Australians have always taken great national pride in their prowess across a variety of sports from netball, to cricket, to swimming. But the country’s performance has become more inconsistent in recent years amidst tough competition and higher sports spending by rival nations (Financial Times, 2016). This has sparked vigorous debate about what funding system we should use and where this money is best spent. Some consider Britain’s Lottery Fund as a better alternative to our own, which is a national lottery that funds the majority of the UK high-performance sport’s. (The National Lottery, 2015) Advocates of adopting this system believe it would help to fund our elite athletes to compete more successfully at an international level and also assist getting our country out of our current health crisis by encouraging …show more content…
However, they argue that some research has found that this is not always the case. Weed, in his study with 1509 rugby and cricket players in New Zealand, determined that “elite success did not have a significant impact on those who rarely or never participated and are therefore not already emotionally engaged with the sport. “(Weed, 2009). This study showcased the limited link between elite sporting success and mass participation. Furthermore, another study examined the relationship between membership data and athlete success in Flanders, Belgium. “The membership figures from Flanders were compared with figures from the Netherlands to identify the common trends. It found that across 20 sports, there was no consistent relationship between membership levels and success.” (Scrutinizing the sport pyramid metaphor,
Collegiate sports have turned into a billion dollar industry and are probably just as popular, if not more popular than professional sports. College athletes put their bodies on the line to play a sport they love, many with hopes and dreams to one day make it to the professional leagues. Athletic facilities are the major money makers for all universities. Colleges bring in billions of dollars in revenue annually, yet athletes do not get paid. Some fans believe athletes should not get paid due to their sports level being “amateurish.”; however, this is far from the truth. There is much more to being a college athlete than just practicing and playing games. These student-athletes must practice, weight lift, go to meetings, travel, go to tutoring and study groups, all the while maintaining sufficient grades. This is very tedious work and is very time consuming. College athletes have a high standard to live up to (Frederick Web; Huma Web; Patterson Web ).
“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
The NCAA Football Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has finally arrived, and the National Championship awaits the semi-final winners. What also awaits, is about a 50 million dollar payout from the NCAA, to the winning university. This is just a very tiny portion of the amount of money the NCAA earns in revenue each year from 23 different sports and over 150 universities. On the other hand, the players competing for these titles will earn no money whatsoever. Is this Fair? At first glance some may think it is not. Sure, these athletes are the cows truly bringing in the cash, but there are many compelling reasons why the college athlete is not and should not be paid. The facts are that the money earned from the NCAA is redistributed to the universities each year for many beneficial reasons, college athletes already earn compensation for tuition and school expenses, and paying these athletes would be far too complex and unequal to all players, sports, and universities.
Since 1906 When Theodore Roosevelt established the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) to infose and make rule for intercollegiate sports. The NCAA had made billions of dollars out of college athletic increasing popularity. This has fuelled debates whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarship and how and who would do it.
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
How many college athletic events do you watch a year? Every time you turn on the television, chances are some type of college sport will be on. In the last decade a serious question has arisen: Should we pay college athletes? They provide entertainment in the same way professional athletes do when they are on the field, and they are familiarized with the pressures of professional athletes. But with this in question, there are numerous arguments. Some will argue that many athletes have their tuition paid in full so there is no need for additional money, while others will argue that they are at college for an education not a paycheck. According to an article on NCAA and college sports, “The college sports industry generates $11 billion in annual revenues. Fifty colleges report annual revenues that exceed $50 million. Meanwhile, five colleges report annual revenues that exceed $100 million” (Mitchell). These athletes devote the majority of their time to practicing their sport, and then put those talents on display for millions of people across the world to watch. I believe it is time we begin to compensate college athletes for the enormous amount of revenue they generate for the NCAA.
Imagine if you were told that you had to work 43.5 hours a week, but you were not being paid for the work by your company or business. Would anyone be okay with that? Even if they love what they do, nobody would want to work that long for free. That is exactly what college athletes are being held asked to do. An investigation following a lawsuit by two former University of North Carolina students uncovered that most student athletes spend more than 40 hours per week in practice, the weight room or training room of their facility (Jacobs). Add on to those hours the hours of playing time, and it seems clear that student athletes deserve to be paid to play.
Throughout the years college sports have been about the love of the game, filled with adrenaline moments. However, the following question still remains: Should college athletes get paid to play sports in college? Seemingly, this debate has been endless, yet the questions have gone unanswered. The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) plays a vital role in this debate. The NCAA is a billion dollar industry, but yet sees that the athlete should get paid for their hard work and dedication.
Throughout the United States college athletes are forced into debt due to busy athletic requirements on top of standard coursework. A great percentage of athletes finish their athletic career without even graduating college with a degree. These athletes are a huge marketing tool for this universities, from the sales of their jerseys, to using their talent to showcase their brand/logo on television, and also making millions of dollars off of contracts with television networks. Because of this I believe college athletes should be compensated for the time and dedication during their time as an athlete in college
When the topic of college comes up, many things come to mind. Those are the glory days for most of us. The college parties, the struggle to find a balance between having fun and maintaining a good GPA, and not to mention the amazing athletic departments that colleges offer. Everyone enjoys sports but does anyone ever stop to wonder how much goes into the preparation for those games? There’s much more effort that’s put into it other than just showing up for practice. It’s definitely a lot more work than your average college student which is why the question of whether or not college athletes should get paid comes up. Football alone brings in millions of dollars a year; and with all of that money floating around, it comes as a surprise that
Michael Jordan once said, “In college I never realized the opportunities available to a pro athlete. I 've been given the chance to meet all kinds of people, to travel and expand my financial capabilities, to get ideas and learn about life, to create a world apart from basketball.” Michael Jordan is a huge face in sports and is well known all over the world and throughout all generations. In college at North Carolina University where he attended he talks about how there is more than just being an athlete. There is a life away from sports because one day you may became a professional athlete but then there comes a day that you retire and find joy in another part of your life. Tying this into the theme of “Should College Athletes be Paid?” can be determined upon the value of the students and others perspective of the game.
Almost every kid grows up with some sort of dream of playing a professional sport. Some of these kids have worked hard every day, week, and year from elementary school to the end of high school. All of this hard work could possibly lead to a Division 1 college scholarship, which in most cases is one step before the fame and glory of professional sports. Today, sports are no longer fun and games; sports are a business, and college sports are no different. Paying College athletes would result in improved student life, removal of the double standards athletes face, and fair compensation to the athletes for the money they generate.
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
For quite some time now there has been a great dispute about whether or not athletes at the collegiate level should receive compensation for their hard work. The proposal of payment to student athletes has begun major conversations and arguments nationwide. Some people argue that college athletes already receive compensation by not only having to pay for college tuition but the special treatment that goes along with being a collegiate athlete. While the idea of receiving a free college education for four years is something few would complain about; when examined up-close, the issue becomes more apparent that it is not enough.
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