Paying College Athletes
Many people believe that college athletes should be paid for how much revenue they bring to their school. However, there are also people who think they should not get paid because they already have numerous advantages that other students do not have. Student-athletes at the Division 1 level that play men's basketball and football should not necessarily be paid a salary but should be able to make money off of their accomplishments, especially if we hold them on a high pedestal as we do now. It may seem unfair only to pay those who play men’s basketball and football, but the reason why these two sports are the most reasonable is that they bring in the most revenue for the schools out of the major sports that are
…show more content…
Because of this, they say it would provide an unfair advantage to the other students if these athletes get both a free education as well as get paid at the same time to play a sport (Yankah). Others say that they are just kids and do not need that kind of financial pressure at such a young age. Furthermore, athletes should not be paid because there just is not enough money in the school, and there would be an uneven pay between sports based on general revenue (time). People even say that if the NCAA were to pay athletes, it would take away from the importance of an education and these players would not take their education seriously(lemmons). All these reasons and much more support why college athletes should NOT be paid. However, there are just as many points to argue why they should be paid. First of all, college athletes at the Division 1 level spend more than 43.3 hours per week to his sport which is 3.3 more hours than the average American work week (Edelman). Secondly, while the NCAA claims these athletes are just students, the NCAA's tournament schedules require college athletes to miss classes for nationally televised games that bring in revenue (Edelman). Thirdly, the play of teams and players can help bring in more students to the school. For example, the year that Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie won the Heisman Trophy as the nation’s outstanding college football player, Boston College’s
College athletes should be paid because of the hard work, dedication and effort they put into their respective sports. These athletes are a major source of income for their schools and they are not receiving a penny for it. These college athletes deserved to be paid, colleges are using these athletes to get money and they are never given anything but a pat on the back and a good job. College athletes work and train extremely hard to perform at the highest level possible. In most cases, they spend more time training and preparing for their sport than they actually do learning and studying. They put so much on the line to play and they get nothing in return. These college athletes literally make their schools millions of dollars every
What college athlete would not want to be paid to play the sport that he or she loves? The real question is, though, should college athletes be paid for their roles in a college’s athletics? They are many points to each side of this recent controversial topic, which is why this has been made into such a hot debate in the past couple of years. As of right now, these athletes are not getting paid, but many of them truly believe that they should. Others believe that they already are being paid through certain types of scholarships and don’t deserve anything more than that. With that being said, there are two sides of this topic that have quality points.
Many people argue yes student-athletes ' deserve to be paid and one of the biggest reason many people support the idea of college athletes being compensated is because the NCAA and many universities make millions from advertisements, sponsorships, TV deals, and even video games and players is the cause
College athletes should receive some sort of payment for playing for their college. Many people believe that college athletes should be paid financially, because they are considered to be taken advantage of by the NCAA and most other school systems, because they should receive pay. Most college athletes are the main reason for huge profits from many merchandise sales; live events such as the game itself, and media and live coverage also provide sales increases. Differently from the professional sports, the athletes don’t get any type of cut. College teams may not have the same national expectations as the professional ones, but they are just as important, if not, even more important than professional athletes. Millions of dollars of merchandise,
But why should a student athlete be paid in the first place? Their just athletes right? They go to school just like everyone else? What makes them so special? What makes a college athlete different than the average student is the amount of revenue that they help bring to their selected colleges. This type of revenue is made up from ticket sales, merchandise, media rights and contributions. “USA today” reported that the University of Texas generated $167.7 million dollars from their athletic programs, and that’s just one school. With this in mind, imagine just how much money other colleges are making from their athletics. Sure one can make the argument that they should not be paid because they are not professionals, but one can’t ignore the fact that they are bringing in millions of dollars and seeing none of it.
