Should College Athletes Be Paid?

“But Whittenburg beats Anders to the ball, retrieves it and with the clock showing 0:02 he heaves a 35-foot desperation shot. Charles, reading the shot all the way, leaps, snatches the ball from the air and slams the ball into the net with a second left” (Espn). Fans all over the world pay hundreds of dollars to view college sports games similar to this one. People are about as entertained as they can get. But how much do they players make for this? It 's an argument that pops up every year approaching the legendary NCAA basketball championships. College athletes should not be paid by the NCAA because it would be too difficult to determine the amount each player earns from the NCAA, schools can have unfair advantages over one another recruiting wise, and athletes who receive full scholarships gain advantages for the rest of their life.

“From 1992 to 1996 the University of Michigan had a group of five young men known as the “Fab Five”, and their star player was Chris Webber. Throughout all four years they made millions of dollars for their athletic department as well as for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), but while doing so they somehow seemed to be making a large amount of money themselves. The public did not want to believe they could be taking part in gambling as Chris Webber would talk about how he did not have enough money to buy even a Big Mac from the dollar menu at McDonalds, so when the “Fab Five” would show up to practice in their new cars, fancy clothes, and gaudy jewelry, the public would not take notice. Because the public tends to take pity on the poor college athlete struggling to pay for food they instead took his side and agreed college athletes should somehow be reimbursed believing they had done nothing wrong. Eventually the truth came out that Chris Webber and his teammates had received thousands from Ed Martin, a big gambler in Michigan who made thousands, and he was arrested for money laundering. Along with that came speculation that Webber and his teammates had also taken place in “point shaving”, although never proven it was never forgotten. (Torr, 64-65) The NCAAs’ reasons for not paying athletes are as followed, the NCAA feels college athletes are still considered amateurs, athletes number one priority on college should be focusing on his or

During the selling of NCAA Football games by EA sports, some schools made up to $140K a year while the players received nothing. Other events, such as the FBI crackdown of college staff members paying high school athletes to commit to the college they’re apart of, as well as the release of LaMelo Ball’s signature shoe (which led to him signing to a Lithuanian team in fear of his NCAA eligibility being revoked due to him receiving money from the shoe) has only mounted to the importance of the debate of whether college athletes should be paid or not. Combined with suggestions from former college athletes, ruined dreams due to injuries, to players losing NCAA eligibility, it is clear to me that they should stop being overly restricted and

In light of the outbreak of scandals and bribery occurring in college athletics, the average person would most likely agree that paying college athletes would escalate the desire for extreme NCAA neglect, which would be an extreme job in all aspects. However, there are even more efficient problems to consider. For example, how much should college athletes get paid and what will those payment increments be chosen by? What if a student-athlete on scholarship ends up with a severe injury halfway through their sporting season? What if a student-athlete does not end up being as superior as thought to be and, although still remaining on the team, does not start or even play at all? These are all problematic things that should surface far more questions. According to College Express, it has been shown that only a fraction of Division I football and men’s basketball programs turn a profit. The other Division I football and basketball programs, as well as baseball, softball, golf, hockey, women’s basketball, and just about all Division II

Before, college athletics was a stepping stone towards the athletes professional future. Now in the 21st century, it is a lucrative business. D-I college athletics is the majority of income for major universities. They collect money from ticket sales, merchandise, T.V. contracts, etc. The athletes, however, receive a scholarship and not much more. Even though receiving a college education is something most people would not complain about, when these athletes practice longer than the average American work week and don 't receive money to sustain themselves, it is time for a change. Athletes dedicate their lives to a sport and train hard to make it big. There has been a lot of controversy whether or not student athletes should be paid, and

What has been a hot topic for several years now is why the NCAA still refuses to pay their student athletes as well as ban them from making any financial income off their names. The amount of time put in to athletics can interfere with performance in the classroom. They are students first and athletes second and the purpose of the scholarship is to get an education while competing in athletics. A highly controversial topic for several is the amount of time put in to athletics can interfere in the classroom while at the same time, they are students first and athletes second NCAA athletes have gone on for several years trying

