Taylor Branch argues that big time college sports are fully commercialized. Corporations offer large sums of money to universities so they can profit from the talent of college athletes. Branch believes that the NCAA imposes amateurism on its athletes for their own selfish gain. Branch calls into question two of the NCAA’s most noble principles on which it justifies its entire existence. The first being amateurism and the second being student-athlete. He believes that both are nothing but “cynical hoaxes” and just legal terms created by the universities so they can exploit the skills and fame of young athletes. The NCAA’s moral authority lies in its justification to protect what it calls the “student-athlete.” The term is meant to represent the amateurism of college sports, and the precedence of …show more content…
Branch uses the example of TCU football player Kent Waldrep who mas paralyzed in a game against the Alabama Crimson Tide. TCU paid for his medical bills for nine months but refused to pay anymore afterwards. Throughout the 1990’s Waldrep pushed for a lawsuit for workers compensation rights. The appeals court finally rejected Waldrep’s claim in 2000, ruling that he was not an employee because he had not paid taxes on financial aid that he could have kept even if he quit football. The case of Ken Waldrep shows the power of the NCAA’s “student-athlete” formulation as a shield, and the organization continues to use it as both a legal defense and a noble ideal. One argument that Branch discusses is the NCAA and its officials. Those who lead the NCAA have tried to assert their dominion by distracting attention from the larger issues. For example, chasing frantically after petty violations. Branch uses the example of A. J. Green, a wide receiver at Georgia. He confessed that he had sold his own jersey from the Independence Bowl, to raise cash for a spring-break
Growing up in America sport is a vital part of everyday life. From childhood to adulthood some aspect of sport pertains to virtually everyone. As a child one is looking to find a hobby so they play sports. As a parent fathers look forward to coaching their child’s little league team. And as tens and young adults sports are an opportunity to become a “somebody” and do something amazing. The general perception in high school and college is that athletes have it all. If you’re good at sports then you don’t have to worry about schoolwork or popularity and essentially you have but not a care in the world; you are invincible. Although it is great to see some succeed and become professional athletes many others do not have the same fate. The fate of these athletes, which happens to be the majority, is what drives my opinion on college sport.
Since the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) inception in 1906 there have been laws in place to protect the amateurism status of its student athletes. Over the last 100 years the NCAA has morphed into a multimillion dollar business. The success and revenue that student athletes have brought the NCAA and its member institutions has sparked a debate of whether or not to compensate players for paying. Research in the field has focused on the debate and reasons to pay players and reasons not to. There has been little attempt to assert the thoughts, feelings, and opinions of the student athletes. The purpose of this study is to examine what the thoughts, feelings, and attitudes of the student athletes towards NCAA amateurism laws. Informal face to face interviews with Division 1 student athletes at universities in Indiana will be conducted to get an analysis of the attitudes, opinions, and feelings Division 1 student athletes have towards NCAA Amateurism laws.
These professors argue that student athletes, under common law and NLRB’s (National Labor Relations Board) employee criterion, do in fact fall under the classification of an employee (Cooper). Under common law, four tests determine if someone is an employee or not. Three of these rules are as follows: “(1) the right of others to control a person's activities; (2) whether that person is compensated; and (3) if that person is economically dependent on that compensation.” According to these guidelines the employer-employee relationship is plainly synonymous to that of coaches and student-athletes. For one, coaches have a significant amount of control over their student-athletes’ activities, two, athletic scholarship money is considered compensation, and third, student-athletes are highly dependent on these scholarships for their food, living, and education. Even after realizing that a student-athlete falls under what the law defines as an employee, we can agree that any D1 student-athlete who works upwards of 40 hours a week to perform at a high level of competition for the universities benefit is essentially working a full time job on top of school work
Throughout the country young men and women are losing their priority for an education. To attend a university should be a highly cherished privilege, and it should be an even greater honor to play athletics for the university. Therefore, the writer supports the decision that the “student” comes before “athlete” in student-athlete. Playing for pay should be considered a job for “professionals”. In the rulebook, the NCAA views college athletes as armatures. This statement sums it up best. When athletes go to college, not all of them go in with the mindset that athletics is going to be their future job....
Video footage and documentation of the man who coined the term “student athlete” is shown. One compelling piece of evidence was when the founder himself admitted that the concept was outdated and should be change. This combination of diverse viewpoints helps to expose the truth of how college football turned into a multibillion dollar industry supported by unpaid laborers.
Paul Dietzel, former head coach of LSU, once said, “You can learn more character on the two-yard line than anywhere else in life.” Ever since the beginning, not only children but also college athletes have been playing sports for the love of the game and have used it as a way to grow character, teamwork, and leadership. Although when playing for a University an athletes job is to bring in profit for the school, this is not why these young men and women have continued with these sports they love. It is usually these students passion, a way for them to express themselves like others have art and music. The question has been up whether these college athletes should be paid for their loyalty and income for the University but by paying these students more than their given scholarship, it would defeat the purpose and environment of a college sport versus a professional sport, cause recruiting disputes, and affect the colleges benefits from these school athletics.
In “The Fish” by Elizabeth Bishop, the narrator attempts to understand the relationship between humans and nature and finds herself concluding that they are intertwined due to humans’ underlying need to take away from nature, whether through the act of poetic imagination or through the exploitation and contamination of nature. Bishop’s view of nature changes from one where it is an unknown, mysterious, and fearful presence that is antagonistic, to one that characterizes nature as being resilient when faced against harm and often victimized by people. Mary Oliver’s poem also titled “The Fish” offers a response to Bishop’s idea that people are harming nature, by providing another reason as to why people are harming nature, which is due to how people are unable to view nature as something that exists and goes beyond the purpose of serving human needs and offers a different interpretation of the relationship between man and nature. Oliver believes that nature serves as subsidence for humans, both physically and spiritually. Unlike Bishop who finds peace through understanding her role in nature’s plight and acceptance at the merging between the natural and human worlds, Oliver finds that through the literal act of consuming nature can she obtain a form of empowerment that allows her to become one with nature.
