Research Paper On College Athletes

Donald Delahaye, a kicker for UCF you may have heard of him. Lost his NCAA eligibility for making and profiting of his YouTube videos. Another name you may know LiAngelo Ball. Couldn’t profit or promote his family made business of Big Baller Brand (BBB) because of NCAA eligibility rules. His little brother LaMelo Ball could lose his NCAA eligibility for making and profiting off his own signature shoe. These athletes all have something in common. All these athletes, these people have either had their eligibility taken or in jeopardy because they were profiting off their image, content, or likeness. College coaches, programs, and schools make millions off their student athletes and the NCAA billions off the student athletes. As more people

We often forget that playing a sport is not the only way to earn a scholarship. Many students are accepted for exceptional grades, involvement in the band, clubs, or being well rounded. Most of these students just have to study to keep their scholarship, while the athletes have to work hard and be a student. In a competitive market, “workers” are paid according to the value of the output they produce (Heath). It does not seem right that the college journalist can sell their piece to a paper for extra cash, or the local band can play for a few dollars at the bar Saturday night, or the biology major that takes an internship at the school lab can be profitable yet college athletes cannot. Under the NCAA they are not allowed to make any money of their skill. Any college student should be able to endorse products (Wilbon). This is why the idea of going to school for free should not be an argument against paying athletes, because that is not the case and they have earned it.

Student athletes should not be paid. A misconception is that all athletic programs in the NCAA make head-over-toe profit. There are three divisions of intercollegiate athletics, and frankly division three athletic programs don’t make as much or have a profit when compared to division one programs. “Critics of paying college athletes note that only a small number of them compete in sports or on teams that actually generate revenue”. (Paying College Athletes) The truth is only a fraction of athletic programs are actually profitable, while most pose a cost to the institution. The question arises primarily in division one programs and typically in the sports of basketball and football. The argument is made that these institutions receive millions of dollars from their student athletes’ performance, in return they should be paid.

Another argument why college athletes shouldn’t be paid is that it would be hard to control. With all that athletes playing college sports how would you know how much to pay each player. This is a simple fix. You just give every college athlete a base salary. You set the amount of money each athlete gets and no certain athlete gets anymore or any less. People could argue that this is unfair because some athletes put in more time than others and some sports produce more revenue than others. This is a valid point. If you work harder and for longer than another athlete why should you get paid the same amount as them? If this is the case pay the athletes a base salary of say $2,000 a year and however long the athlete’s sport goes for take that ratio to the year. So if you do a sport that takes up 6 months of the year, that is half a year of athletics so you get half the amount a full year of athletics would get. In this case you would end up only getting $1,000. Another strong argument is that what if the athlete plays two sports like Heisman Trophy winner Jameis Winston. He plays both quarterback in football and pitcher in baseball. In this case he should get just as much as everybody else who plays a sport that takes up a full year like football. He would not get any additional bonuses to the base salary. If you had a part time job that pays federal minimum wage which is $7.25

Also, college athletes should not be paid because that is not the purpose for going to college. Many argue that is not he purpose for going to college. Many argue that going to college is not for money but for education (should college...1). They should not be paid because playing a sport is not a job. Students go to college to take classes to later have a career. Also, not all colleges make enough money for all of the athletes to be paid (“Should College...1”). There are a ton of athletes that participate in many sports in college. There are too many athletes at a college for all of them to be paid.

