Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Annotated bibliography on paying college athletes
Paying college athletes
Summary on college athletes getting paid
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Annotated bibliography on paying college athletes
Swindling All-Stars
The topic of college athletics has always been very prominent in the news. Most recently, members of the Northwestern University football team have joined together to start the first college sports union (Novy-Williams & Soshnick, 2014). Their goal is to obtain control over their collegiate athletic career, including what they believe are long overdue financial benefits. This case has reopened the longstanding debate concerning whether or not college athletes should be paid.
The History of College Athletics
The Beginning of College Athletics
College athletics began specifically as a “leisure” activity (Sack & Staurowsky, 1998, p. 3). Today, college athletics is far from its humble beginnings of over a hundred years ago. It wasn’t until 1906 that the National Collegiate Athletic Association, referred to as the NCAA, was created. Football violence was the main reason the NCAA was formed; however, eligibility rules and amateurism were also top priority issues. The consensus of the NCAA was that college sports should be for student amateurs only. In 1916, the NCAA formally defined the term amateur athlete in article VI(b) of their bylaws stating that “an amateur is one who participates in competitive physical sports only for the pleasure, and the physical, mental, moral, and social benefits directly derived therefrom” (Sack & Staurowsky, 1998, p. 34). In 1922, this definition was amended to include the statement “to whom the sport is nothing more than avocation” which means nothing more than a hobby (Sack & Staurowsky, 1998, p. 35). As time passed, college sports became much more than a hobby to the athletes and to the colleges. As many colleges began seeing huge profits from athletic events, the NCA...
... middle of paper ...
...lleran, 2013). If athletes were paid, they may no longer be considered amateurs which may affect how people view college sports. Finally, if athletes were paid, they may have a difficult time seeing themselves as students and abiding by all the school, team, and league rules.
Conclusion
The topic of whether or not to pay college athletes has been one of debate for many years. Although it will be quite difficult to implement a payment system for college athletes, with many legal and ethical issues to consider, the facts show that it is long overdue. These college athletes, who give their heart and soul to their teams, are being exploited when millions of dollars are made each year and they cannot afford to buy toothpaste. It is time for the NCAA and the colleges to correct this mistake and compensate these student athletes in a way that is fair to all involved.
If there’s one thing we dread in the summer more than the heat, it’s the afflicting sentiment that surrounds oneself when one is inhibited from experiencing the thrills of football for six long and gruesome months. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football is a part of many Americans’ Saturdays, but to fewer does it mean their lives. Recently coming under debate, many sporting fans and college athletes believe that players should be paid more than just tuition, room, board, and books. Two articles on this issue that bring up valid points worth discussing are Paul Marx’ “Athlete’s New Day” and Warren Hartenstine’s “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” From these articles I have found on the basis of logical,
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.
The proposal of payment toNCAA student-athletes has begun major conversations and arguments nationwide with people expressing their take on it. “This tension has been going on for years. It has gotten greater now because the magnitude of dollars has gotten really large” (NCAA). I am a student athlete at Nicholls State University and at first thought, I thought it would be a good idea to be able to be paid as a student-athlete.After much research however; I have come to many conclusions why the payment of athletes should not take place at the collegiate level.The payment of athletes is only for athletes at the professional level. They are experts at what they do whether it is Major League Baseball, Pro Basketball, Professional Football, or any other professional sport and they work for that franchise or company as an employee. The payment of NCAA college athletes will deteriorate the value of school to athletes, create contract disputes at both the college and professional level, kill recruiting of athletes, cause chaos over the payment of one sport versus another, and it will alter the principles set by the NCAA’s founder Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. Under Roosevelt and NCAA, athletes were put under the term of a “student-athlete” as an amateur. All student athletes who sign the NCAA papers to play college athletics agree to compete as an amateur athlete. The definition of an amateur is a person who “engages in a sport, study, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons” (Dictonary.com).
Woods, Al. “College Athletes Should Be Paid.” Sports and Athletes: An Anthology. Ed. Christine Watkins. Greenhaven Press, 2009. 87-94. Print.
First lets explore the history behind the paying of college athletes. Over the past 50 years the NCAA has been in control of all Div.1, 2 and 3 athletic programs. The NCAA is an organization that delegates and regulates what things college athletes can and can’t do. These regulations are put in place under the label of ‘protecting amateurism’ in college sports. This allots
Throughout the country young men and women are losing their priority for an education. To attend a university should be a highly cherished privilege, and it should be an even greater honor to play athletics for the university. Therefore, the writer supports the decision that the “student” comes before “athlete” in student-athlete. Playing for pay should be considered a job for “professionals”. In the rulebook, the NCAA views college athletes as armatures. This statement sums it up best. When athletes go to college, not all of them go in with the mindset that athletics is going to be their future job....
Abstract: Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.
...whole different world from professional sports considering they supply men with a family to help grow character with, supply them with a free education, and create a whole community of people that are loyal and generally remain loyal to one school. This bridge between the two sports could be majorly affected if college athletes were to be paid and would then bring up the issue about paying even high school athletes eventually. It is merely opening a can of worms and has been a tradition for so long that it should remain one for years to come. College athletes might not be receiving a full salary but that is not the point of it and they know what they are getting into when they commit to playing a sport. This long-standing barrier between professional and college athletics should remain how it is for the good of everyone but mostly the athletes and college programs.
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.
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.
College is a time for young people to develop and grow not only in their education, but social aspects as well. One of the biggest social scenes found around college campuses are athletic events, but where would these college sports be without their dedicated athletes? Student athletes get a lot of praise for their achievements on the field, but tend to disregard the work they accomplish in the classroom. Living in a college environment as a student athlete has a great deal of advantages as well as disadvantages that affect education and anti-intellectualism. Around the country, college athletic programs are pushing their athletes more and more every day.
The huge amount of money being made off college sports has led some to question whether student-athletes can be considered amateurs any longer, and whether they should, instead, be paid for their efforts, the argument can be made that the opportunity to both receive an education and get the exposure to win a major professional contract more than compensates NCAA athletes for their
For decades there has been a debate on student athletes and their drive to succeed in the classroom. From the very beginning of organized college level athletics, the goal to want to succeed in athletics has forced students to put academics to the back burner. In spite of the goal to want to succeed over a hundred years of attempts to check limits of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards still seems to struggle to this day. This brings to surface one of the most asked questions in sports, “What effect does college sports have on academics and economics?” Herbert D. Simons, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington, authors of “Academic Motivation and the Student Athlete” researched the topic on whether athletics and academics benefit each other. Bryan Flynn, the author of “College Sports vs. Academics” poses the question “Should institutions of higher learning continue to involve themselves in athletic programs that often turn out to be virtual arms races for recruiting talented players who bring big money and prestige, but put academics to the back burner?” Although both authors agree that sports have an impact on an athlete’s academics, the focus of their argument differs.