College Athletes Should Be Paid Essay

The hot topic in amateur sports has been as to whether or not college athletes should be paid. The NCAA amateur rule states that an athlete in college sports cannot be paid other than their athletic scholarship. These athletes spend a tremendous amount of time at school practice and then working on schoolwork after practice. The NCAA is an organization that oversees all of the athletes that make up the basic unit of intercollegiate sports. The success of the NCAA whether it’s through the sale of merchandise, game day revenue or NCAA tournaments that each individual sports has, despite the absolute success of these tournaments these athletes receive any monetary compensation .Some of the main reasons why the NCAA lack of payments are that it wants to maintain its amateur status and

The NCAA has been around and evolved since the beginning of college sports. This organization is a non-profitable organization, but ironically makes more than millions of profit per year. Branch states “that money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contract”(pg. 228). Meanwhile, the student-athletes do not receive any of this money. This is the start of an unsubstantial business between universities built around amateurism.

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.

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.

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.

When deciding to play a sport in college that sport essentially becomes ones main focus. It is trusted by the school that they are being given their all. Between countless hours of practice and keeping ones grades up it is nearly impossible for a college athlete to get a job. Without a job, some of these athletes have no guaranteed source of income and that makes covering every day needs difficult. That brings the debate to whether college athletes should be paid to play a sport or not. The NCAA, formed by President Teddy Roosevelt in 1906, was initally put into place to take care of the safety element in college football. In 1950, colleges introduced the athletic scholarship. Using scholarships was seen as an act of pay-to-play

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.

Yet the college athlete gets paid nothing to play the game that he or she loves. When students play a sport in college, they become a part of the National College Athletic Association, better known as the NCAA. Any athlete in the NCAA is considered an amateur athlete, which means they cannot make any money from their respective sport. If athletes get paid in any way, it becomes a very serious legal matter. Most often, these cases end with the student being expelled and the university being fined. The NCAA bans their athletes from receiving payment in any way, even when sports are not involved. When discussing this issue, Craig T. Greenlee states the case of Darnell Autry, “In the summer of ’96, Autry, a theatre major who also played football for Northwestern University, was prohibited by NCAA rules from getting paid to appear in a movie shot in Italy” (67). The NCAA does allow student athletes to make money in any way. A debate has ensued. One side says these rules are outdated and need to be changed. Should NCAA student athletes receive compensation for their contributions to their universities?

One of the hottest debates in the sports industry is if college athletes should be paid. If you want to pay these athletes, how would the college determine the dollar amount that should be paid? Should the basketball team make more than the football team? Should the the soccer team be paid as well? Cheerleading? Chess team? Should everyone on the team get a salary? What if your college is good at football and your basketball team is awful? Rather than thinking about these questions, the college board is just better off not paying athletes like how they did in the old days. For example, “When the National Collegiate Athletic Association was founded by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1905, the institution was devoted to the belief of not providing a salary to the college-athletes who took participated in the organization. It is based on the belief of amateurism, and it was a remarkable idea” (Meshefejian). However, The continuous growth of NCAA causes a huge amount of revenue to come into colleges and this cause controversy to whether if athletes should be paid for what they do. The opinions on this subject can be grouped into two general categories. Some feel that college athletes should not be paid because education comes first and athletes are already paid in full. Others feel that college athletes should be paid because playing a sport is a full-time job and it would make the sport more competitive. Although some

Thesis: College athletes should not get paid due to the financial restrictions of the NCAA, the imbalance of competition, and the fact that these young adults are students.

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.

What if someone wasn’t getting paid to do your job? What if someone were invited to a workplace to dedicate at least one year of pushing every physical limit thought possible. But what if someone did all that for free? Would they still do it? Opt out for a better situation? It seems that many Future NCAA athletes are asking this question to themselves more and more these days. And the question being begged her has a complex yet clear answer to it. If anyone who plays any sport at a college level chances are other than possibly a scholarship You’re not receiving much of anything else. So this sparks a huge debate. Why are NCAA athletes not getting paid? The NCAA makes slightly more than 1 BIllion dollars of revenue every year, and yet not one cent goes to college

Although college players don't get paid I contend they should because sometimes full ride scholarships to college are not enough they should get paid for playing as well because they work more than the average american a week, entertaining the fans and doing the hard work. The NCAA makes a lot of money from their collegiate sports. Yet college players don’t get paid and they are the ones playing the sport and entering the fans. This is unfair to the players. This why college players should get paid and the NCAA should pay them.

In trying to decide what research topic I wanted to use, I took many ideas into thought. I decided that the one idea that interests me most is whether student athletes should be paid or not. This is very intriguing to me since my master’s program is sports management. In order to do this research there must be many ways to use research as well as ideas from other people. This project is a very big topic in today’s discussion amongst sport fans, college administrators, and student athletes themselves. Media has recently put more pressure on this topic as well with the Northwestern decision to unionize as well as pointing out an athletic director gaining an $18,000 supplement for a wrestler at their school winning a national

College sports are big business. For many universities, the athletic program serves as a cash-generating machine. Exploited athletes generate millions of dollars for the NCAA and their schools, and never see a dime. In terms of profit, if all ties with the university were eliminated, an athletic program acting as its own separate entity could compete with some fortune 500 companies. So, why do the vital pieces of the machine, the players, fail to receive any compensation for their performance? The answer lies in the money-hungry NCAA and their practice of hoarding all the revenue. College athletes should receive payment for their play to make their college experience more bearable because they create huge profits and