Have you heard that college athletes can get paid? Do you think they should get paid, or should not get paid? Starting in 2021, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) lifted a ban on name, image and likeness (NIL) for college athletes. This means that now college athletes can profit off themselves during college. This is important to discuss because many people have different thoughts on this topic.While college amateur athletes who don't go pro would benefit from NIL, college athletes should not get paid because it will hurt the college community, and they should be playing the sport because they love it, not because they can make more money. Student amateur athletes shouldn’t be paid because they should be playing for the love …show more content…
Yeah, some of them went on to make millions in the NBA and NFL, but most of them didn't...... How life-changing could NIL opportunities have been for them when they were in college?”(Zimmer, 2022). These prove the counterclaim because many students really won’t make it to their professional leagues and make big money. But most NIL deals are not worth that much money, and that won’t really change how they go on to live their lives. And is 5,000 worth of NIL money per person really worth all of the negatives that go along with it, no? That is why college athletes shouldn’t get paid. In conclusion, college amateur athletes would benefit from NIL, but hurting the college community, and playing the game because they love it outweighs and helps support why college athletes should not be paid. While athletes who don’t become big stars would benefit from NIL, there are many downsides to athletes in college getting paid. Also, they don’t even get paid that much money so it won’t make a big difference. So that is why the college community is more important because it can get hurt when you have students getting paid on
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.
Nowadays, we've seen many universities’ competitions on the television as a leisure performance but we've never concerned whether they receive their pay. In Mike Benedykciuk's article "The Blue Line: College Athletes Should be Paid," he argues that student athletes should receive the wage though they are not professional. Like any good writer, he employs special word choices, statistics and rhetorical devices to plead with the audience to take his side. In this article, he demonstrates many such devices, which will be explained further as follows.
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.
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.
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!
This argument has been trying to settle people’s minds with coming to a conclusion of whether or not the athletes should be paid. Many people love college athletics because it is just that: college athletics. The bidding on March Madness made more money than bids that were placed on the Super Bowl this past year. People love to watch young stars develop into the greater athletes that they are capable of being. The amateurism of college sports is why so many people are drawn to it. If the athletes were to be paid, it would forever change the organization and how it’s run. College athletes are amateurs, not professionals; therefore they should not be paid.
College sports have grown over the years, earning billions of revenue every year. However, what may seem surprising is that the athletes involved do not get a single penny earned from the revenue. These college sports require tremendous time and determination due to long hard practices along with rigorous course works. And due to the lack of time, athletes don’t often have the time for part time jobs that allow them to earn money to buy things they need or want for their personal life. Therefore, college athletes have every right to be paid for their hard work.
Over the past decades, college athletics have gained immense popularity in the United States. Whether it be basketball, football, baseball, or volleyball. The NCAA is a billion dollar company, but where is all this money going to? For example the University of Kentucky Men’s basketball coach John Calipari has a seven year deal with the school for $52.5 million. Other collegiate coaches are receiving the same amount if not more. However that is not close to all the money the NCAA receives, so still where are they putting the leftover money. How are these coaches receiving so much money, but these players are the ones putting in all the hard work and aren’t seeing a penny of it. The NCAA should be paying these students. They are putting in hours
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.
Team sports like soccer or basketball and individual sports are extremely popular worldwide. Famous sportsmen and sportswomen have statutes similar to Hollywood celebrities, and their wages are high. However, no matter how well they play, all of them have once been amateurs; in that way, college athletes don’t have much difference from professionals. At the same time, the NCAA prohibits college athletes to be compensated monetarily for their effort, which is definitely unfair. A multitude of reasons can be listed for paying college athletes.
“Money is flooding into athletic departments and the athletes benefit in many ways, but do these athletes deserve to be paid for what they do?” (Walch & Marshall, 2016). This is the question that has been the main focal point of the NCAA for the last decade. Proposers state that the athletes are the ones that bring in the money, and they also point out that college athletes need money for essentials such as food. Opposers counter with the fact that colleges already compensate their athletes through scholarships.
Conformity destroys diversity, stunts societal development, and impedes personal growth. It is a blind following that is not preceded by conscious evaluation for merit and validity. This phenomenon can develop on both large and small scales. Groups can develop damaging mindsets that people impulsively conform to and individuals can be inclined to forsake their personal urges to conform to those around them; ultimately, conformity produces unhappy individuals that don’t live as they would desire to do so. Assumption in a decision-making group is a form of conformity.