For years an extensive controversy has been ongoing about whether or not college athletes should receive compensation. Jon Solomon, NCAA expert, reveals in his 2013 survey that 69 percent of the public and 61 percent of sports fans oppose paying college athletes. Much like Solomon, many agree collegiate athletes should not be paid, while others argue otherwise.
Colleges do not have enough money to pay their athletes. Football and basketball are the prime reason college athlete compensation is a topic of importance. “NCAA released data showing that only 14 programs are turning a profit without having to rely on student fees and fundraising.” (Dosh) Out of the hundreds of teams in the nation only 14 are making profit. Where are the other teams going to make their money? The dilemma is, if schools pay football and basketball players then other athletes are going to be obligated to acquire compensation too. With all the money going towards athletics and scholarships, universities would lack money for necessary expenses.
…show more content…
The physical labor versus student’s mental labor differentiates the two. Both classes still laboring on school studies, it would be inequitable to wage athletes and not the rest of the student’s. There are more essential careers than a professional athlete. If any body of students should receive compensation in college it should be medical students. Spending years upon years in college with thousands of dollars in debt is a larger issue than a sport. So why shouldn’t they make a salary in college? The betterment of our nation is more important than sports entertainment. Everyone has a choice of what they desire to study and work at in college. Athletes, much like medical students, make the decision on whether or not to play in college, it is not
Many Collegiate athletes believe that they should be paid. This is an argument that can be debated for a long time. The point is that athletes are receiving money through various things. They may receive a scholarship to pay for some to all of their schooling, and they have access to amenities that others aren't able to have. Athletes receive special treatment, and they don't need get get paid more than they already
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.
Many believe that college athletes should not be paid. The main debate against compensating college athletes is that they are at the university for educational purposes and playing sports is a benefit. The NCAA states, “Student-athletes are students first and athletes second. They are not university employees who are paid for their labor” (McCauley 10). Universities get all the financial benefits of the money earned from sports played from things such as team jerseys, sports passes and tickets, etc. Many argue that it is only fair to give a portion of the profit to the players that earned the money. It is very important when arguing for or against paying college athletes to not take into fairness, but to hold
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.
The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) makes millions of dollars in revenue from broadcasting and advertising student-athletes. If you take the revenue of the NCAA (all one dollar bills) and stacked them on top of each other, they would easily exceed thirty-five stories in height, which would be the equivalent to the RSA Battle House Tower in the state of Alabama. Meanwhile, the NCAA is sitting on this expansive “lump of cash” and does not have any idea what to do with it, and by no means wants to share their revenue with athletes. The NCAA needs to use this “lump of cash” to, in a sense, pay their employees. Student-athletes work day and night to enhance their on-field abilities to provide high quality performances for their
Do college athletes deserve to get paid? This question has been asked by every college sport. A lot of people are saying no, but there's a bunch of athletes dropping out of college. The reason to this is that the college athletes can’t afford playing sports and going to college and no one's got extra money lying around to help pay for these college athletes. So college athletes should get paid and it will help by bringing down drop out rate in college.
Student athletes should not be paid. A misconception is that all athletic programs in the NCAA make head-over-toe profit. There are three divisions of intercollegiate athletics, and frankly division three athletic programs don’t make as much or have a profit when compared to division one programs. “Critics of paying college athletes note that only a small number of them compete in sports or on teams that actually generate revenue”. (Paying College Athletes) The truth is only a fraction of athletic programs are actually profitable, while most pose a cost to the institution. The question arises primarily in division one programs and typically in the sports of basketball and football. The argument is made that these institutions receive millions of dollars from their student athletes’ performance, in return they should be paid.
While people may have the opinion that college athletes should be paid, the debate for
Over the last few years there has been renewed controversy about whether college athletes should be paid. The idea of paying college athletes goes back to the early 1900s with one of the first inter collegiate competitions between Harvard and Yale. The modern position of the National Collegiate Athletic Association is that athletic scholarships provide a free college education in return for participating on the university team. Many college athletes dedicate more than forty hours of training per week. College is expensive. How can we expect college athletes to pay for books and other basic necessities if they are busy practicing or participating in home games or traveling to away games? The NCAA needs to start paying these athletes to supplement
College athletics have gained immense popularity among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the(NCAA) and the participating colleges which has fuelled the debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. College athletes should be paid because they spend more time doing that than anything else. It 's kinda like having a full time job.Athletes form the basic unit of intercollegiate sports. Despite the success of NCAA tournaments, athletes do not receive any monetary compensation.
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.
Both sides of this argument have a strong case for why student athletes should, or should not be compensated. The problem might not be what it looks like at first. The main problem is the amount being spent on college athletes and the rising tuition costs for these universities. Duke University 's golf team spent an estimated $20,405 per player (Branstetter). The amount of money being spent on one player on their golf team is represented in the insane amount of tuition which is 60,000 dollars a year at Duke. This is a huge reason as to why colleges are so eager to get a cut of a 60 billion dollar industry. The issue of paying student athletes is not so one sided as athletes work very hard between school and sports, or that
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
There has been a recent debate on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many people believe they should get paid, but many others believe they should not be paid. College athletes should not be paid because the students should worry about their education, it is an extracurricular activity, and the Ncaa does not approve of it.
College athletes are finally getting attention on the fact that they are not paid. I believe that whether or not it is college or pro sports they deserve a salary. These players put their heart and soul on the field and get nothing in return. In the articles “Athletes New Day” by Paul Marx and “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid” by Warren Hartenstine, the reasons for college athletes to be paid are very evident. No matter the case, if the students move on to pro sports or not after college, they should be entitled to some pay for their contributions. College athletes deserve to be compensated for their playtime in these sports, sales of products with their name on it, and even compensation for their injuries.