Should Collegiate Athletes be Paid? Essay

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

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.

Due to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules and regulations no college athlete is able to receive any compensation or endorsement while participating in college athletics. These rules have long been challenged, however no changes have been made by the NCAA. With universities grossing close to $200 million a year college athletics has turned into one of the top industries in the world. The NCAA is a governing body of college athletics, but without people questioning the NCAA and demanding changes to the monopoly that the NCAA is nothing will happen to the unfairness to college athletes like it is currently.

There is currently a major issue in today’s college athletics. Universities and the NCAA make billions of dollars while some student-athletes go hungry. There is a huge debate over whether or not student-athletes should be paid as employees of their respective colleges. Personally, I don’t believe players should receive full-time salaries, but Universities and the NCAA should be required to increase the value of the scholarships that they award to student-athletes. By requiring that colleges provide athletes with an additional $2,000 per semester as part of their scholarship you can greatly increase the well-being (welfare) of the students.

Although athletes would be able to leave college with more than just a degree, they can take other classes to increase knowledge to earn more degrees. Even a little bit of money would be really helpful for these athletes who do so much for their school. It would help them out on their new path. Many athletes expect and believe that they should get paid more than just a fully-funded degree. For the athletes that work 90 hours a week for their time in college, the end of their college years, it may seem as if it was a burn out and can be damaging to the athlete. Paying the student-athletes would help them leave college with a little bit of money to help them out on there new path (“Top 10 Reasons College…”). If they stay in school just a couple more years instead of transferring to the pros, it would help them out in the long run so much because

Those students are students first and then they are members of their club. In the name student-athletes, student comes before athlete showing that being a student should be one’s first priority. Athletes are no exception and should not be paid because the reason they are at college is to get an education and playing a sport should just be an extracurricular activity. Earning a degree is something that not everyone can do and once one has that, the sky is the limit. Moreover, Athletic Director at the University of North Texas, Cinnamon Sheffield has key reasons as to why student-athletes should not be paid. Sheffield states, “The main reason they [students] will be coming to UNT is to earn a degree which they will own for the rest of their lives.” Sheffield nailed it when she mentions how the most important reason students attend college is to earn a degree regardless of their athletic ability. That is exactly why student-athletes should not be paid because they are there to earn a degree not earn a paycheck by playing a sport. She also continues by saying, “We remind them that athletics is a privilege, academics are the priority” (Sheffield). This also backs up as to why college athletes should not be paid. Academics is the most important thing while one is at college and if they started to pay athletes their mentality would be changed and they would be more focused on the paycheck they receive from their

In the last few decades a crucial question raised around collegiate athletics and the student athletes who compete within the NCAA. Some argue that college athletes should be paid because of how valuable they are to their school, and because of how hard they work to manage both their sport and school work. However, others believe college athletes don’t deserve payment because of the many benefits they already receive due to playing sports. Therefore, supporters of paying college athletes say they deserve compensation due to their dedication and amount of revenue they bring to their universities; yet, the opposite side argues athletes already enjoy many luxuries along with their scholarships that other college students do not receive.

There has been a lot of talk about college-athletes for the past couple of years in America. One of the biggest question is if college-athletes should get paid to play or not? This topic obviously has two sides to it. One side people are pushing the idea of paying these college-athletes thousands of dollars to play that sport. On the other side people are not liking the idea of paying student-athletes to play that sport and they’re only in college. This paper will examine whether or not paying student-athletes is a good idea or a bad idea. This document will support the fact the student-athletes should not get paid to play any sports at any college level. This document will only follow football but will have the same effect on other sports. Their will be three main points for this discussion. First being that college students are too young and immature. Next point will show some profession players that really fall under these categories. The last point will show some of the reasons why people think they should get paid. If a student plays a college sport, this is their time to develop their skills and only professionals should get paid.

