Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay

Well I mean they do work long hours practicing. Being in class and studying makes it even harder for them to have spare time. What about the players that have to use the scholarship as the only way to receive an education? Some people do not have family to help support them and if they have no time for a job how will they get by? I see it like this; Players should get something but not necessarily a wage or a paycheck. There are numerous ways players good get paid besides additional funding from the school. The NCAA could most definitely shake loose some of their rules. Let the players receive new Nikes from a sponsorship or a kid that looks up to them. Let those hardworking, no time for anything, injury sustaining young players receive something, at least a little something, besides free education they barely have time for because of practices, games, pep rallies, and camps. The NCAA is too strict on these players about accepting outside sources of money, free meals, and plenty of other helpful sources (Rosenburg 2). I’m all for student athletes getting paid in some way and form but maybe not a salary or four

Some would say that the athletes are only in it for the money, but there is no way they could only be in it for the money if they had to make the right grades. At every college people have to make the grades to keep the scholarship people are earning. They can’t just receive the scholarship and not work hard to get the good grades. It would be the same with this extra money. The athletes don’t make the grades; therefore, they won’t get the money. There is no doubt that athletes should be paid. It is clear they would benefit from it more than they

Most college athletes get a scholarship to play for the team they are accepted into, and therefore money for school is handled. Depending on the school and how big, is what makes me indecisive of deciding whether athletes should be paid or not. If an athlete goes to play at a division 1 school, the sport comes to be their job; where if an athlete plays for a team at a level of division 3 school, they can not get a scholarship for sports, but for academics. Playing as an athlete in a smaller school makes it easier to get a job, stay strong in academics, and also be part of athletics. This is what makes me indecisive about my decision; so my idea is, I feel the athletes of a division 1 school should be paid to play in college, because it is more of their job than just a sport.

With athletes spending over 40 hours for games and practicing and less than 40 hours for academia. 40 hours a week towards anything is a lot of time, and to not be paid for your time is wrong. It hard for most athletes to balance the two and that leads to them failing classes. The NCAA sets a rule stating they are not allowed to get jobs. On a typical day, a player will wake up before classes, get a lift or conditioning session in, go to class until 3 or 4 p.m. go to practice, go to mandatory study hall, and then finish homework or study for a test. The truth is that for many college athletes, a sport is a full-time job. It demands so much, the sports become their main priority. Valuable time to complete academic is taken away and time for them to get the proper rest through the course of a day.

“Should college athletes be paid” is an issue that is very controversial. Some people say “yes sure it’s a great idea”. Others say “no not at this time”. Paying college athletes for participating in sports is a bad idea. Athletes getting paid to play sports could take the focus of education away, it would cost way too much for universities, take the love and passion of the sport away, and many other reasons. Mostly all athletes get scholarships anyway which pays for their tuition, dorm, meals, etc. As the athletes receiving scholarships have a full ride through college their payment is in the form of education benefits as opposed to direct compensation. As the majority of Division I and II schools are higher scale colleges in general this

The NCAA’s annual income of over 900 million dollars is a considerable amount of revenue, however, the players themselves do not deserve to receive any portion of this cash (Thellin). If payment is given to just a certain sport or a certain gender of sports, such as Division 1 men’s football or basketball, players of other divisions and sports will most certainly want a share of that as well. This would also create a monopoly-type of business in collegiate sports, causing players to be drawn to certain colleges who will pay out the most. Paying athletes would undermine the primary role of universities which is to offer education. The experiences and education that athletes receive while in college cannot be equated to the amount they would receive were they to be paid.

While most people disagree on whether college athletes should be paid, there are several factors that should be taken into consideration when debating this topic. Because basketball and football bring such a profit to colleges, the money earned pays for smaller sports within the college (ex. Volleyball, Soccer, and Lacrosse). If these big sport players were being paid, small athletic teams would be cut due to the lack of profitable money (Anderson). It’s not fair that these smaller teams would be terminated. An

Another reason college athletes should be paid is because school isn’t cheap. Most top of the line D1 universities can get up to $45,000 - $65,000 in tuition, which is a substantial amount of money for a young man/woman to pay off. If a flat rate pay is given across the board varying from sport to sport it will provide students assistance paying for school and just help in their everyday lives. Opponents of paying college athletes often argue the scholarship and tuition aspect of college athletes. As cited in (“Here's Why We Shouldn't Pay College Athletes.”) by John R. Thelin, who is a author and a professor of Educational Policy Studies at the University of Kentucky; “A full athletic scholarship (a grant-in-aid) at an NCAA Division I university is about $65,000 if you enroll at a college with high tuition. The scholarship is $45,000 for tuition and $20,000 for room, board and books. At state universities, the scholarship would be lower if

Student athletes that are on athletic scholarship are basically paid already. They receive free living, high-quality meals and some money for books and other miscellaneous things pertaining to college. At the more successful universities, athletes also receive academic tutoring, counseling, skill training, and even nutritional advice. Of course, not all student athletes are on scholarship. In fact, only 2% of high school athletes win a sports scholarship, and even then the average grant is less than $11,000. Even less likely are full scholarships. This may not seem like physical pay because it isn't, but the student-athletes are receiving compensation in the form of educational benefits and living expenses. To any person that looks at this situation logically, this can be looked at as “pay”. Even things that are overlooked, such as free physical training and therapy, which professionals pay anywhere from $2,000-$3,000 per week on, come into being labeled as “compensation”. Summing up all of the things the average student athlete is given, such as education, room and living, physical education, and training. Depending on how many scholarships one is given, a cost of $20,000 to $125,000 is paid for by the school. Seems like a very good trade, just for playing a sport. On top of that, there is, of course, things such as fame and publicity. Pro scouts looking into drafting

Including training sessions, games, travel and other requirements that student athletes may have to attend to. Then they are working the same amount of hours as those in full-time employment. Salaries are also based on a standard 40-hour work week. Since colleges are getting paid for NCAA tournaments why shouldn't the players get paid since they are the ones putting in the hard work?

“The NCAA gets a cut; universities get a cut; coaches get a cut. The only ones not cashing in, it seems, are the players themselves. Under NCAA rules, they’ve been considered ‘amateurs’ who aren’t allowed a profit from their sports” (Majerol). This is something the NCAA has to change if they want more college athletes to be happy. If athletes in college were paid, even a small amount, this could change their lives. College athletes are risking their lives, spending a large amount of time with their team, and paying college expenses, and this is why college athletes should be paid for the dedication of their team and the risking of their

to support their families. If student-athletes were to be paid, this would allow for them to take care

Meals, clothes and other essentials don't get payed for by the college. During school it is hard for athletes to go from school to practice, then get a healthy meal and go to their dorm to start their homework.

To start off the argument, while I do not think they should be paid for their playing time, I do agree with the policies set that give them payment in other ways. The schools pay for their tuition, meal plan and room and board, to give them a more than comfortable living area. Along with the free doctor visits and personal training to enhance their performance. These student-athletes are compensated for their dues.

Being a college athlete is a job all by itself. All of the countless hours of lifting weights, working out, dieting, plus the same school work all the other students are getting as well. Athletes have to manage their time to the best of their ability and still have to stay up until midnight just to stay caught up on schoolwork. Then, after a long school day college athletes attract hundreds of thousands of visitors to a stadium to watch an event. So not paying these athletes is the equivalent to not paying professional athletes or even musicians performing at concerts.