Free Rides
Controversy strikes as talks of payment to college athletes are on the rise. Recent cases have brought about whether or not the country’s beloved student-athletes should be paid to play. The answer to that question is no, reason being that these “athletes” are students before anything, including a celebrity. College athletes, especially those who play football or basketball, are being compensated more than fairly enough through their scholarships as is. It’s public perceptions that the NCAA and/or the university these students attend are blatantly neglecting them. No, there is simply more to it. Most schools barely come by enough money to pay student-athletes, whether it be basketball, football, baseball, or even tennis and golf.
…show more content…
The complaint of the academic institution receiving the TV and merchandising money while players get next to nothing is a ridiculous sentiment. The apparatus of said institutions is not set up to drain players but the opposite. Student-athletes get room and board, the opportunity to show their skills to professional scouts, and most importantly a free education (Ramey 1). Though even with this provided, a collection of athletes somehow struggle to make ends meet. Out of all college athletes living on-campus, a whopping 86 percent drop below the federal poverty line (Alford 1). Faith Alford, journalist for the Daily Cougar, claims that the student-athletes cannot afford food at times, considering their sport is their full time job (1). Even so, that’s another day in the life of any other college student. College students make cutbacks all the time, staple foods are ramen noodles and great value counterparts to popular brands. Everyone has to make sacrifices. There is acknowledgement to be made to Alford 's statement, regardless, as of January 27th, 2015, College athletes are getting more than just tuition, room, and board under a vote taken at the NCAA 's annual convention (Berkowitz 1). These added benefits are called stipends, which could also be a problem for schools like TU. Stipends are not as simple as one would think. If these plans were to follow through in all places with players getting $2,000 …show more content…
This is probably due to so many being traditionalist holding beliefs that the spirit of school sports will be ruined. Not to mention the population seeing college sports as amateurism, similar to unpaid internships and so forth (“Paying College Athletes Pros…” 1) According to a poll only 33 percent who took part believed that student-athletes should be payed. Opposition nearly double that number at 64 percent, not to mention that 47 percent were STRONGLY against the concept of "pay-to-play" (Prewitt 1). ESPN analyst, Jay Bilas, finds the apparatus of the scholarship program "Laughable, but it 's not funny". He further claims that schools aren 't even "out a nickel" when providing college athletes with their all expense paid vacation to to free education (Prewitt 1). What’s “Laughable, but it’s not funny” is this blatantly obnoxious response to the issue. Though there should be acknowledgement given to the amount of money coaches earn, that 's their profession. They train these young athletes to perform on the level they do and bring profit from it. Without coaches there would be no gain. Critics, such as Bilas, try to make points such as the salary of college coaches yet only 19 percent of the population agreed with him in the polls (Prewitt 1). With such unheard of public support, it’s very unlikely for a paycheck for college athletes to go
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.
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.
First lets explore the history behind the paying of college athletes. Over the past 50 years the NCAA has been in control of all Div.1, 2 and 3 athletic programs. The NCAA is an organization that delegates and regulates what things college athletes can and can’t do. These regulations are put in place under the label of ‘protecting amateurism’ in college sports. This allots
The athletes at these institutions bring in tons of money into their school every year and deserve compensation. These Universities are exploiting these athletes by not giving them back what they make for their school. The numbers say it all when it comes to the scamming of the athletes by their own schools. In 2004, over 40 schools brought in more than $10 million, with 10 of them bringing in over $30 million. Several athletes around the nation are worth more than $1 million to their school(Brown). Both of these statistics are proof that while these athletes are essential to their schools, they are still kept out of the revenue. Even though these Universities won’t pay their players, the schools still have no problem giving their coaches some money. In 40 U.S. states the head coach of the basketball or football program is the highest paid public official(Edelman). 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)...
Over the years, the debate on whether or not to pay collegiate athletes, specifically Division 1, has increased greatly. With athletes bringing in millions of dollars to their respective schools, many believe it’s time to make a change. The debate has been ongoing since the 70’s, maybe even earlier, but it really came to the attention of many in the early 90’s, specifically 1995. Marcus Camby, a basketball player for the Toronto Raptors, admitted he took money and jewelry, from somebody who wanted to be his agent, while he was playing at the University of Massachusetts. This was one of many incidents that involved a player accepting money and other gifts from an agent and/or booster. I believe that college athletes deserve to be paid in some fashion. They devote their whole life to their sport, whether or not they are the starters, and most will not go on to the pros, even though they contribute to the team. They sell tickets, jerseys, T-shirts etc. for their school, and see none of the money. Coaches sign six figure deals with shoe companies, like Nike, Reebok, Converse, and the players are the ones wearing the shoes and jerseys, the coaches have on whatever they want. Even though just recently the NCAA Committee allowed athletes to get a job; between schoolwork, and practices, they don’t have enough time to find a job. Most of the kids come from poor backgrounds, and don’t have enough money to do normal college things, like going out to eat, going on a date, or out to the movies.
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.
Today there are over 450,000 college athletes and the National College Athletics Association (NCAA) faces a difficult decision on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many people believe that they should and many believe they should not. There are several benefits that college’s athletes receive for being a student athlete. Why should they receive even more benefits than their scholarship and numerous perks?
College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.
In recent years the idea of student-athletes getting paid for playing in college has become more and more popular. There have been many instances where questions have been raised surrounding some of the finest athletes participating in the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Some of the biggest names in athletics have been involved, including Cam Newton, Reggie Bush, Johnny Manziel, along with many more athletes who have been exposed by the media for supposedly accepting cash benefits while in college. Most recently Johnny Manziel has been brought up in an autograph scandal. Apparently he was paid ten-thousand dollars for more than over one thousand and one hundred autographs. Ultimately Manziel was only suspended one half of a full collegiate football game, but is it really fair that he was forced to sit a half of football game because he simply gave some people his John Hancock? Reggie Bush and Cam Newton have both been involved in scandals involving mone...
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!
College is a time for young people to develop and grow not only in their education, but social aspects as well. One of the biggest social scenes found around college campuses are athletic events, but where would these college sports be without their dedicated athletes? Student athletes get a lot of praise for their achievements on the field, but tend to disregard the work they accomplish in the classroom. Living in a college environment as a student athlete has a great deal of advantages as well as disadvantages that affect education and anti-intellectualism.
In recent years, the argument about whether or not to pay athletes playing at the college level has become a matter of national debate. Currently, the ruling is that college athletes cannot be paid. This is a stance that should be maintained. Paying athletes to compete at the collegiate level is unfeasible because it would cost colleges too much, influence student’s educational decisions and create an unfair financial atmosphere between athletes and non-athletes.
Some schools force students to participate in organized school sports. However, I believe that schools should not make this a requirement. Some students may have medical conditions, family situations that don't allow them to participate in organized school sports, or they simply may not have the time.
For the past few years many have argued that student-athletes should be thankful for their educational opportunities in college, including the cost of tuition, books, room and board (which would be around $17,000 here at Penn State). Many also argue that if we are paid for our performances, other college talents should be paid for their contributions to their schools. However, when one looks at the vast difference in the amounts of money that different groups bring in, it makes sense why we are resentful at the millions of dollars being made off of our sweat and tears. For instance my former teammate Larry Johnson put his heart and soul into playing for the past four years. His jerseys were sold for $50 each all year around, and he never saw a dime of that money. This is just one of the many examples of unfair compensation. Each year we are under enormous pressure to perform well in the classroom and in sports and I feel that if we were given a stipend it would help alleviate some of stress we go through.