College athletes being paid has become an interesting debate in recent years. People are starting to get different feelings of the old way of not paying amateurs. Profits are so easily made in today’s age through social media, advertisements, apparel, and ticket sales, that programs are bringing in millions of dollars each year off the likeness of their athletes. Athletes dedicate their lives to the sports they play and it consumes their time. Data shows that some colleges do bring in millions of dollars a year in profit, but many colleges around the US are struggling to break even. Should college athletes be rewarded for their hard work and dedication? Opponents of paying college athletes point out that they are rewarded through scholarships,

More than 460,000 student athletes compete in the NCAA alone, many of which are D1 athletes and participate in one the major sports (NCAA). With college athletics on the rise for popularity, March Madness basketball tournament generates more than $1 billion each year in ad revenue (Green). The last audited number for revenue released by the NCAA reported was a yearly revenue of $871.6 million (NCAA). Many think with all the money floating around these athletes should be paid in some way, others argue otherwise (Debate). There is strong controversy whether college athletes should be compensated other than scholarships.

Luckily their revenues do not correspond. Spending millions more to pay players would only make a more difficult financial situation for schools that are already subsidizing athletics. If they expand athletic costs by millions of dollars, that means they’ll be draining the academic budgets even more than they already are. Although Huma, the NCPA and CAPA president says, “The idea that there 's not enough revenue out there is ridiculous. The major conferences recently signed television deals worth an additional $1.2 billion over their previous deals,” he says. He also notes that “schools already share athletic revenue in a variety of ways. If the NCAA is seriously worried about the schools that aren 't making money, the association could institute a revenue-sharing program that would distribute the money more equitably.” (Huma, 2014). Even though student athletes work incredibly hard to not only stay good but also thrive in their collegiate endeavors, that doesn’t mean the university they attend should pay them for it. That’s their choice to play, college is a place for obtaining an education. Not trying to get paid for playing a sport like a professional. The question of whether or not student athletes should get paid arises primarily in reference to student athletes who play football and basketball at NCAA Division I institutions with high profile and high income athletic programs. The argument is that because some institutions receive millions of dollars from the

Should College Athletes Be Paid? This question has the propensity to cause much commotion within the various collegiate athletic divisions; e.g., NCAA, BIG 10, MEAC, and CIAA. The complexity involved in flushing out an answer to this question coupled with our status as college students may have played a direct influence in the decision of the group Long Term Money’s (L.T.M.) choice to use this topic as an interest for group assignment. A “student athlete” is a participant in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which he or she is enrolled. Student athletes must typically balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete. Due to educational institutions being colleges, they offer athletic scholarships in various sports; therefore, the proverbial question of which came first, “the chicken or the egg?” comes to mind. Are the individuals who would be directly affected by such an action, considered students’ firsts, or athletes, and if they are athletes, should be they be considered employees governed by significant employment and labor laws eligible for pay? If they are now employee, how will this affect their pursuit of the educational process, eligibility for scholarships, classes, study, etc.; what changes that must take place for the plan (if granted) to be carried out, would it be consistent across the entire country. So, with so many unanswered questions, we ask again; “Should College Athletes Be

With the passing of another academic year, fans were able to enjoy yet another nail-biting NCAA Basketball Tournament and a highlight filled football season. Most would agree that the NCAA provides competitive sport as popular as the professionals. In fact, its annual revenue makes that point clear. College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly.[1] There is one major difference between the two associations, however. NBA players get paid for the revenue they help bring in, while NCAA athletes receive no monetary compensation. The promise of a free education is not enough anymore if the NCAA wants to act as a money making business, and not reward those who help make it profitable. If the NCAA does not want to pay college athletes, than it should not hold these players back from entering the professional game. However, colluding with the NBA and the NFL, athletes are restricted when it comes to joining the pro ranks. With these two ideas combined, athletes are drawn to the college game out of necessity, and not always desire. Some writers, like Stanley Eitzen, have even compared the system to indentured servitude or a “plantation system.”[2] Concerning the revenue sports of men’s basketball and football, the players should be entitled to some monetary compensation for their work, as well as the right to enter the professional leagues at an age that suits their abilities.

There are about 325.7 million people in the United States of America, 400,000 of those people are college athletes, that’s 12.3%. Along with that, 1 out of every 25 of those college athletes will become a professional, that’s 16,000 athletes (.5% of America’s population). Due to the slim possibilities of even becoming a college athlete, college athletes should be compensated because of the support their families need financially, the revenue they bring in for their school, and the sacrifices they must make for their team.

Firstly, college athletes work as hard as professional athletes. They practice and train to win each game they play. They are sacrificing themselves at a chance to play the game they love. Both college athletes and professional athletes play their game with heart and soul.