It is time to pay college athletes. The collegiate sports nonprofit conglomerate the NCAA is an organization that oversees over 1200 institutions between two divisions, D1 and D2. They implement rules and regulations that every student athlete must follow between these two divisions regardless of their sport or school. These top college players are expected to withstand a 40 to 50 hour training and playing schedule While keeping up their school work in the same week. Because of this many of these students get nothing out of their scholarships they receive to attend the school and an even smaller amount of these kids even make it to a higher level of competition. The NCAA the tax exemption monopolistic program takes in an average of over

The first reason why college athletes should be paid is because the athletes will be able to support their families earlier in life. The players would be able to afford a decent meal and possibly send money back home. Many of these athletes come from urban, low-class families and often leave school early because of the unimaginable pressure to be the main provider for their family at a young age (Lemmons). As stated earlier, 86% of college athletes come from families which are in poverty (Hayes). The families which gave everything to their kids should be rewarded back, but most of them never are if their children do not make the professional league. People who oppose the idea say that amateur players receiving payment just seems like a complete disaster. The college athletes don’t know how

At the time of its inception in 1906, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) was a non-profit organization mandated with the management of athletics and sports in colleges and universities across the United States and Canada. The board had a unique operational structure that provided payments and stipends to the student-athletes through a model known as altruism. The model limited the benefits the student-athletes drew from the association to their necessities in the colleges. However, the body changed its approach by denying student-athletes any form of remuneration. Instead, it concentrated on providing scholarships and other academic benefits to the athletes. As such, compensation of student-athletes has become

Good afternoon ladies and gentleman. I stand before you today with a matter that is very prominent in the college sports industry, especially within the sports of football and basketball, and that is whether or not to pay the collegiate athletes. I firmly believe that college athletes have the right to receive payment due to their services in the sport. Many college sports are large attractions for these schools resulting in a gross of millions of dollars for the universities. The league that represents them, the NCAA, is a billion dollar organization due to the popularity of the sports teams. The players on these teams deserve a fraction of the money that they bring to these other groups. Also, making it to the professional level is a

I chose the topic are college athletes given preferential treatment over non-athletes while in college because it is something very controversial in college athletics. Besides being controversial, I also find the topic very interesting. It is interesting to me to find out why college athletes get special treatment to play a sport when in reality the special treatment is probably a disservice to the athletes. Another reason I enjoy this topic is that I love sports in general and college athletics are some of my favorites to watch.

High school athletes have really only one option after high school to continue playing their chosen sport, and that option is to play for a college team. However, if the student does play for a college the student must adhere to the National Collegiate Athletic (NCAA) rules and regulations. By doing so, the student athlete gets a sports scholarship, especially if the student participates in a making money sport. And here lies the problem. Many of the fan favorite sports like football and basketball rakes in millions of dollars for not just the universities of winning teams but also for the NCAA. Student athletes do not receive any compensation outside of scholarships. In effect the NCAA has a monopoly on the talent, efforts, and earning potential

College athletes should not be paid. Instead they should be compensated. Student athletes receive a large compensation in the form of athletic scholarships. They receive a free education and the opportunity to represent their school by playing sports. “College athletes don’t have to worry about student loans, paying for

In my life, the one thing that has always been most interesting to me is sports. I have grown up around sports my entire life and have always stayed active in following it. Over the past few years, there has been a question that has lingered over the sports world and caused a significant amount of controversy. The question would be whether or not college athletes should get paid to play. I have always had an opinion on this very large topic, but as time goes on, new variables keep arising and changing the factors within this skeptical topic. As I began to actually research the topic, many new aspects were brought up. Things such as university funds, businesses, and fairness were continuously brought up. Luckily all these were easy to look

I'm going to represent to you the side of the argument that does not feel like college athletes should be paid. The first argument is that student-athletes already received scholarships and other benefits. As stated in text “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 stipends to help towards books and other basic needs.” So with help towards tuition and textbooks and essentials, student-athletes shouldn't need the extra money to get through college, mainly because the funds used for their tuition and dorms and textbooks don't need to be paid back to the

Imagine being a college football player, playing for the college of their dreams, but the only catch is that they only have time for practice and schoolwork each day. They are also faced with little to no sleep, as well as little money to buy food and clothes. This is the life of many college football players every day who are not being paid to play football. College football players put forth an average of 40 hours of conditioning and practice a week and are not paid a cent for all the effort and pain they face in a season. As a result, there is much controversy surrounding whether or not college football players should be paid to play football while attending school. People believe paying them will take away from the meaning of the game while