College Athletes Should 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

These people think this because athletes are already being given a free ride to college. An athlete may be given a full paid scholarship; however, if they begin to fail a class they will lose their scholarship. It is hard for athletes to keep their grades up when they’re always on the road and have so much work responsibilities on their backs. This unneeded responsibility can affect them in many ways. One way is that if they are always stressing out about loosing their scholarship they will not play as well as they should. Athletes are not only worried about losing their scholarship, but they could possibly lose their sports job. An athlete trains for 45 hours a week, that’s more then a full time job. A full time job is 40 hours. Training for 45 hours a week is hard work and then trying to manage schoolwork on top of that is even more difficult. The main reason why people think they should not be paid is because they have no way of doing so. College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for

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).

Now, paying these athletes doesn’t have to be for everyone. Only the high caliber, D1 athletes. The D1 athletes put in all this time and effort to get a scholarship, but don’t see any money. Now that’s not right. These D1 caliber players don’t come around all the time. There are not many of them. Plus the schools that do have these players are super rich. “These teams not only provide their supporters with a steady source of entertainment, but their performance also helps bring notoriety and pride to the universities they represent. College athletics, especially the so-called "revenue sports" of men 's basketball and football, is now a multi-million dollar business that is marketed, packaged, and sold in the same manner as other commercial products” (Acain).

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 sports has become extremely popular over the past few years. With the March Madness tournament held in March and the new College Football Playoff held in January, the NCAA has achieved a great deal of attention and high television ratings. Although colleges make tons of money off of their athletes, college athletes receive plenty of compensation. Paying student athletes would cross the line between professionalism and amateurism and would violate the essence of being a student athlete.

Have you ever heard of a business that made billions of dollars, yet did not pay their employees? Seems pretty remarkable doesn’t it? Well this business is known as the NCAA. According to an article in the New York Times, the NCAA made $770 million from just the three-week Men’s Basketball Tournament, but how much did the athletes who participated in said tournament receive? If you said zero then you would be correct. The athletes that poured their blood, sweat and tears into practice everyday and into the 30 plus game regular season did not see a dime. It is hard to fathom how an industry of

In fact, collegiate athletes are not permitted to use their own image for personal profit, as it violates the NCAA’s rules on amateurism. Paying college athletes has been debated and argued about for years, with tensions increasing on both sides. However, one idea remains clear. The NCAA needs to compensate college athletes, and can do so through salaries, compensation for games played, or through endorsement deals.

The amount of college athletes is simply ridiculous, and seems impossible to figure out a way to pay all of them. Not to mention how many more lawsuits would be presented for not enough pay being given out to each athlete. A star football player may be given the top pay of a university, while a golfer may receive much less. Would the NCAA then be expected to have athletes on a payroll, and have universities give scholarships? How could the world of college maintain a healthy ongoing organization with so much money given out?

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.

One of the most popular pastimes in America is watching college sports. Whether it’s football, baseball, or basketball, these student-athletes bring fans, money, and sponsorships to their schools. So why shouldn't these athletes be paid? The answer is that student-athletes should not be paid, because they have the ability to earn scholarships or financial aid, college athletes are paid in other ways than financially, and not all schools have the money to pay them. Ultimately, paying college athletes would ruin the current culture and competitiveness of college sports.

Is an athletic scholarship really enough of a “payment” to reimburse athletes for the billions of dollars made by the NCAA every year? This issue of paying collegiate athletes, especially football and basketball players, has been around for many years. Athletes, students, bystanders, and NCAA analysts and authority figures have a strong opinion about paying college athletes. Whether college athletes should be paid or not is a debate topic that is more prevalent today than ever.

While not all student athletes are on scholarship, many are; particularly those who are playing for schools we see winning national championships. In addition to free tuition and room and board, these college athletes also often receive help towards books and other basic needs. This money does not have to be paid back. Most other students are not receiving these benefits, and will come out of school with a great big student loan debt. Student athletes already have it easier, financially, than most of the students at their school. That’s why some people answer the question “Should student athletes be paid?” with a firm no.

Collegiate sports have been a huge American pastime. Since the beginning of college level sports people have debated if college athletes should paid. College athletes should be paid because there sport requires them to work year round, therefore they do not have time to get money from a normal job. Also the hardwork and dedication it takes to be a college athlete should be rewarded because not a lot of people can go that far in their career. While it may be true that college sports are run through a school however the school gets money from these events and put elsewhere.

The NCAA has had debates before of whether or not they believe college athletes should get paid because often most of the students have been or are covered with scholarships that cover fees, meal plans and their tuition. Even though the