In America we feel comfortable deciding how much somebody should get paid or if in fact they should get paid. We like to make decisions like that because it gives us power over somebody else. There are numerous ways where throughout history we have tried to influence how much a group of people get paid, or to influence the how much a certain race should get paid. We want to give everybody the same opportunity to succeed not depending on race, religion, or ethnicity. To give everybody a fair shot in life doesn’t always work out because you can’t always please everybody. You might work hard and put in a lot of effort, but to reach a certain outcome doesn’t always home to fruition. Being an elite level athlete and studying in school is one of

Every morning, millions of people around the world get up and go to their jobs in hopes of a paycheck to support themselves and their families. Full time or part time, where there is work to be done, there are money and benefits to be earned. Collegiate athletes not only work to excel in the classroom but are also expected to train and perform like professional athletes. College athletes participating in the NCAA should get paid because a scholarship does not cover all college athlete expenses, the return on investment received by the college or university is large enough to do so, and with money as motivation, the level of play could significantly improve.

Two heated debates arise when considering faults in modern-day college athletics. The first is in college football whether or not a playoff system should be implemented in order to determine a definite Bowl Championship Series (BCS) Champion. This major issue in college football has been temporarily solved with the approval of a four-team playoff starting in 2014 and ending in 2025 (Dinich 1). Though it remains highly exclusive to the top four ranked teams at the end of the season, there lies an opportunity to grow its structure. Second tier, Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) expanded the playoff from 16 teams to 24 teams by giving the top eight seeds a bye in round one. The second most controversial question recurring in college

Televised sports help people watch games, without you actually being present at the event. Whether it’s the NBA, the NFL, or even the NCAA, which is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, people see their favorite games all over the sports channels. Two out of the three groups I have listed have their athletes being paid. The NCAA does not believe in rewarding their athletes. When college athletes get hurt, they do not get paid. Although, I agree with colleges not compensating students who are injured, overall they should get paid for their hard work.

College athletes have been giving their all on their respective fields for decades without reasonable compensation. Often times, these athletes have been training since elementary school and some even before that. Each and every day they train and compete while risking their potential future career without any pay. These athletes deserve to be rewarded for their hard work, dedication, and most of all, profitability.

There has always been a big controversial debate on whether college athletes should receive some type of compensation for playing Division one sports. Many college teams pile up huge revenue from football games, basketball games, and many other different sports. Although the university piles up huge amounts of that money, not one penny goes towards any of the athletes. Even though they’re the reason why universities are getting rich from all the money the sports have obtained, the revenue that usually comes from game tickets, sponsorships, and booster clubs. Also college athletics have a huge popularity among Americans over the past few years, more American have turned their heads to watching collegiate sports rather than watching professional sports, to the fact that its way more exciting. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the other colleges that’s participating with this, in this case the debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. Student athletes have worked hard, have dedicated themselves to the sport and also sacrificed their own time for the sport they love.

In 2012, the NCAA earned $871.6 million in revenue (Dirlam), but it is never distributed to the workforce. As it stands, the NCAA forbids college athletes from earning any compensation from participation in college athletics. Scandals surrounding high-profile college football stars who accepted payment for providing autographs have brought to light what is wrong with NCAA policy. Athletes from college football and men’s basketball deserve a piece of the $871.6 million revenue pie. These sports athletes occupy a different role on campus, the role of an employee as well as a student that female and other male athletes do not. Paying athletes’ a full salary for their participation is an extreme solution. Instead, the NCAA can solve the

Not having these things cause athletes to take money from boosters or other outside individuals. The problem with paying athletes is the debate if some schools should be able to pay more, or if certain players should receive extra

While the idea of paying college athletes sounds more than a possibility to some, there are also potential negative aspects of this decision. An article from Forbes Magazine asked the question of where the source of money going to come from. Followed by statistical data that stated, “the NCAA released data showing that only 14 programs are turning a profit without having to rely on institutional support” (Dosh, 2011). This is a negative due to the fact that some schools would not have the financial ability to provide