High Risk Low Reward The debate on whether college athletes should get some type of compensation has been an ongoing one. A documentary which aired on the EPIX channel entitled “Schooled: The Price of College Sports”, shows the evolution of college athletics and how it became what it is now. With the creation of the term “student athletes” in the 1950s by Walter Bayers, student athletes were forced to give their labor for the sake of the NCAA. The term, as expressed by some of the interviewers in the documentary, is an evil term because it allowed universities and colleges to stand behind the term and neglect the student athletes. As the NCAA and the universities start to amass insane amount of revenue from the sweats of these said student …show more content…
The NCAA seems to be more content of levying fines and punishment for college misconduct than taking care of the players. Saying that college players are students is no longer acceptable because the fact of the matter is they are much more than that. In an article by Steve Berkowitz for USA Today, he reported that the NCAA had a total revenue of almost $1 billion, that’s according to their financial statement for the 2014 year and he goes on by pointing out that it’s an $80.5 million surplus for the year (Berkowitz) which by all means is an outstanding number when considering the machine that generate those types of revenue has no right to any of it. The NCAA limit each institution on the amount of scholarship they can give out, the highest number of scholarships goes to the discipline that generates the most revenue (O 'Shaughnessy) not where the kids are guaranteed a better life after college. The Lynn O 'Shaughnessy article also mentioned how college coaches try to recruit kids as young as seventh graders thus securing their chances at a high level athlete but not for the kids for the coach reserve the option to change his mind at any time (O 'Shaughnessy). Andy Katz, senior writer for the ESPN sport network, has reported that the NCAA proposed a rule that would let college athletes
College sports is a multi-billion dollar industry. Each year thousands of high school students are recruited to play college sports, but under strict conditions. Students are required to do well in athletics while keeping up with their academics. College athletes spend up to forty five hours per week on practices, training, and games. In addition, they spend roughly forty hours on their academics. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) does not think it is necessary to pay these athletes because they want to maintain the “amateur sport” status. According to Stanley Eitzen in his “College Athletes should be Paid, “The universities and the NCAA claim their athletes in big-time sports programs
In the recent past, college athletics has gained massive fame in the United States. The immense fame of the college athletics has developed over the past twenty years. The massive development and fame of the college athletics have resulted in improved incomes for the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA). Due to increased revenue received by the NCAA, the participates in athletics in the colleges has fuelled the argument of whether the college athletes need to be paid and rewarded more than just the athletic scholarships. In this research paper, I will take a stab at to respond the question whether they should be paid by delving the explanations for and against the payment of the college athletes (Adams and Becky 108).
Sports have been a big part of culture in the United States since the 1900’s. Sports has become a multibillion dollar business of sort, with spots such as baseball, basketball, and football captivating americans.With american sports gaining popularity, the growth of college sports went on the rise. In 2013, The National Collegiate Athletic Association statistically generated $912,804,046 (Alesia, 2014). With all of this income that the NCAA brought in, one has to raise the question, should college athletes be paid? Even though college athletes are student athletes, they should be paid because they are practically employees to the college without compensation.
College athletes should be paid. The athletes put in as much work as the people who do get paid. Why should they not be paid? There are many pros for why they should get paid, but there are also many cons on why they should not get paid. The athletes should get paid because of how hard they work in season and the off-season. Do not pay all of the athletes, but pay the ones who are at a D1 college. The athletes should get paid because they put in the same amount of time as the pros do, and the pros get paid.
Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.
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.
The System for college athletes isnt perfect, and needs to be worked on, a big problem we cannot seem to agree is how to compensate the student-athletes who drive the NCAA. I would like to start off with a question. Are college athletes being compensated enough for the effort they put forth today? Every Day they wake up early and represent their university whether they are putting in work in class or on the field. Each student-student athlete generates tons of money for their university and they don’t see a dime other than their scholarship that may or may not been renewed every year. Keep that question in mind while reading this essay, and form your own opinion.
A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.
Some college athletic departments are as wealthy as professional sports teams. The NCAA has an average annual revenue of $10.6 billion dollars. College athletes should be paid because of the amount of revenue that they bring to their college. Each individual college should pay its athletes based on how much revenue they bring to the college in which they attend. The colleges that win their Division title, their Conference title, or the National championship, give bonuses to the Head coach of that team. If colleges have enough money to give bonuses to coaches, that means they have money that is left over for the athlete who gives them recognition to pay them. College athletes should be paid based solely upon the performance and success that they have.
In the United States, college athletics are growing larger by the minute. College athletics contribute not only to the recognition of colleges and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), it also contributes to the income of colleges and the NCAA. Without student athletes, these colleges and the NCAA would not reap the benefits of college athletics, such as: increased awareness of colleges, higher application rates, and of course the revenue brought in from game and event tickets, apparel, and contracts for licensing and television rights. Since the student athletes, who devote a great deal of time to their sport, are the cog in the machine that is the NCAA and college athletics, they deserve the fair and rightful compensation that they certainly do not currently receive. Here is exactly why student athletes in the NCAA should be compensated for what they do for their colleges, on and off the field of play.
This is most likely the reason these young athletes elect to turn professional early. With the NCAA bringing in more money every year and student athletes starting to ask for a chuck of the profit pie. Should student athletes get paid for the helping the NCAA grow its brand or should they continue to be strictly amateurs?
One of the most controversial subjects we as individuals hear about this day in age is whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid. Many people argue that these athletes do intact, deserve to be paid for their time and hard work. NCAA athletes create a name for themselves by playing and performing well on their college teams. The better these athletes perform, the more publicity the school revives. This then leads to higher ticket sales and stores around campus selling jerseys and other clothing items with athletes names and numbers on the back. NCAA schools have become comfortable with using athletes’ names to bring in a revenue for the school, and yet the athletes never see any of that money. On the other hand, many people believe that these athletes do not deserve, nor should they expect to receive payment in return. They believe that these scholarships and the education are payment in itself. Some even bring up the question on if it is affordable or even realistic to pay college athletes.
With another academic school year passing by, college football fans were able to join another out the seat nail-biting highlighted NCAA football season. Majority of the people would agree that college football is just as competitive and popular as the NFL. The annual revenue of the top 25 college football teams can reflect that assumption by grossing over 1.2 billion dollars alone. There is one major difference between the two associations which is NFL players are paid off the money they help bring in and college student athletes are not. Providing scholarships to the athletes isn’t enough anymore if the NCAA Football wants to perceive themselves as a money making competitor, and not reward the athletes that helped bring in that type of money.
College Athletes Should Be Paid One of the biggest controversial topics in NCAA sports is whether student-athletes should be paid or not. Many people would say this is a bad idea, but more people think the rules should be changed. ESPN analysts have given many situations in which both sides, the players and the schools, can make it a win-win situation. One example would be to pay the athletes up front to play, other than original scholarships. Another is letting college athletes have their own endorsement deals if the school itself is not comfortable paying the players up front.
As of today, there are over 460,000 NCAA student-athletes that compete in 24 different sports while in college throughout the United States (NCAA). Over the past couple decades, the argument for paying these college athletes has gained steam and is a hot topic in the sports community. However, paying these college athletes is not feasible because most universities do not generate enough revenue to provide them with a salary and some even lose money from the sports programs. These collegiate student-athletes are amateurs and paying them would ruin the meaning of college athletics. Also, playing college sports is a choice and a privilege with no mention or guarantee of a salary besides a full-ride scholarship. Although some argue that