Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
social benefits of sports
benefits of team sports
benefits of team sports
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: social benefits of sports
An amateur is one who pursues an activity for pleasure instead of material gain (Morehead 33). A professional is one who engages in a sport for pay (Morehead 567). The definition of an amateur and a professional has one key difference: the word pay. Should student athletes be paid to play their sports? College athletes are amateurs who are playing a sport in which they have limited big time stage playing experience. College athletes are not professionals. Student athletes should not be paid to play their sports while attending college. Amateur student athletes are first and foremost in college to receive an education not for financial gains. Students become a professional once they graduate with a degree. The same concept applies with athletes playing sports in college. Playing a sport in college gives an athlete more training, knowledge and experience before moving on to play professionally at the next level. Student athletes should not be paid to do a job in which they have little high stakes experience in. When the athletes signed to play their sports in college, they knew playing a sport at the college level meant sacrificing certain opportunities. The athletes knew that playing at a college level would mean putting in numerous hours per day towards practicing, in addition to maintaining a certain grade point average (GPA) to remain eligible to play. Playing a sport in college also means not having the time to have a job. Student athletes are on a limited monetary budget just like most non-student athletes. However, non-student athletes have the liberty to earn additional income from jobs in their spare time. Even though non-student athletes have the advantage of obtaining a job, student athletes were aware of their financi... ... middle of paper ... ...resents further issues such as competitive disadvantage between universities, decline in team morale, and less profitability. Works Cited Morehead, Albert H., Loy Morehead, and Philip D. Morehead. The new American Webster handy college dictionary: includes abbreviations, geographical names, foreign words and phrases, forms of address, weights and measures, signs and symbols. 4th ed. New York: Signet, 2006. Print. " Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?." Fool.com: Stock Investing Advice | Stock Research. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Apr. 2011. . “Why student-athletes are not paid to play - NCAA.org." NCAA Public Home Page – NCAA.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Apr. 2011. .
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).
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.
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....
“Big time athletes do get paid. They get free college tuition.”(Posnanski). College athletes not only get tuition, but they also get room, board, and meals. They also get to be coached by top coaches, train in the best training facilities, travel around the country for free, be treated by the best doctors and medicine, and have their chance in the spotlight (Posnanski). With universities constantly raising tuition prices, having free tuition is a big thing, but most, if not all, athletes waste that by focusing just on their sport. The athletes themselves probably aren’t the only ones to blame. Practices should be cut shorter to allow the students’ time to study more and actually get a college education. While you hear many athletes complaining that they don’t have personal spending money, other college students can say the same thing. While athletes are practicing, others are working to pay off tuition fees, which the athletes get free. In an interview at his trial against the NCAA Ed O’Bannon, a former basketball player from UCLA, said “I was an athlete masquerading as a student. I was there strictly to play basketball. I did basically the minimum to make sure I kept my eligibility academically so I could continue to play.” (Dahlberg). People should be going to college for what it is meant for—education, not sports. College sports are an extracurricular activity that should be
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.
The argument whether a student-athlete should be paid to play or not be paid is one that spans the ages. College sports are considered to be of amateur status by the NCAA. Therefore they believe student-athletes should not receive a pay check to participate in a sport. However on the other end of the spectrum, many critics believe that student-athletes should receive pay for play because not only are they participating in a sport, they are entertaining the spectators. They believe that if performers in the entertainment industry are paid, why not pay the college-athletes.
The great thing about amateur athletes and watching them play is that they play with more heart and determination then professionals. College athletes play because of the love of the sport, they play for pride not a paycheck. This is a crucial reason why college athletes should not be paid because sooner or later it will turn in
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.
One of the strongest arguments against student athletes getting paid is that many people feel they already are getting paid, through their financial aid package. Sports Illustrated author, Seth Davis, states in his article “Hoop Thoughts”, that “student athletes are already being payed by earning a free tuition. Which over the course of four years can exceed $200,000, depending on the school they attend. They are also provided with housing, textbooks, food and academic tutoring. When they travel to road games, they are given per diems for meals. They also get coaching, training, game experience and media exposure in their respective crafts” (Davis, 2011). This is a considerable amount of income. While the majority of regular students are walking out of school with a sizeable amount of debt, most student athletes are debt free. Plus they get to enjoy other benefits that are not made available to the average student. They get to travel with their teams, t...
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.
According to the NCAA regulations an athlete will lose his/her eligibility if they are paid to play; sign a contract with an agent; receive a salary, incentive payment, award, gratuity educational expenses or allowances; or play on a professional team. The word amateur in sports has stood for positive values compared to professional, which has had just the opposite. The professional sport has meant bad and degrading; while the amateur sport has meant good and elevating. William Geoghegan, Flyer News sports editor writes, “Would paying athletes tarnish the ideal of amateurism? Maybe, but being fair is far more important than upholding an ideal” (Geoghehan 1).
There are many people out there that believe that college athletes should not be paid because they are called to be a student first and an athlete second (Farrey). There are an ample amount of people and articles that suggest that paying college athletes is unfair and that they do not deserve to be compensated for their contributions to their respective schools. These people argue that these athletes and “st...
College athletes are not forced into playing the sport that they have devoted their time to during their years in secondary education. They continue to play into the college level for their love of the game. And for this, many college athletes are offered full scholarships. Today’s tuition for many schools are so expensive that without the scholarships that some of the students receive, they would not be able to attend college at all. For these students, college sports offer a great avenue to obtain an education that otherwise would not have been available for them. This allows them opportunity to study something that they can use to build a better life for themselves and their families.