College athletes do not receive a salary for their services in their athletic programs. Officials have debated for many years on the correct position on paying these student athletes, especially those in the larger profit gaining sports such as football and basketball. The debates have come to the similar conclusion that college players should not receive direct monetary compensation as an amateur athlete at any institution. This decision is appropriate for multiple reasons involving the athletes, administration, and universities as a whole. College athletes receive different scholarships that purchase tuitions and other learning materials. If students get more money for their athletic performance, they will direct their focus away from academic …show more content…
The article “Paying College Athletes” also reads, “Supporting Evidence/Source: On many campuses across the country, athletes' academic studies are forced to take a backseat to their athletic performance” (Garda 2). College athletes have to take focus away from education in order to practice and perform well in sports, so if it was also making them a profit it would encourage players to focus less on education. A limited percentage of college athletes become pro athletes after graduation, so it is imperative for students to excel in academic classes in order to have the tools necessary for future employment. Coaches commonly attempt to persuade athletes to sign up for less involved classes so that they can focus on football or basketball. After graduation, many student athletes are left with an impractical degree and no future in professional sports. An article, “Should College Student Athletes be Paid,” also brings up an NCAA commitment under the collegiate model which includes institutions creating an environment in which athletes’ activities promote further education. Colleges have the responsibility to create a learning environment, and paying players for participation in sports would inhibit that environment. College athletics are for the purpose of providing entertainment and activity to exist with the intention of attaining higher education. College athletes choose to participate in sports as part of their educational experience, but sports should not become the focus of their college
They do not face problems of debt and tuition to the extent that the normal college student faces. Student-athletes are fairly compensated through publicity and financial benefits, and the NCAA should continue to refrain from paying them. The varying size and interest levels of universities makes it almost impossible to fairly pay all athletes. In order to avoid problems like those exhibited by Northwestern’s football team, who recently tried to unionize, all athletes would need to be paid equally. The excitement brought on by college sports is immense, and problems created due to paying athletes would only hurt the tradition and charisma that college athletics offer. In conclusion, College athletes are students and amateurs, not employees. “Remember student comes first in student-athlete”
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.
This points out that if student athletes were given a salary, the only athletes that would receive it are those in basketball and football. The less popular sports athletes would either switch to these two sports, or continue playing the sport they love while their colleagues thrive in the sport they love while getting an incentive. Universities and colleges pride themselves as environments where students seek further education in a particular field of study.
The argument whether a student-athlete should be paid to play or not be paid is one that spans the ages. College sports are considered to be of amateur status by the NCAA. Therefore, they believe student-athletes should not receive a pay check to participate in a sport. However, on the other end of the spectrum, many critics believe that student-athletes should receive pay for play because not only are they participating in a sport, they are entertaining the spectators. They believe that if performers in the entertainment industry are paid, why not pay the college-athletes?
College football has been a sport in American society for decades. Yet the players playing the sport are not receiving their fair cut of the prize. It has been debated whether or not college football players should get paid for playing. The supporters say that the players are not being compensated fairly and the non-supporters say that the education the players receive is payment enough. They also say that the universities the players attend are providing them with the basic necessities so they should not get paid. College football players should be paid though because they put their bodies at risk, make a lot of money for their school, and the play to entertain audiences.
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.
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?
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...
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
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 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.
The payment of NCAA student-athletes will deteriorate the value of an education to the athletes. The value of an education for a young man or woman cannot be measured. It is our gate way to success as...
Should College Athletes Get Paid? One of the biggest controversies in the sports world is if student athletes should be paid on salary. Some believe that they should be paid and others would love to beg to differ. Student athletes are paid in many ways through scholarships and tuition grants that cover their room and board and meal plans.
Another reason that college athletes should not be paid is because they are, under NCAA rules, to be considered amateurs. In the National Collegiate Athletic Association Rules it states, “College athletes are not to be paid, not to cash in on their prominence, never to cross any kind of line of professionalism.” Steve Wieberg, of the USA Today, studied the rules that the NCAA has placed on paying college athletes. He concludes that, “Athletic programs are meant to be an integral part of the educational program” (Weinberg). The reoccurring theme here should be obvious now —education is the most important part of the student’s time in college and being an athlete should come second.
Compensating College Athletes Often college athletes get hurt and miss classes. Shouldn’t athletes be compensated for all that is endured? Athletes work hard out on that field and usually get hurt for more than forty hours a week for an entire season. This is why college athletes should be paid.