A reporter asked Richard Sherman, a former Stanford football player who is currently playing in the national league, his opinion if student-athletes are given the time to take advantage of their education. Sherman explained, “They pay for your room and board, they pay for your education, but to their knowledge you are there to play football. And it sounds crazy to hear that form a student athlete, but that’s the things coaches tell them every day” (Sports Illustrated , 2015) His comment explains the challenges student athletes have to get their promised college education. Some people feel that having their education paid for is more than enough compensation for student athletes, but more argue that they are not getting an education and should …show more content…
However, as this essay explains that so many challenges student athletes have to go through just to get an education they are promised in their contracts. One example, is the UNC paper classes where student athletes take these paper classes for 18 years and “advisers funneled athletes into the program to make them eligible” (Ganim & Sayers, 2014). These paper classes are made to keep star players on the field or court, which is just an easier way then actually educating the students. Also with the limited time student athletes have to study it is hardly possible for them to gain an education. Penn Schoen Berland presented a study that showed more than half of student athletes agree that they do not have the time to study tests (Penn Schoen Berland, 2015). Basketball players in the annual March Madness tournament are out of the class room for about a month. As well having the institutions and NCAA arguing that they are not legally obligated to make sure they have gained the education promised. Everyone the student athletes surround themselves with are people who push for the best performance on the court or field and not in the class room. With no one taking responsibility for the student athletes educational opportunities it is almost impossible for them to get an education their promised. The more money that comes into college sports the more pressure it becomes on athletic performance then getting an education and that is when amateurism becomes pro. If the colleges are making billions of the athlete’s talents and not compensating them with a true education, then paying the players might be the most fair for the student
There are many situations in the modern day where too many people cause controversy about paying college athletes. They see this as the coarse issue, but paying the athletes will not solve the big problem that you do not think about at first. Although, there are many college athletes that are struggling to get through life and a salary for their hard work will be appreciated, it just will not solve the big issue. This issue would just become worsened.
In “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid,” a response to the previous argument that also appeared in the Baltimore Sun, former Penn State football player Warren Hartenstine argues that “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” Like Marx, Hartenstine is writing to a similar audience, but argues why student-athletes shouldn’t be paid above scholarships like professional athletes are.
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.
Should college athletes get paid an additional salary? They are an important assets to universities and colleges, so why should they not? How else would universities justify taking advantage of these young men and women? These are questions that arise when pondering the issue. This has been a large controversy over the years of rather or not college athletes should be paid, more specifically football and basketball players. However, they fail to mention that colleges are only considering paying a select few, the stars of the sports. Every single sport in colleges is making revenue for those campuses, making colleges money hungry. Thus, if they decide to only pay a select few, would that leave out women sports all together? Why pay college athletes more on top of everything they already receive? Most college athletes receive free tuition, medical care, meal plans and room and board, which can acquaint to more than a quarter million dollars for their entire college career (Scoop, 2013). Why ask for more? What is this teaching our youth? They should appreciate their chance to do what they love and value the education they are receiving, because that education is far more valuable than a potential sports salary. Even though colleges and college athletes have a few good points on why they believe they should get paid, over all the issue is larger than that, college athletes already make their share of “money” through free education and much more.
College athletes juggle busy academic and practice schedules all throughout their stressful weeks, so why shouldn't they be compensated for their time dedicated to sports? NCAA rules strictly prohibits players from being paid for all the hard work they do to protect “amateurism”, but are you really an amateur putting in over 40 hours a week between practice and other activities? Although students earn a college scholarship, that doesn’t cover living expenses, and access to a degree at the end of their career, players should be paid because schools, coaching staffs and major corporations are profiting off their free labor.
Athletes everywhere complain and gripe about how little money they have. What they don’t realize is, it’s not just them. Most college students do not have a sufficient amount of money that they can buy whatever they want. It is outrageous that athletes believe they are entitled to accommodations because they play sports. To play a sport at the collegiate level is a privilege (Top 10 Reasons College Athletes Should Not Be Paid). Students that participate in athletics should not receive any payment because they are receiving tons of benefits, free tuition, and this would extend the talent gap.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Playing a sport in college is equivalent to working a full-time job (Thomas). There are rules that allow major-college football coaches to only demand twenty hours of the players time each week (Wieberg). However, studies show that those athletes are doubling those hours per week during the season (Wieberg). Other sports are putting in the equivalent of a full time work week (Wieberg). Some NCAA officials are concerned with the amount of time spent stating that beyond forty hours is inhumane (Wieberg). Most of the athletes compete and do whatever it takes to succeed, so they enjoy spending countless hours on sports (Wieberg). Many athletes even have struggles in the classroom because they do not have enough time to study. Student-athletes at top Division I schools think of themselves as athletes more than students (Wieberg). Less than one percent of college athletes actually make it professionally (Wieberg). That means these kids should focus more on their education than on athletics. In reality, these official...
...it off of their likeness. No we should not be paid millions of dollars, or even hundreds of thousands, but I do believe that student-athletes should receive a small amount of money .It is only fair to the student-athletes because they are the ones out there putting in work on the field, weight room, film room, and traveling half the time to represent the university on top of trying to maintain a grade point average. I feel that it does not only deserve, but I also believe that getting a stipend would help student-athletes learn to manage their money. There is a reason so many athletes that make it to the professional level end up broke. It’s not fair to the players that they cannot make a profit off of their god given talents and their likeness. In a certain aspect college athletics is sort of like slavery, the university controls almost every aspect of your life.
The college athletes of their respective sports today, have the opportunity of showcasing their talents in competition on local and national programming on a regular basis which has lately brought attention this controversy, paying college athletes. The issue was brought on by the athletes over time, then caught onto coaches, sports columnists, and fans. The athletes dedicate themselves to the sport to a caliber comparable to the professional tier. The idea of paying the athletes could be considered as they play major factor in reputation of their schools, as well as funds for their schools. However most colleges do not have profitable sports teams. Thus, paying athletes would prove to be a very difficult endeavor and this could destroy college athletics as we know them today.
Herbet D. Simans, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington focuses their argument on academic motivation of student athletes and what drives them to want to succeed in the classroom as well as on the court or field. Although Flynn also focuses on academic motivation of student athletes, he also discusses how colleges tend to spend more money on sports related necessities for the students instead of towards their education. Flynn’s argument displays how colleges are basically a business...