Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay

Many believe that college athletes should not be paid. The main debate against compensating college athletes is that they are at the university for educational purposes and playing sports is a benefit. The NCAA states, “Student-athletes are students first and athletes second. They are not university employees who are paid for their labor” (McCauley 10). Universities get all the financial benefits of the money earned from sports played from things such as team jerseys, sports passes and tickets, etc. Many argue that it is only fair to give a portion of the profit to the players that earned the money. It is very important when arguing for or against paying college athletes to not take into fairness, but to hold

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.

The NCAA feels the athletes should not be paid. Horace Mitchell from the NCAA Board of Directors states

Sports have been a big part of culture in the United States since the 1900’s. Sports has become a multibillion dollar business of sort, with spots such as baseball, basketball, and football captivating americans.With american sports gaining popularity, the growth of college sports went on the rise. In 2013, The National Collegiate Athletic Association statistically generated $912,804,046 (Alesia, 2014). With all of this income that the NCAA brought in, one has to raise the question, should college athletes be paid? Even though college athletes are student athletes, they should be paid because they are practically employees to the college without compensation.

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.

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.

Whether college athletes should or should not get paid has been a controversial topic throughout the Collegiate Athletic Association for many years now. According to the article “My Priceless Opportunity” by Bill Walton , he believes that NCAA student athletes should not get paid because “the players entering the game know the rules going in and that they have been given a chance to make something of their lives in exchange for the privilege of being a student athlete”. Others like Michael Wilbon, author of “As Colleges’ Greed Grows, So Does the Hypocrisy”, thinks student athletes should get paid due to their hard work and labor. While I respect and admire the diligent task of being both a student and an athlete, I strongly agree with Bill Walton and the many others who support college athletes not being paid.

The argument whether a student-athlete should be paid to play or not be paid is one that spans the ages. College sports are considered to be of amateur status by the NCAA. Therefore they believe student-athletes should not receive a pay check to participate in a sport. However on the other end of the spectrum, many critics believe that student-athletes should receive pay for play because not only are they participating in a sport, they are entertaining the spectators. They believe that if performers in the entertainment industry are paid, why not pay the college-athletes.

Every year in the United States, thousands of collegiate student-athletes participate in a variety of different sports, and currently they do not receive paychecks for their performances. College athletics have attained an extensive popularity increase among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA] and the participating colleges, which has fuelled the debate of whether or not college athletes should collect an income. College athletes should not be paid to play because it will negatively affect their college experience. Rather, they should be compensated for their dedication to the sport. Many student athletes accept scholarships to play at a

College athletes being paid to play, good or bad? This would be for the athletes that are going to be competing at the Division 1 level. According to NCAA’s official website a study was done and the stats showed that the highest percent of all athletes that would play D1 was 12.3% which was for lacrosse. The highest percent that the students would go play at the highest level which is Division 1 is .7% which is for volleyball. This is a very small amount of student athletes that get to go n to the next level of play and maybe to the professional league. So it would make sense that the athletes that are able to play at the highest level should be paid to do whatever sport it is that they are playing. People argue that the D1 athletes kinda get paid by the full ride scholarships that they receive. Well the athletes who play in the pros make money so why shouldn’t the players who play at the highest level be paid in the lower bracket of competition.

Should College Athletes Be Paid? (Final Revision) College sports are a big part of American culture. I along with many other people watch college sports.

College athletes should not be paid. “ They argue that the main purpose of going to college is to get a education, not to make money” (“Should college”...1). College is not a job, it is a place to learn. Also many college athletes receive scholarships to attend that school. “The value of the scholarships athletes receive during four years of college can be well over $250,000” (Weiss et al.1). Therefore, athletes

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 athletes are finally getting attention on the fact that they are not paid. I believe that whether or not it is college or pro sports they deserve a salary. These players put their heart and soul on the field and get nothing in return. In the articles “Athletes New Day” by Paul Marx and “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid” by Warren Hartenstine, the reasons for college athletes to be paid are very evident. No matter the case, if the students move on to pro sports or not after college, they should be entitled to some pay for their contributions. College athletes deserve to be compensated for their playtime in these sports, sales of products with their name on it, and even compensation for their injuries.

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