College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

Over the past 30 years or so college athletics have gained immense popularity and has resulted in an amazing amount of revenues from the NCAA and its Subsidiaries. The debate as to whether college athletes should be paid even beyond their athletic scholarships. While reading this paper it will answer the question as to whether college athletes should be paid by exploring the reasons for and against the payments of these athletes beyond their scholarship.

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

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 playing sports. Another argument is that if student-athletes were to get paid then it would ruin the amateurism of college sports. People who are against paying the athletes do not want to see the young people become focused on money. “Paying student-athletes

Jameis Winston, Dwayne Wade, Giancarlo Stanton, and Dalvin Cook all are very big people in Florida’s sports market. They all are important to their team’s success and considered leaders on their teams. The major difference between the four players is that 3 of them are compensated for their work, but on the other hand, one which is a college student receiving a free education, isn’t paid for nearly doing the same kind of work. Many people would argue that it’s not fair that college athletes aren’t being paid for bringing in millions of dollars to the institution they play for, putting their lives in danger to play the sports, and missing tons of class to prepare for their sports games without being paid. Those who argue against the compensation of athletes would say that most college and universities don’t make nearly enough revenue to pay all the college athletes as well as saying college athletes already receive a free education with scholarships and that should be the real reason to be in college. This issue has been a debate for many years among players, the National Collegiate Athletic Association & even outside influences like celebrities and law officials.

College sports are one of the largest and fastest growing markets in today’s culture. With some college sports games attracting more viewers than their professional counterparts, the NCAA is one of the most profiting organizations in America. Recently there has been controversy in the world of college sports as to whether the college athletes that are making their universities and the NCAA money should receive payment while they are playing their respective sport. Many believe that these athletes should be paid. Others argue that they are already receiving numerous benefits for playing that sport from their universities. Many of the proponents of paying college athletes are current or former college athletes who believe their hard work and hours put into practice and competing go under appreciated. They feel that while the athletes are making the university money, the athletes do not receive any cut of these profits. Opponents feel that athletes already receive numerous perks and should not receive extra compensation on top of the perks they already receive.

College athletes have much more responsibilities to worry about than pros, and scholarships don 't help athletes that much and they often don’t even finish college. The problem is college athletes don 't get paid when they have twice the responsibilities of pro athletes. college athletes have to juggle their sport practices and games, being on the road a lot of the time, going to classes everyday, and going to work so they can have money to eat. The solution would be to take out of all the money college athletes make from games, and memorabilia. NCAA is a billion dollar organization and they don 't pay the very people who make them the

Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.

Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.

Have you paid attention to all of the news that has been surfacing about collegiate sports lately? It is a big topic now days in the world of sports on weather college athletes should be getting paid to play sports. College athletics have gained great popularity of the past few decades, and have brought schools lots of revenue. A lot of college athletes think they should be getting paid for their services they do for their school. College sports like basketball and football generate over six billion dollars a year, but none of it goes to the athletes. Athletes should be paid for all of the time and dedication they put forth to their sport and the effort they put towards school to be eligible to play, athletes should get paid for all the money they bring to their school by playing sports, and players should also be paid for putting their bodies on the line while playing sports.

Kristi Dosh and Mark Cassell have contrasting opinions about compensation of college athletes. Dosh’s opinion is that college athletes should not be paid because there are problems associated with it. She inquires, “The first question I ask people when they say college athletes should be paid is: where is the money going to come from?” (477). She exposed only a few colleges are turning a net profit. She mentions that paying athletes who are mostly male could cause issue with federal laws like the

Howard Chudacoff raises the controversial question of whether or not college athletes should be paid during a time of the year when people are most focused on college athletics, March Madness. Chudacoff is a firm believer that college athletes are given enough amenities as it is and do not deserve extra compensation or paychecks. His main arguments to support his position revolve around the royalties that power five athletes receive in regards to education centers, training facilities, and the fact that these players receive a free education. Chudacoff paints the picture of these facilities throughout his article and appeals to the reader’s pathos by descriptively showing the reader how college athletes really do live like millionaires.

Day in and day out college athletes work endlessly in practice, school and work without any type of reward. Over the past couple of decades universities have attempted to get the NCAA to allow these universities to give student athletes some type of money for their work and dedication. In John Nocera’s NY Times article, “A Way to Start Paying College Athletes,” he uses strong logical reasoning and credible sources to effectively educate his audience. However, he drastically changes his tone when discussing certain ideas, by indirectly calling out those who do not believe in his way of paying college athletes.

More and more it’s discussed daily on whether if college athletes should finally be paid, or remain unpaid, this topic is very important because college sports are very popular in the United States. College athletes should remain unpaid because it wouldn’t be fair to the other less watch sports that don’t bring in a lot of revenue, it wouldn’t be fair to the female athletes they wouldn’t be paid equally, college athletes already have advantages and receive benefits, and paying the athletes would only benefit the big named universities and not the smaller schools. College athletes were all recruited out of high school to play a sport for a university of their choosing, if the athletes were good enough they would receive a scholarship, that comes with a free education, free housing, and a free meal plan. A discussed topic is should college athletes be paid because of all the hard work and revenue that they bring towards their universities, or should they remain unpaid because they are already receiving enough. In the article “Pay to play: should college athletes be paid?” Many get scholarships, which help pay for their tuition, supplies, housing, and sporting equipment. According to the NCAA, college athletes often receive grants worth more than $100,000”. (Birkenses & Bagaria Par. 8) A free education is already enough, college athletes get to go to school for free just because of their athletic abilities, which also

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.

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.