This argument has reached its peak of debate when Northwestern University football players planned to form a union in order to receive some form of representation. Northwestern quarterback, Kain Colter, started this movement when he reached out to the President of the National College Players Association, Ramogi Huma. He said, “This is about finally giving college athletes a seat at the table. Athletes deserve an equal voice when it comes to their physical, academic, and financial protections” ( Farrey). Huma filed a petition to the office of the National Labor Relations board on behalf of the players of Northwestern. Besides this being the first move towards a labor union in college sports what’s important is that the athletes of Northwestern are not seeking unionization due to mistreatment by Northwestern. According to Colter, “The school is just playing by the rules of their governing body, the NCAA.” Also, this isn’t about just helping players at Northwestern. Colter expressed how he wan...
Recently college athletes have been granted permission to work, from the NCAA. Even with this permission, their jobs are still regulated. One regulation to the athletes working is that they cannot work for alumni of the school. The NCAA has this rule because they feel if athletes work for people with close ties to the school then they will be receiving special benefits while working. These special benefits include, (but are not limited to), athletes being paid while not at work and higher salaries then other workers doing the same job (Anstine 4).
Zimbalist, Andrew S. Unpaid Professionals: Commercialism And Conflict In Big-Time College Sports. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
Education and athletics, two of the most prized activities within our society. It's therefore no surprise that the two so closely link in one of our society’s favorite pastimes: college sports. Some believe that these two things benefit each other and some don’t. In the Forbes article titled “Rethinking the Benefits of College Athletics,” the author Jonathan Robe, a research fellow at the Center for College Affordability, explains, “In my short life, I’ve long been perplexed with the way many higher ed administrators–particularly college presidents–tend to laud college sports for the benefits they add to institutions of higher learning.“ He argues that college athletics do not benefit colleges and in some ways can even harm them. A majority of the supports are strong and, despite a few ineffective supports and language, Robe's argument is effective for its intended audience.
Education and Athletics, two of the most prized activities within our society. So is it any surprise that the two are so closely linked in one of our societies favorite pastimes College Sports? Some believe that these two things benefit each other and some don’t. In this Rhetorical Analysis I will be analyzing the argument presented by the article titled Rethinking the Benefits of College Athletics, which questions the academic benefit that college athletics provide. The article which appeared in Forbes magazine is written by Johnathan Robe a research fellow at the Center for College Affordability and Productivity. The author describes his thesis in the first sentence of the article stating “In my short life, I’ve long been perplexed with the way many higher ed administrators–particularly college presidents–tend to laud college sports for the benefits they accrue to institutions of higher learning.“ (Robe 1) arguing that college athletics are not beneficial to colleges and in some ways can even be harmful. Robe's argument does provide supporting evidence, however it is unlikely to convince those readers that come into it with an opposing view.
The proposal of payment toNCAA student-athletes has begun major conversations and arguments nationwide with people expressing their take on it. “This tension has been going on for years. It has gotten greater now because the magnitude of dollars has gotten really large” (NCAA). I am a student athlete at Nicholls State University and at first thought, I thought it would be a good idea to be able to be paid as a student-athlete.After much research however; I have come to many conclusions why the payment of athletes should not take place at the collegiate level.The payment of athletes is only for athletes at the professional level. They are experts at what they do whether it is Major League Baseball, Pro Basketball, Professional Football, or any other professional sport and they work for that franchise or company as an employee. The payment of NCAA college athletes will deteriorate the value of school to athletes, create contract disputes at both the college and professional level, kill recruiting of athletes, cause chaos over the payment of one sport versus another, and it will alter the principles set by the NCAA’s founder Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. Under Roosevelt and NCAA, athletes were put under the term of a “student-athlete” as an amateur. All student athletes who sign the NCAA papers to play college athletics agree to compete as an amateur athlete. The definition of an amateur is a person who “engages in a sport, study, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons” (Dictonary.com).
The NCAA prides itself as an organization dedicated to safeguarding the well-being of student-athletes and equipping them with the skills to succeed on the playing field, in the classroom and throughout life. In order to ensure that participants are students first and athletes second the NCAA has specific rules pertaining to athlete amateurism. The requirements prohibit contracts and tryouts with professional teams, salary for participating in athletics, prize money, and representation by an agent. (Amateurism) These rules not only limit the freedom of the player but also put the player at risk of being taken advantage of due to the lack of a players union and illegality of employing an agent. Other aspects of the NCAA’s rule book have been under scrutiny as well. Marc Edelman, Professor of Law at Baruch College, wrote in his treatise: Why the NCAA’s No-Pay Rules Violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act that courts are now beginning to overturn certain rules that are deemed anticompetitive. This development is important because according to the Sherman Act “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherw...
According to the NCAA regulations an athlete will lose his/her eligibility if they are paid to play; sign a contract with an agent; receive a salary, incentive payment, award, gratuity educational expenses or allowances; or play on a professional team. The word amateur in sports has stood for positive values compared to professional, which has had just the opposite. The professional sport has meant bad and degrading; while the amateur sport has meant good and elevating. William Geoghegan, Flyer News sports editor writes, “Would paying athletes tarnish the ideal of amateurism? Maybe, but being fair is far more important than upholding an ideal” (Geoghehan 1).