Should College Student Athletes Be Paid Essay

Each university associated with the NCAA differ in size and budgeting. Some schools would have no problem paying each student athlete at their school only because of their profits from their ultimate money sports such a football and basketball, while other schools struggle now to even field enough teams to remain an NCAA school. This is why I find it intriguing to see where each school lies on how this situation could affect them. Athletes being paid could also affect high school and pro sports as well which interests me more to research this topic. High school athletics could improve by students pushing harder at the high school level to reach the college level because of pay, while pro sports could have many different affects such as students not leaving school early because of pay at the college level now.

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 amount of money made over the past twelve years in football and basketball has increased to about 300%, which helps fund all other sports (Meshefejian). College coaches are receiving a numerous amount of money for what the players are doing out on the court or field. Also, some athletes feel they need to excel more in the sport than in the classroom which can jeopardize their future. Student-athletes have other costs they need to pay for, but they have no time for a job due to practices, workouts, and games. College athletes should be paid for playing at the collegiate level, because they would focus more on academic studies, have an easier time paying for extra costs, and the colleges earn enough money

College athletes are good at their sport so they work hard for it but they get there hard work paid for and if they are successful then they can go to the nba and get money. Many players didn't get much but then they ,are the pros and are really good players such as steph curry he played at davidson. College players are given much more than they are needed and still try

The question people are asking is, should college athletes get paid? This is a very popular question that a lot of people are asking. College athletes should be getting paid for playing athletics. The athletes that are playing college have worked hard to get where they're at. The athletes that are playing are still college students and don't have a lot money. The athletes are bringing tons of money to the school. Getting paid will help them take care of their money.

Only 2% are drafted into the NFL for instance, while the other 98% are getting a $200,000 education for free. There are eighty scholarship players on each of the 112 Division 1-A teams. This costs a university $16,000,000 to pay for an entire roster over four years (1 “College Athletes Shouldn’t Be Paid”). With all of that money being thrown around, it would be difficult for a college to determine which athlete gets paid how much, and if one sport deserves to get paid more than another.

Throughout the existence of the NCAA and the realm of intercollegiate competition, one of the largest topics of debate has been the idea to compensate athletes based on athletic performance above any scholarships awarded. Mark Emmert, president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, has previously said “We can never move to a place where we are paying players to play sports for us” (Garcia, 2010, para.9). This statement by Emmert has again sparked several conversations concerning the specifics of what defines amateurism and the exploitation of our young student athletes. The awarding of a salary to athletes is both heavily supported and strongly opposed by players, spectators, coaches, and collegiate

“…big-money sports easily subsidize sports that don’t bring in any profits, like lacrosse and soccer. Such programs might suffer or even be eliminated if the more profitable programs suddenly had to give top athletes a cut of revenues” (Majerol). Even if the football and basketball programs made all the revenue for the school, colleges would still have to pay other athletes that play other sports. Because of this, athletic departments would not have enough money to pay every athlete extra money. “Only 24 FBS schools generated more revenue than they spent in 2014”, according to the NCAA Revenues and Expenses of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Report. If this was to happen, most of the smaller schools would have to forfeit their athletic programs because of the deficit of income. Yes, someone could argue that the university should only pay the athletes that play in the “big money sports”, but at the same time, every athlete works just as hard as another and it would be very unfair if you did not credit the other athletes as much as the football players and basketball players. Imagine if you were in their

The top-notch athletes produce a plethora of money and popularity for the school, which exceeds the cost the school pays. Schools can sell marketing items with a players name and use their popularity for people to buy. On average a full D-I scholarship is $25,000 per year” (Hartnett). Now even though this may seem like a lot most athletes don’t spend all four years at a school; there are injuries, transfers, rules and regulation violations, etc. Yet the scholarship only covers the general basics: thousands of dollars in mystery fees, housing, tuition, a low cost meal plan, and a few hundred dollar textbooks.The scholarship is not money in the players pocket, athletes are usually broke. “The NCAA currently produces nearly $11 billion in annual revenue from college sports” (Edelman). This amount exceeds the revenues of the NBA and NHL. And just the University of Alabama alone reported $143 million in athletic revenues, that is more than all NHL teams and 25 of 30 NBA teams. But with all this money generated by the athletic programs, what do the actual players who make the money receive? Nothing. “The annual economic worth of an average football player is $435,000 and worth of an average men’s basketball player is $587,000” (Kruckemeyer). If just each athlete was paid $2,000 over the semester, they would have a little spending cash, and an opportunity to manage their own money. When the NCAA was created paying coaches was frowned upon, but now they receive millions.

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.

Even though an additional $2,000 a semester does not seem like a lot of money, for some smaller market colleges this extra expense may create problems. That is why I suggest either requiring the NCAA itself to provide the extra money to the players or allowing the players to make money off of jersey sales, autograph signings, etc. By potentially taking this financial burden away from the schools and transferring it the NCAA you avoid putting undo stress on smaller schools and instead ask the NCAA, a multi-billion dollar industry, to barely dip into their huge expanse of funding/profit. Furthermore, the NCAA itself is considered a non-profit organization so instead of hoarding the billions of dollars a year that it earns it should be giving money back to the student-athletes who have made the NCAA what it is today (SOURCE). Even though many schools would not be able to pay student athletes the extra scholarship money many larger schools could easily provide this additional scholarship money. For instance, some schools already pay their head football coaches millions of dollars a year. One specific example of this is Alabama Head Football coach Nick Saban. Saban makes six million dollars a year and also receives other

Team sports like soccer or basketball, and additionally individual games are to a great degree well known around the world. Celebrated sportsmen and sportswomen have status like Hollywood superstars, and their wages are high. In any case, regardless of how well they play, every one of them have once been beginners; in this point of view, secondary school or college competitors are very little not quite the same as experts (if also their abilities). In the meantime, the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) doesn't allow college competitors to be fiscally adjusted for their effort, which is certainly out of line. College competitors should to be paid their due for various reasons.

When you’re watching the College Football Playoffs or March Madness, are you wondering if the players on the television should be considered slaves? It sounds like a ridiculous question, but there are some people out there who would say that is exactly what they are. In the past few years, the debate about whether or not student-athletes should be paid for the sports they play in college has grown insurmountable. This is an issue that sheds light on the fairness of college athletics and is important for not only student-athletes, but anyone who enjoys watching. I, personally, believe student-athletes should not be paid because they are already awarded generous compensation, there are far too many of them with no way to determine who should get paid what, and it would take away from the value of university academics.

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

When you are in college playing sports you are considered a student athlete, as for if you were a professional you would be a professional athlete. Student athletes in college should not be paid to play because it was like when you played sports in high school it is your choice to play, but if you were a professional you should get paid because you're older and you are at a more complex level and you should be paid because the teams you play for want you and pay for you to come and play for their team. Being a professional is not like being a college athlete because you are an adult and it is your career to play that particular sport. The professionals should be paid because they spend all of their free time working out and practicing when they could be at home laying down, watching movies, eating snacks, and etc. College athletes have their own free time and don’t have to worry about practicing day after day.