Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics of athlete salary
NCAA and college athletes monetary compensation
Essays on why athletes should be paid
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethics of athlete salary
College athletics have become a very popular commodity throughout college scenes across the nation. They, in turn, tend to bring in a lot of money for these universities, especially along the division 1 and division 2 institutions. Many of these athletes can likely play professionally; however turn down the millions of dollars in order to obtain educational values. Rules regulate whether the athletes can be paid for their efforts within their given sport. The debate is ongoing; as some believe that athletes should be paid given how much money they do bring into the university. Others believe that the college game should be kept amatuerized and should be a learning experience for its participants. Regardless of what decision will be made …show more content…
in the future, the debate has many pieces, which can be broken down in order to analyze the argument. This question has been debated for many years throughout the nation and across college campuses. It can only be answered by one means of authority, the NCAA. The NCAA is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, whose mission is to govern govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount. The NCAA is the mane authority figure for all college athletes. If the NCAA does not agree with the idea of giving money to athletes, then it will not happen. This decision cannot be left up to the colleges and unversities because the NCAA’s sole purpose was to maintain the college athletics so that colleges could focus on the academics. By not giving the NCAA that jurisdiction, it would completely defeat the purpose of the NCAA. The bylaws of the NCAA clearly state “Before initial collegiate enrollment, an individual may accept compensation for athletics participation. This compensation may be in various forms, such as salary, stipend or the payment of expenses. Also, while there is no limit to the amount of compensation that may be accepted before collegiate enrollment, the compensation must cease upon collegiate enrollment.” This says that an athlete can accept money before they are enrolled into the college, but when the actual athletics begin, compensation must cease. This argument was much less talked about until recently. The argument has been made much more public over the past few years through the media. The actual debate is simple—either the athletes will get paid or they will not get paid.
There are many pros and cons for and against each argument. As an argument for athletes being paid, college students often struggle with finances when they get to college because it is hard to work and go to school. Krikor Meshefejean states: “There are also student-athletes who have to leave school early because they do not have enough money to continue, or to pay their bills…” Nathan Chaisson of the Collegiated Times also states “Athletes are scrutinized for getting any type of job while on scholarship for their school. Getting paid to play or work in football would be sacrilege.”The money that they obtained would make the college life less stressful on them. They would be able to buy the things that he needed and pay for added luxuries that every college student deems essential. The athletes work very hard at their respective sport. Chris Bellamy states “…if I were busting my ass every day of the week in the weight room, the practice field, the classroom, the library-mostly to the school's advantage-well, that's worth a lot more than a free education, if you ask me.” Playing college athletics is like having a full time job. It takes a lot of hard work and dedication. Practices tend to take up much of the day and traveling to and from events can take time. Athletes could be paid for their efforts in that they do so much for the program. Other ideas such as: paying athletes …show more content…
will give an incentive to stay in school has been introduced since the early exit of many college stars. Andrew Sivic writes “Paying them would improve quality of play by keeping borderline professional athletes in college.” There are other ideas against what athletes should be paid for, however. QThe statement “College players are not professionals.
They are amateur athletes and therefore should not be paid.” has been the main idea for those against paying athletes, however, other ideas have come about over the past couple of years. Those against the idea say that athletes playing for pay could affect how they perform in the class room or anywhere else at the school. They can begin to believe that they are above the rules. College Athletics is not meant to be something of proffesionalism. Athletes are told that the college experience is suppose to be about education and friendship. Athletics is an added bonus and luxury to those who partake in it. Athletes are told that in order to retain their amatuerism, they can’t accept any form of pay or compensation. Some believe athletics money should go directly to the academics for universities. “The money generated from college sports should be used to benefit the entire college, not just the individual.” (Jim Winn, para.6) Colleges’ are strict in enforcing this rule because of penalties which can affect any program from the
NCAA. The debate of college athletes being compensated for their play has been made rather public as of late. The jurisdiction has been left solely on the NCAA, who has been debating the issue for the past couple of years. The debate is whether college athletes should be paid or not paid for their efforts in their school sporting events. There are various points made in support of each side, however, a common ground has not yet been agreed upon. Rather then trying to decide whether one point is better then the other, officials should strive for an agreement which is acceptable for both parties.
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.
Critics feel that the term amateurism is only a term used in collegiate sports to show the distinguish the difference between professional and collegiate so that they don’t have to pay college athletes. College athletes are just as talented and just as exposed as professional athletes. The argument is for there to be a share in the profits for wage compensation amongst players is know as pay-for-play. College athletics is a corporate enterprise that is worth millions of dollars in revenue. Pay-for-play is an assumption that colleges and universities receive huge revenues from marketing their collegiate sports programs and that the profits from these revenues are not shared with players who perform in the arena. Which some feel that they should.
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.
Tyson Hartnett of The Huffington Post once said “Even with any type of scholarship, college athletes are typically dead broke.” This quote regards a tremendous controversy that has been talked about for the past few years. He talks about whether or not college athletes should be paid for their duties. Despite the fact college athletes are not professionals, they should most certainly be paid for playing for their respective schools due to many factors. These factors include health risks and the income bring in for their colleges as well as to the National Collegiate Athletic Association.
... being paid. Many people prefer watching college sports over professional sports based on the idea that money isn’t involved in college sports. They are competing and giving everything they have for the love of their teammates, the love of their school, and above all, their love for the game. Paying athletes would ruin this standard of intercollegiate athletics. For all these reasons, college athletes should not be paid beyond their full ride scholarships.
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.
These athletes receive free tuition, textbooks, rooms, meal, and training. So they should not be paid extra money on top of that. Athletes may have to train hard, but while they are training, non-athletic students are out working to pay off debts. By paying athletes, it would hurt many smaller universities without much athletic funding, as they would not be able to buy the best players like bigger colleges could. College sports are meant to bring players and fans together to celebrate their school, but sports are becoming too big a part of college life. Colleges were created to help further educate students and all college attendees should be focused on education and not extracurricular activities like
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.
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.
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
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.
In today’s society, one of the big controversies with sports is, should student athletes be be paid a salary? Some people believe that they should be paid and others would completely disagree. Even though they technically are being paid, they really are not. The only type of way the athletes would be paid is through financial aid or if they have a job. Only their education is being paid by the school. Although some people believe that they should be paid, it would not be a good idea at all. So college athletes should not be paid at all because they are basically being paid to study and play a sport.
College athletes should be paid because they are basically working for the school. When a student gets a scholarship to a college for a sport they are expected to practice with the team and without the team, so on their free time. College athletes go way over the maximum amount of hours they are allowed to practice with the team. A 2011 survey, from the article Should College Athletes Be Paid?, states “The NCAA has a limit of 20 hours of training per week, D1 football players on average practice 43 hours a week, baseball 42.1 hours a week, and men’s basketball 39.2 hours a week”(Walch). With
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!