Athletic programs at many universities across the country have become more and more inconsistent with how they define their athletes. They are called “student-athletes”. Meaning that they are students first, and then athletes. We have reached a point here it can be argued that they are instead more like athlete-students. Despite of the rules and regulations implemented by the NCAA, some student-athletes still receive preferential treatment and extra benefits while in college. Some recruited athletes are not prepared for the cascade of academic college work along with the additional demands that NCAA athletics require. The athletic pressures that accompany NCAA athletic scholarship can leave the unprepared student athlete with little time for …show more content…
Most Americans believe that sports have too much influence over some of the premier academic institutions, and they very well may have a point as high performing football and basketball teams bring home annual revenues ranging in the tens of millions of dollars. One of the main issues is that the governing boards of these universities has extreme loyalty to their sports teams. For example, how can a president of a school step up and point out the corruption that is taking place when his/her boss, the governing board, is doing these corrupt acts. According to a former president at Vanderbilt University, the governing boards “are disproportionately made up of persons whose loyalty to the school is heavily influenced by athletic performance.” Now on the other hand, this does have some positive effects, as good teams bring in more applications for admission, greater alumni donations, and national publicity. But studies have shown that athletics still don’t necessarily bring academic prestige. Most of the top football schools aren’t even in the top 100 according to both Forbes and US News, and often aren’t even in the top 300. The top schools academically are actually getting more endowment money that those who place emphasis on …show more content…
Millions are being spent on high-end facilities and coaches are being paid salaries in the millions. The question of whether schools care too much about the outcomes of their sports is becoming more prevalent in the media. Many people see no issue or harm in players not necessarily focusing on the schoolwork first, as quite frankly sports provide great entertainment and brings in tons of money. But if the NCAA wants to continue to push the agenda that students are first there must be some sort of intervention. The question of rather “student-athletes” are students first always becomes a hot topic during championship runs such as “March Madness” and the newly implemented “College Football Playoffs”. By definition, school should be their primary focus and athletics second, but a 2011 survey conducted by the NCAA found that football and basketball players consider themselves athletes more than students as they spend way more time in their sport than on their schoolwork. This is also reflected in the admissions process as it is a well-known fact that students on athletic scholarships are far less qualified for admission than regular students. As a result of this, the graduation rates of student-athletes is much lower. It’s becoming near impossible to maintain the myth that players are students first, especially with them being on the brink of getting paid to play their
They do not face problems of debt and tuition to the extent that the normal college student faces. Student-athletes are fairly compensated through publicity and financial benefits, and the NCAA should continue to refrain from paying them. The varying size and interest levels of universities makes it almost impossible to fairly pay all athletes. In order to avoid problems like those exhibited by Northwestern’s football team, who recently tried to unionize, all athletes would need to be paid equally. The excitement brought on by college sports is immense, and problems created due to paying athletes would only hurt the tradition and charisma that college athletics offer. In conclusion, College athletes are students and amateurs, not employees. “Remember student comes first in student-athlete”
The payment of NCAA student-athletes will deteriorate the value of an education to the athletes. The value of an education for a young man or woman cannot be measured. It is our gate way to success as...
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.
The athletes at these institutions bring in tons of money into their school every year and deserve compensation. These Universities are exploiting these athletes by not giving them back what they make for their school. The numbers say it all when it comes to the scamming of the athletes by their own schools. In 2004, over 40 schools brought in more than $10 million, with 10 of them bringing in over $30 million. Several athletes around the nation are worth more than $1 million to their school(Brown). Both of these statistics are proof that while these athletes are essential to their schools, they are still kept out of the revenue. Even though these Universities won’t pay their players, the schools still have no problem giving their coaches some money. In 40 U.S. states the head coach of the basketball or football program is the highest paid public official(Edelman). Over the past 20 years, there has been a major increase in the popularity of college athletes. From 1989 to 2004 there was a 27% increase in ticket revenue(Brown)...
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....
"College Athletic Programs Undermine Academics." Student Life. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2011. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 July 2011.
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.
I believe that college sports should be considered a profession. Athletes deserve to be paid for their work. College athletics are a critical part of America’s culture and economy. At the present time, student-athletes are considered amateurs. College is a stepping-stone to the professional leagues. The NCAA is exploiting the student- athlete. Big-time schools are running a national entertainment business that controls the compensation rate of the players like a monopoly (Byers 1).
College athletes are manipulated every day. Student athletes are working day in and day out to meet academic standards and to keep their level of play competitive. These athletes need to be rewarded and credited for their achievements. Not only are these athletes not being rewarded but they are also living with no money. Because the athletes are living off of no money they are very vulnerable to taking money from boosters and others that are willing to help them out. The problem with this is that the athletes are not only getting themselves in trouble but their athletic departments as well.
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...
Student athletes should not be paid more than any other student at State University, because it implies that the focus of this university is that an extracurricular activity as a means of profit. Intercollegiate athletics is becoming the central focus of colleges and universities, the strife and the substantial sum of money are the most important factors of most university administration’s interest. Student athletes should be just as their title states, students. The normal college student is struggling to make ends meet just for attending college, so why should student athletes be exempt from that? College athletes should indeed have their scholarships cover what their talents not only athletically but also academically depict. Unfortunately, the disapproval resides when students who are making leaps academically are not being offered monetary congratulations in comparison to student athletes. If the hefty amount of revenue that colleges as a conglomerate are making is the main argument for why athletes should be paid, then what is to stop the National Clearinghouse from devising unjust standards? Eventually if these payments are to continue, coaches, organizations, and the NCAA Clearinghouse will begin to feel that “c...
Howard-Hamilton, Mary F., and Julie Sina. "How College Affects College Athletes." New Directions for Student Services (2011): 35-43.
Many people believe that College athletes have it easy, and who wouldn’t think that? A free education, free living; getting to travel and play the sport that many people would love to still be able to. Student athletes also get to pick classes earlier than a regular student and have the ability to be excused from classes to go to games and special events. The life of a student athlete sounds like an enticing thing for many people; especially those who are not student athletes on scholarships or walk-ons to a college team. The rising cost of attending college has made the younger athletic population work just as hard to receive a scholarship to play a sport, because they may come from poverty where they can’t otherwise afford to attend school, which is beneficial to them. Understand, that college is a place where academics comes first, and everything else is second; this includes athletics. But are these athletes treated fairly and given all the right things they need to succeed in life, let alone college?
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.
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.