Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay

Some schools also bring in considerably more money than others from their sports programs. Schools like the University of Florida and the University of Alabama would have no problem using the money brought in by football and basketball to pay all of their athletes (which would still be going against the aforementioned sports ethics, but let’s pretend for a little bit). That is all fine and dandy, but what about smaller market schools like Bethune-Cookman University and the University of Montana? These schools bring in more than $50 million less than the previously mentioned schools. Not only does this limit the amount of money these schools could use to spend on paying athletes, it puts them at a great disadvantage from a recruiting standpoint. This is an extremely important piece of information. Aside from the idea of maintaining amateurism, the entire reason that the NCAA has rules against paying players and players accepting said compensation for play is to keep the recruiting game fair. As nice as it would be, it would be nigh impossible to compensate athletes with the revenue that they bring in, which further muddies the discussion on where money would even come from if athletes were to be paid.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) makes roughly $1 billion in income annually and the athletes do not receive any of it. This topic has been debated for many years and is still being debated. The debate dates back to the 1980s and now athletes are demanding that they deserve to be paid since profits are made off of them. Some athletes such as former and current basketball and football players came together with lawsuits to federal courts asking for rewards from profits NCAA makes gets of them. Research has opened several different opinions on this matter. There are many pros and cons for paying college athletes. College sports provide a huge source of the university’s income. The athletes, however, receive their scholarship

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 debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many

NCAA, short for National Collegiate Athletic Association, is a “non-profit” organization which over watch all the athletic related activities on college level. In the early 20th century, President Roosevelt created NCAA because he wanted to insured college athletes from injuries and even deaths. Despite the original purpose of the NCAA is not about money, it has become one of the most lucrative companies in the USA. According to Taylor Branch, “big-time college sports are fully commercialized. Billions of dollars flow through them each year. The NCAA makes money, and enables universities and corporations to make money, from the unpaid labor of young athletes” (Branch). Besides the tremendous fortune these college athletes made for the NCAA, it is also a vital source for university entertainment, enrollment, and money. Although these athletes generate great fortune and put up great shows for society, they do not receive proper pay back. To balance the current unfair compensation system to the athletes, in addition to free tuition, college athletes should be treated as workers in a business market system and paid depending on their own performance.

Should college student-athletes be paid has become a much debated topic. The incentive for a student-athlete to play a college sport should not be for money, but for the love of the game. It has been argued that colleges are making money and therefore the student-athlete should be compensated. When contemplating college income from sporting events and memorabilia from popular sports, such as football and basketball, it must not be forgotten that colleges do incur tremendous expense for all their sports programs. If income from sports is the driving factor to pay student-athletes, several major problems arise from such a decision. One problem is who gets a salary and the second problem is how much should they be paid. Also, if the income

College athletics are becoming more like the professional leagues except for one big issue, money. Student athletes bring in a vast amount of revenue for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) not to mention recognition and notoriety regarding the athlete’s university. However, the debate continues as to whether student athletes should or should not receive payment for playing college sports.

Kids grow up loving to play sports in their free time. They never get paid to play when they are at a young age. They do it for the love of the game and for the need for competition. This is the way that it is in college right now. College athletes compete with all their hearts to be the best they can for their schools. They don’t get paid a cent. It has been a common debate if that is the right way to do it. Should it be that college athletes do not deserve to get paid for playing a sport? It should not be this way. College athletes certainly should get paid to play.

There is currently a major issue in today’s college athletics. Universities and the NCAA make billions of dollars while some student-athletes go hungry. There is a huge debate over whether or not student-athletes should be paid as employees of their respective colleges. Personally, I don’t believe players should receive full-time salaries, but Universities and the NCAA should be required to increase the value of the scholarships that they award to student-athletes. By requiring that colleges provide athletes with an additional $2,000 per semester as part of their scholarship you can greatly increase the well-being (welfare) of the students.

Waking up before the sunrise is a daily routine. Early morning film sessions, class, then practice, which dominates the day. There are few moments in between for food and socializing, but the life of a student athlete is anything but ordinary. Sleep, eat, practice and school are all an athlete knows, and with the pressures of campus life it becomes even more difficult. No time for much of anything, let alone getting a job. Like most students, these athletes need money, but do not have a spare moment to work. Without any source of income, athletes are put at a major disadvantage. Their full-time job is athletics, in addition to rigorous college-level courses. The possibility of becoming a professional athlete and making millions

College athletes generate millions of dollars for their schools each year, yet they are not allowed to be compensated beyond a scholarship due to being considered amateurs. College athletes are some of the hardest working people in the nation, having to focus on both school courses and sports. Because athletics take so much time, these student-athletes are always busy. College football and basketball are multi-billion dollar businesses. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes beyond scholarships, and it would be tough to work a new compensation program into the NCAA and university budgets. College athletes should be compensated in some form because they put in so much time and effort, generating huge amounts of revenue.

College athletes being paid to play, good or bad? This would be for the athletes that are going to be competing at the Division 1 level. According to NCAA’s official website a study was done and the stats showed that the highest percent of all athletes that would play D1 was 12.3% which was for lacrosse. The highest percent that the students would go play at the highest level which is Division 1 is .7% which is for volleyball. This is a very small amount of student athletes that get to go n to the next level of play and maybe to the professional league. So it would make sense that the athletes that are able to play at the highest level should be paid to do whatever sport it is that they are playing. People argue that the D1 athletes kinda get paid by the full ride scholarships that they receive. Well the athletes who play in the pros make money so why shouldn’t the players who play at the highest level be paid in the lower bracket of competition.

College athletics have become popular over time over the past few decades. Student athletes need to be determined, committed, and focused. The biggest trait needed by the athlete is dedication. The amount of dedication needed to be a student athlete could be overwhelming. Between classes and workouts could exhaust even the best athlete mentally and physically. Students athletes should be proud to get free education and play sports, but education should be valued more than sports . As an athlete, time management is the key to surviving. Athletes need a balance, maintaining at least 40 hours of practice a week, 30 hours a week of class time, and getting some sleep into their schedule too. Maintaining all of these aspects deserves some more credit, more than just a free education. The NCAA can afford to pay athletes, the NCAA makes about 12 billion every year. The NCAA money comes mostly from TV and marketing and makes up less than 10% of all college athletics money. The rest comes from school ticket sales and student fees from the school itself. The NCAA since 2006 profit have doubled since time has gone by and is still increasing from tournaments and school funding. Athletes play an active role in the promotions of these activities,

The debate between if college athletes should get paid by the NCAA and colleges is a hot topic in the country. Everyone has an opinion on the topic but fact is that there’s a lot of positivity if college athletes are paid. Some of the positive things that come with college athletes receiving royalties are that they are financially stable, players stay in college longer, and limits corruption. College athletes should be paid. First Many players come from different backgrounds and have different financial situations.

College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and