In addition, some say that the system of compensating student-athletes would be too hard to handle and monitor. I agree that it would be difficult because it is something new and would break the familiar mold, but that didn’t stop people in history before from doing what is necessary and what should be done before. Critics worry that it will ruin the game if we pay the student-athletes, but we don’t see them causing an uproar when schools pay the student-athletes’ coaches millions, or when the NCAA charges hundreds of dollars for a ticket to see a single game, or when schools sell a jersey with an athlete’s number on it at the student bookstore. When the Olympics allowed professionals to participate, it forever changed the Games in a positive …show more content…
Many sports at a school lose money and if it’s in the best interest of the school to keep the programs, they will, just as they have them now. The NCAA may complain because they are not showing a profit but the the Universities work as a Non-Profit so what are we missing. In life, people are paid based on their value and revenue turned in, so why are the student-athletes any different? Furthermore, the compensation system may look difficult to set up, however the leaders of the NCAA are making it look more difficult that it actually would be. If the NCAA can set up a college football playoff in 2 months and have the playoff bring in millions of additional revenue, setting up a fair market for players it’s too far …show more content…
Redick and Richard Sherman provide valuable insight, as they have each been a student-athlete and are currently professional players. After the North Carolina Tar Heels won the 2017 NCAA Basketball Championship, Redick went across the aisle and complimented his former rival Tar Heels on the win. He also added “Every player on the court tonight should have been paid. Scholarships don’t count.” Redick knows it won’t be a simple change and says “It’s got to be something radical, It’s not just, ‘Oh, let’s just pay every player $5,000.’ It really requires something really radical. And maybe that’s getting rid of college athletics as we know it. If you’re playing in a sport that is making millions of dollars -- for either your school or the NCAA -- you should get a piece of that, And the scholarship doesn’t cover your piece -- your rightful piece. That’s my two cents.” (CBS.com) An interesting note is the that CBS is reporting on how student-athletes should get compensated and they are the ones that signed the $10.8 Billion contract with the NCAA. In addition, Richard Sherman has spoken multiple times about this subject and he wants outsiders to understand the student-athlete struggle. "They are upset when a student-athlete says they need a little cash," he said. "Well, I can tell you from experience, I had negative-40 bucks in my account. Usually my account was in the negative
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.
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.
Hypothetically, as athletes recognize that they can get an education, play college sports, and also get paid like an employee, they will start transitioning away from the lesser schools while creating a pool of players in the top schools. Not only would that turn out to be a horrible situation for minor schools, but this also means that college sports’ would not be exciting to watch when the top four schools fight it out, in the tournament each year. Eventually, ratings and ticket sales would go down due to the loss of unpredictability in games. College athletics are only a portion of the negatives that come out of paying student athletes, the athletes themselves are also in virtue of disorder. Not only would college athletics find itself in jeopardy, another negative of giving a college student a paycheck comes to mind.
A question that has been rising to the surface lately is “should college athletes be paid a salary?” One cannot get on the internet now a day and not see some kind of college sport headline. The world of college sports has been changed greatly the past decade due to college athletes. These athletes make insurmountable amounts of money and an unbelievable amount of recognition for the universities. The athletes that provide and make a ton of revenue for the colleges also spend a huge amount of their time practicing and staying committed to sports, and have to maintain good grades in school which requires quite a bit of overtime. Because college athletes generate massive amounts of revenue and put in massive amounts of personal time for their individual universities, colleges need to financially compensate players for their contributions. The colleges that these superstars represent are reaping all of the benefits of the accomplishments the athletes have, yet the big named players are making nothing from what they do.
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.
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.
College athletes generate millions of dollars for their schools each year, yet they are not allowed to be compensated beyond a scholarship due to being considered amateurs. College athletes are some of the hardest working people in the nation, having to focus on both school courses and sports. Because athletics take so much time, these student-athletes are always busy. College football and basketball are multi-billion dollar businesses. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes beyond scholarships, and it would be tough to work a new compensation program into the NCAA and university budgets. College athletes should be compensated in some form because they put in so much time and effort, generating huge amounts of revenue.
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.
"The best argument against paying players is that it diminishes the value of an education" (qtd. in Zimbalist). State University has breached its academic standard by allocating unnecessary expenditures to athletically advanced students. Student athletes should not be paid at State University, because it focuses on an extracurricular activity as a means of profit, praises athletic ability over merit/ scholastics, promotes a bridge between players and regular students, and creates hierarchy between universities.
There has always been a lot of debate on whether or not college athletes should get paid. With as much money as college sports makes from these student athletes, should these student athletes be getting paid? There are many different stances on why I feel like these student athletes should be getting paid. I will talk about some of the reasons on why they should get paid. Being a student athlete is a very stressful thing in life at that age as they are attending school full time and working extremely hard at being the best athlete they can on the field.
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 thing opponents say is, "They're already getting a scholarship! That is more than anybody else! Don't be greedy!”(Hartnett). These are just two men’s opinions, but no one needs to give his or her opinion any longer. The answer to this question is unmistakably clear. NCAA athletes do not need to be paid because they get to go to college for free, their living expenses are paid for, and there would not be a fair way to choose which teams are paid and which are not.
In recent years, a major controversy in the NCAA has been whether or not student athletes in college should be paid for playing sports. There are different viewpoints from different people stating if they should or not. Many people believe that they are already being rewarded enough with their education being paid, but even with the school’s help with their tuition and school fees, many have trouble paying personal expenses. Even though some people believe they shouldn’t be compensated for their hard work and dedication, it is the right thing to do, due to their lack of time occupied by sports and schoolwork. Many famous athletes in college such as Johnny Manziel and Tim Tebow bring in millions of dollars into their universities due to publicity and even though they are breaking their backs they don’t receive a single dime for their hard work. The college coaches also get a really high salary, just for coaching the players. They also receive many contracts that include shoe contracts, TV and radio contracts, and many perks along the way. When the coaches get their teams to the playoffs or win major games, they might receive big bonuses. It doesn’t make sense that the athletes are the ones that are doing all the work to get the far yet they don’t see any form of compensation. Many executives from the NCAA and the universities also get millions of dollars from big sporting events, and they do nothing to earn it. The athletes are the ones taking stuff out of their time and working hard to not get paid.
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!
Despite the strength of the reasons as to why student-athletes should not be paid, there are certain problems with the current NCAA system which can and should be cured. The gap between a full scholarship and the cost of attendance should be covered by the academic institution, especially when a student athlete does not qualify for a loan. Such a policy will go a long way in ensuring that student-athletes are not leaving school to become professional athletes because they cannot pay their bills. Academic institutions should be able to provide at least that much for their athletes. Ultimately, this is a form of payment, but it is not the type of payment that some individuals are advocating. The primary purpose of these institutions is to educate; it is the coach's job to teach, and not just in terms of the sport a student athlete plays. These schools should facilitate the educations of student-athletes through scholarship grants, but not through a system of salaries dependent on supply and demand, which ultimately detracts a student-athlete from picking a school, and detracts them from attending a school, for the right reasons.