The position of the college coach is one that comes with fame and notoriety. Coaches of big time programs have to deal with acclaim and infamy of each win and loss. And while their winning percentage may be variable, as presented in the reading Billion Dollar Ball, their contracts are not. Football and basketball coaches’ salaries have been growing as popular demand has risen, which beckons the question, are coaches overpaid by their athletic departments? Ultimately, I believe that the salaries that coaches make are justifiable due to the amount of revenue big time programs bring in, the market forces that dictate demand, as well as the recruiting “expertise” that colleges posses.
First, college coaches are aptly paid, due to the fact that market forces dictate as such. Ultimately, the market for college coaches is
…show more content…
As described in the Billion Dollar Ball Chapter, football programs are largely the most revenue grossing sports at a college (with the exception of Kansas) (Gaul. 2015). Similarly, as we discussed in class, most of that revenue is reinvested back into the athletic programs since schools are non-profit entities (In Class Work). Whether it is right or wrong and whether that money should have invested in the players is another question. Additionally, players are not being paid. As a result, I believe that the amount that a college coach gets paid should be a generous portion of that revenue. Another critique of college sports is that many schools do not produce a net positive revenue, but still pay millions for a coach anyways. Schools may do this in order to achieve the status of schools like Alabama or Clemson (Gaul, 2015). Regardless, of whether the revenue from the sport is present, I believe that if that school believes that coach will push their program to excellence, coach’s should be able to capitalize on that in the form of high
The WACC is basically computed by the sum of multiplying the costs per component to its respective proportional weight (how much that company uses a certain cost of capital) [See Appendix 1]. As financial management is focused on the maximization of the stock price, an optimal structure of costs based on these three factors is needed.
Sports provide a nice source of money for the college but some of the money is given to the coaches where coaches are given much more money than professors that do make an effort to teach students. The money can be potentially be used to promote more departments and of the like, but to see that coaches get paid more than professors, it makes a statement of how sports are more important than education. Colleges are made to educate students and ensure that education are the highest quality valued, but to have professors who are the basis of education being paid less than coaches. Colleges are made to enhance student’s education and should not focus too much on its sports
“On Golden Pond” is the story of changing and evolving family dynamics, and it follows a family that spans three generations. Each of the four main characters in this film are encountering a different stage of life and the challenges and changes that accompany it, with the exception of Ethel and Norman, who are married and both in late adulthood. Chelsea, Billy, Ethel, and Norman all are facing unique challenges and changes in their physical and mental state reflecting their particular stage in life.
First lets explore the history behind the paying of college athletes. Over the past 50 years the NCAA has been in control of all Div.1, 2 and 3 athletic programs. The NCAA is an organization that delegates and regulates what things college athletes can and can’t do. These regulations are put in place under the label of ‘protecting amateurism’ in college sports. This allots
Should college athletes get paid an additional salary? They are an important assets to universities and colleges, so why should they not? How else would universities justify taking advantage of these young men and women? These are questions that arise when pondering the issue. This has been a large controversy over the years of rather or not college athletes should be paid, more specifically football and basketball players. However, they fail to mention that colleges are only considering paying a select few, the stars of the sports. Every single sport in colleges is making revenue for those campuses, making colleges money hungry. Thus, if they decide to only pay a select few, would that leave out women sports all together? Why pay college athletes more on top of everything they already receive? Most college athletes receive free tuition, medical care, meal plans and room and board, which can acquaint to more than a quarter million dollars for their entire college career (Scoop, 2013). Why ask for more? What is this teaching our youth? They should appreciate their chance to do what they love and value the education they are receiving, because that education is far more valuable than a potential sports salary. Even though colleges and college athletes have a few good points on why they believe they should get paid, over all the issue is larger than that, college athletes already make their share of “money” through free education and much more.
So everybody would get paid fair. While others may say or wrecks family history because if you have generations and generations go to one college than they started to get paid it might wreck that history because they will pick the highest paying one. That is not true though because if salary caps were put in everybody would get paid the same. In summary college athletes should be paid because they are too busy to have a job, the NCAA has enough money and they can put in salary caps so everybody get paid
In 2004, over 40 schools brought in more than $10 million, with 10 of them bringing in over $30 million. Several athletes around the nation are worth more than $1 million to their school (Brown). Both of these statistics are proof that while these athletes are essential to their schools, they are still kept out of the revenue. Even though these universities won’t pay their players, the schools still have no problem giving their coaches some money. In 40 U.S. states, the head coach of the basketball or football program is the highest-paid public official (Edelman).
If there’s one thing we dread in the summer more than the heat, it’s the afflicting sentiment that surrounds oneself when one is inhibited from experiencing the thrills of football for six long and gruesome months. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football is a part of many Americans’ Saturdays, but to fewer does it mean their lives. Recently coming under debate, many sporting fans and college athletes believe that players should be paid more than just tuition, room, board, and books. Two articles on this issue that bring up valid points worth discussing are Paul Marx’ “Athlete’s New Day” and Warren Hartenstine’s “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” From these articles I have found on the basis of logical,
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.
5) Shropshire, Kenneth. “College Athletes Deserve Pay, Olympians Get Paid. So Do College Coaches, Why Not The Stars?” USA Today, Final Edition. 18 Sept. 1996. Sec. A p: 15.
While the coaches of these sports teams are benefitting greatly the players still receive nothing. The coaches are receiving way too much. One of the main points about the unfairness of coaches compared to players is that the coaches are allowed to advertise while players are not. The coaches receive very generous compensation for advertising, so why is it a big deal if a college athlete is being paid for being in an advertisement? Coaches are able receive huge deals from companies, and can make way over one million dollars a year. The only way college coaches are able to receive all these deals from shoe companies and others are by how the players perform. When the coaches have players that per...
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 would dramatically shift their focus away from where it should be - gaining knowledge and skills for life after college” (Lewis and Williams). This is very understandable because one of the biggest reasons college sports are so popular is because the athletes play for school pride and for bragging rights. They play because they enjoy the game, not because it is their job. Most people that disagree with the idea of paying the athletes fail to realize what really goes on behind the scenes. At most Universities around the country the bulk of the income the school receives is brought in through the athletic programs. In fact the football and basketball teams usually bring in enough money to completely pay for the rest of the athletic programs all together. To get a better understanding of how much has changed in the world of college sports a little history must be learned.
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.
In the negotiation for the Federated Science Fund I represented the Stockman Company. The meeting started with a caucus between Turbo and I which set the tone for the negotiation. In the five-minute caucus, we understood that we get the highest payoff by working together and decided to only form a deal with United if it benefited us. This was the main turning point in the negotiation as we returned to United with only high-ball offers: we opened with $220,000 each for Stockman and Turbo, and went only as low as $200,000 each, with $80,000 for United. United presented counter offers throughout, but all of them were below our $200,000 reservation point. Even though United continuously demanded a more inclusive deal, we saw no real benefit and made a deal by splitting $440,000 evenly.
Another idea from Boyd’s Bets (2017) talks about the salaries for NBA and NFL coaches. The NBA has about 7 coaches on each team. A head coach, an associate head coach, and associate coaches are all coaches that are involved with a team. The amount of each varies however there is only one head coach. Those with the head coach title make more than those with the title of associate coach. For example, Doc Rivers, head coach of the LA Clippers has a salary of $10 million but a contract of $50 million for the five years his contract pertains to. On the other side of the scale, the lowest paid head coach, Earl Watson, has a $2.5 million dollar contract each year for 3 years. Moreover, the NFL has more than