Paying College athletes has been a trending topic around the National Collegiate Athletic Association over the years. Many have strong opinions about this topic, and the opinions vary. The discussion of paying college athletes began in 1991 when the famed Fab Five became a household name in the United States. The Fab Five is arguably the greatest recruiting class of all time; all attending the same school (Baxter). The Fab Five first created controversy when they started to question why the university and university officials were making millions and millions of dollars off their names, and they were just deprived hungry college kids not making a dime. Nike even made billions by copyrighting their famed black athletic socks, black athletic shoes, and baggy shorts that they made famous throughout the nation. The question over the past several years has become a general and trending topic of argument. College athletes should not be paid for their performance or to perform for their universities because they are there for an education, questions will be asked, and universities would not make as big of an income off the games. 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.... ... middle of paper ... ... being paid. Many people prefer watching college sports over professional sports based on the idea that money isn’t involved in college sports. They are competing and giving everything they have for the love of their teammates, the love of their school, and above all, their love for the game. Paying athletes would ruin this standard of intercollegiate athletics. For all these reasons, college athletes should not be paid beyond their full ride scholarships. Works Cited Baxter, Blake. “The Best in College News and Commentary.” The College Fix RSS. 23 January 2013. Web. 18 May 2014. Bokshan, Amanda. “The Odyssey.” 2 November 2011.Web.18 May 18, 2014. Daugherty, Paul. “College Athletes Already Have Advantages and Shouldn’t Be Paid.” 20 January 2012.Web.18 May 18, 2014. Salvador, Damon. “Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid?” 20 April 2013.Web. 18 May 2014.
Tyson Hartnett of The Huffington Post once said “Even with any type of scholarship, college athletes are typically dead broke.” This quote regards a tremendous controversy that has been talked about for the past few years. He talks about whether or not college athletes should be paid for their duties. Despite the fact college athletes are not professionals, they should most certainly be paid for playing for their respective schools due to many factors. These factors include health risks and the income bring in for their colleges as well as to the National Collegiate Athletic Association.
Posnanski, Joe. “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” Norton Sampler: Short Essays for Composition, 8th ed. Pages 584-590. 2013.
Should college athletes receive pay for what they do? You’ve probably seen this pop-up a million times, and thought about it. You’ve probably figured why should they? Aren’t they already receiving benefits from a full-ride scholarship? But then an athlete will get caught up in a scandal like Johnny Manziel, where he signed footballs for money.. then you think well why shouldn’t he receive that money? And you then contradict yourself. But shouldn’t they receive money from outside sources, and then the benefits from the school. Not get a salary from the school just the benefits they’re already receiving, and money from sponsors. Wouldn’t that make sense considering the money they’re making the school? According to an ESPN report Alabama University makes $123,769,841 in total revenue from sports. (College Athletics Revenue) Yes ONE HUNDRED & TWENTY THREE MILLION. Yet an athlete from Alabama can only receive benefits from a scholarship.. That doesn’t seem right. You would want to be payed when the opportunity arises. It should only be fair these players get a piece of the revenue pie, after all they are the ones creating the revenue. The players should be getting benefits to allow them to pay for basic college needs, grow up to be responsible adults, and allow the NCAA to thrive. This would allow for the NCAA to truly thrive as a sporting association.
“Should NCAA Athletes Be Paid?” US News. U.S. News and World Report, Apr. 2013. Web. 05
Athletes everywhere complain and gripe about how little money they have. What they don’t realize is, it’s not just them. Most college students do not have a sufficient amount of money that they can buy whatever they want. It is outrageous that athletes believe they are entitled to accommodations because they play sports. To play a sport at the collegiate level is a privilege (Top 10 Reasons College Athletes Should Not Be Paid). Students that participate in athletics should not receive any payment because they are receiving tons of benefits, free tuition, and this would extend the talent gap.
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.
Student athletes should not be paid more than any other student at State University, because it implies that the focus of this university is that an extracurricular activity as a means of profit. Intercollegiate athletics is becoming the central focus of colleges and universities, the strife and the substantial sum of money are the most important factors of most university administration’s interest. Student athletes should be just as their title states, students. The normal college student is struggling to make ends meet just for attending college, so why should student athletes be exempt from that? College athletes should indeed have their scholarships cover what their talents not only athletically but also academically depict. Unfortunately, the disapproval resides when students who are making leaps academically are not being offered monetary congratulations in comparison to student athletes. If the hefty amount of revenue that colleges as a conglomerate are making is the main argument for why athletes should be paid, then what is to stop the National Clearinghouse from devising unjust standards? Eventually if these payments are to continue, coaches, organizations, and the NCAA Clearinghouse will begin to feel that “c...
6) Clark, Liz. “Athletes Say They Deserve to Be Paid.” Charlotte Observer. (Charlotte, N.C.). April 3, 1994: pg. 4G. Sports. Eleanor Goldstein. Vol. 4. Boca Raton: SIRS, 1994. Art. 65.
Eitzen, D. Stanley. "College Athletes Should Be Paid." Sports and Athletes. Ed. James D. Torr.
Woods, Al. “College Athletes Should Be Paid.” Sports and Athletes: An Anthology. Ed. Christine Watkins. Greenhaven Press, 2009. 87-94. Print.
Daugherty, Paul. "College athletes already have advantages and shouldn't be paid." Sports Illustrated. Sports Illustrated, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/paul_daugherty/01/20/no.pay/
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.
Another extremely important reason to pay college athletes is that paying college athletes would help entice them to finish their college degree. If athletes are paid to play, not only can they cover some of their college expenses that scholarships couldn’t they will continue to want to play because of monetary value of it.
Should college athletes be paid? This is a question that has been asked and discussed a million times, and yet, there still isn't a straight answer for it yet. There are many people who say that college athletes should be paid. Although, there are also a lot of people who think otherwise, that college athletes should not be paid. I believe that college athletes should be paid because they work hard at the sport and risk getting injuries from playing the sport and they deserve something for it besides scholarships for schooling.
Student athletes should get paid by their schools because they generate revenue for various organizations, spend hours practicing and playing their sport, and risk their body of getting injured. Female and male college athletes should get paid from their schools. The female and the male athletes not only go to class, but they also both participate in a school activity that takes away time from their ability to earn an income from a regular job. While some people think college athletes should get paid others think they should not.