athletics and clubs and not enough on classes. And I Believe that schools should put certain restrictions on the spending and promoting or in school sports and clubs because of the major drop in national and world comparisons.
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.
Money Hurts College athletes attend post-secondary schools in order to receive an education and to participate in sports. “Student athletes participate in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which he or she is enrolled. Student athletes must typically balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete” (“Student athlete” 1). Additionally, some people believe athletes should receive a salary. However, paying college athletes hurts the school, the sports, and the athletes.
Within a community is a sense of unity, which for many is brought together by the young athletes of the community. In his article “High School Sports Have Turned Into Big Business,” Mark Koba of CNBC highlights that within the last thirty to forty years high school football has escalated into a highly revered tradition in which not only communities, but highly successful corporations have begun to dedicate millions of dollars towards (Koba n. pg.). This highlights the status of sports within the community and may explain part of the reason schools would favor sports over other programs. Because sports programs can often turn over big profits for schools, they tend to dedicate most of their excess funds towards sports, and rely on sports programs to create large profits for the school. When school administrators see how much sports unite, excite, and benefit the school, they develop a respect for sports and consider it a necessity to provide a good sports program for their students and community. Also in his article, Koba quotes an interviewee named Mark Conrad who is the associate professor of legal and ethical studies at Fordham University 's school of...
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.
Financial aspects and profitability of college athletic programs is one of the most important arguments involved in this controversy. A group of people expresses that college athletic programs are over emphasized. The point they show on the first hand, is that athletic programs are too expensive for community colleges and small universities. Besides, statistics prove that financial aspects of college athletic programs are extremely questionable. It is true that maintenance, and facility costs for athletic programs are significantly high in comparison to academic programs. Therefore, Denhart, Villwock, and Vedder argue that athletic programs drag money away from important academics programs and degrade their quality. According to them, median expenditures per athlete in Football Bowl Subdivision were $65,800 in 2006. And it has shown a 15.6 percent median expenditure increase fro...
Student-athletes should not be paid to play and the amateur status should remain as it has for generations. Student-athletes have not matured enough at this stage of life to be able to handle all of the additional responsibilities that would be forced upon them with the professional status. Put the almighty dollar aside and let students-athletes be student’s first, amateur athletes second, allowing them to grow and mature into tomorrow’s effective leaders.
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.
When schools make budget cuts, they usually take money from athletic programs and clubs. The author is essentially saying that schools have taken away funding from too many programs that it feels as if they will will even stop funding necessary programs in order to say money. This critique on budget cuts helps us see the problem within the public school system. Certain activities that are common in other schools will be seen as a luxury to students in other schools and therefor are not given the same opportunities. The underfunded schools have taken away money from many programs that they will now have to stop funding certain areas that are key to a student’s education.
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...
In college sports athletes perform on the big stage in front of thousands of people every week and receive no money for their performances. These athletes receive no money for their performance because it is made illegal by the NCAA for any student athlete to receive any type of reward for their performance. In the last five years there has been a heated debate on whether the NCCA should start paying college athletes. People responded to this situation with mixed views and opinions. The first reason that people have shown views against pay for play is because scholarships pay for college athlete’s school either fully or partially. Secondly people believe pay for play would create jealousy and hypocrisy on college campuses between administration, college students, and other civic workers. The first reason that people have been convinced about pay for play is overpaid college coaches who make millions for the little work they do. Next the NCCA, Colleges, and merchandisers profit millions off the athletes every week without any of that revenue given back to the athletes. Next people believe scholarships are ineffective or incomplete. Lastly people believe the corrupt system of the NCAA is a reason college athletes should be paid. The NCCA has proposed plans to enact a pay for play plan including adding a two thousand dollar stipend for student athletes but this has been on hold for now. In society for student athletes to succeed in college and college careers the NCCA must pay them.
Because these schools don’t have enough money to provide the resources to educate their students, it is likely they are unable to expend funds on sports activities. This results in sports programs being cut first, right behind music and art. Since many of these programs offer a way for adolescents to escape reality, it is a necessity that we fund these programs. Sports programs are a way for adolescents to experience physical skill development and critical