One of the most important reasons why college athletes should not be paid is that most schools just simply can not afford to pay their athletes. Maxwell Strachan from the Huffington post reported that spokeswomen Meghan Durham from the NCAA stated that only about twenty colleges make more money on athletic programs than they spend on athletic programs. This shows that most colleges are not making any money off of their athletic programs and even if a college makes a
Whether college athletes should or should not get paid has been a controversial topic throughout the Collegiate Athletic Association for many years now. According to the article “My Priceless Opportunity” by Bill Walton , he believes that NCAA student athletes should not get paid because “the players entering the game know the rules going in and that they have been given a chance to make something of their lives in exchange for the privilege of being a student athlete”. Others like Michael Wilbon, author of “As Colleges’ Greed Grows, So Does the Hypocrisy”, thinks student athletes should get paid due to their hard work and labor. While I respect and admire the diligent task of being both a student and an athlete, I strongly agree with Bill Walton and the many others who support college athletes not being paid.
College athletics have been incredibly profitable businesses for many years. With the advent of televised sporting events, the profit margin has increased exponentially. The Texas Longhorns’ football program alone grosses 104 million dollars annually (forbes.com). So, where is all that money going? Most of it goes right back to the school. The athletes who practice for endless hours and devote their lives to the sports get nothing but the satisfaction of winning. So, should Division One college athletes be paid? Division One athletes should be paid because they generate a significant amount of revenue for the school.
Some other reasons why college athletes should not get paid are because, if they were to get paid they may focus more on their sport rather than their school work and studies. Not only is trying to balance both school and sports hard enough but if they were to get paid they may not want to focus on what there actually there for, which is their education. Paying college athletes could also cause the student to have poor money management. The students may end up getting themselves in trouble more easily or fall into bad habits. Legal troubles are always an obstacle in which college students could fall into which could end there career. Another reason college athletes should not get paid is because with the big schools such has Alabama, Florida, Indiana, or Kentucky they would bring in more money compared to smaller schools such as Loyola
Free education is a huge factor as to why they should not be paid. Research shows that “College athletes don't have to worry about student loans, paying for textbooks, the cost of on living and meal plans.” (Source B) Which can add up to a substantial amount. I would say they get free education, in return they represent the school in sports.
My first reason why NCAA athletes should not be paid is that they already receive compensation in the form of scholarships. In a survey conducted by John Dennis in 2013, he found that 69% of the public is opposed to paying college student athletes in addition to their scholarships. If college universities began to pay their student athletes, this would raise the cost of education for non-athletes wanting to attend that university. Some may suggest taking away scholarships and giving salaries to
One of the biggest controversial topics of modern day collegiate sports is deciding whether or not college student athletes should get paid. College athletes deserve to be paid due to the fact that they work all summer to get ready for the season. So, they have little to no free time to find a way to make money. The players are the main source of income for most NCAA schools. So it’s about time they get something in return for their hard work.
College athletes should not be paid to play the given sport they participate in. And as of right now, this statement stands true for the most part but is starting to become blurred and pushed extremely hard for. Over the years the NCAA and other organizations have had many conventions and uproars over the subject of whether or not college athletes should or should not be paid. The main two sports that this debate come up in are men's college basketball and college football, especially during march madness and the college football national championship. Now, I respect anyone who puts in the time, work, and excitement college athletics bring to the world or sports, but they should not be paid.
College athletes should not be paid. “ They argue that the main purpose of going to college is to get a education, not to make money” (“Should college”...1). College is not a job, it is a place to learn. Also many college athletes receive scholarships to attend that school. “The value of the scholarships athletes receive during four years of college can be well over $250,000” (Weiss et al.1). Therefore, athletes
If college students are spending their time playing these sports and not working, they should be getting paid for it. Not only are these students forfeiting their time to study, talk to friends, and even relax after classes, but they are missing an opportunity to have jobs. “Players’ relationships to the school they play for should be spelled out in an individualized pay-for-service contract rather than an NCAA-standardized letter of intent that impinges on basic freedoms” (Marx, 475). The NCAA requires that students are enrolled full time and play football to gain the scholarship offered. There is an argument by Hartenstine on this subject that “Some 15 percent played professional football as a first career, but 15 percent were corporate executives, 13