“Its time for our college athletes to be true students on campus, not athletes on athletic stipends with sports – not education – as their top priority and obligation” (Ralph Nader in League of Fans Proposes Eliminating Athletic Scholarships to Help Restore Integrity on College Campuses, 2011)
“By eliminating the athletic scholarship, … we could de-professionalize college athletes, reestablish athletic departments as part of the educational institution, and be able to use the term student-athlete without snickering.” (Ralph Nader in League of Fans Proposes Eliminating Athletic Scholarships to Help Restore Integrity on College Campuses, 2011)
Over the past years the usefulness of athletic scholarships, and its outcomes for both the schools and athletes has been contested. Opposing parties have debated whether or not banning them will solve the problems that lay within. I believe that athletic scholarships should be interdicted because they are no guarantee of education, good academic performance or a proper lifestyle for the athletes.
Thoughts of athletic scholarships started over 20 years ago while colleges were attempting to attribute it maintaining their athletes at an amateur status (Johnson & Acquaviva, n.d.). Ralph Nader, politician, author, lawyer, and consumer advocate, has recently drawn attention upon and ignited skepticism about its effectiveness, proposing the elimination of athletic scholarships in 2011 (League of Fans Proposes Eliminating Athletic Scholarships to Help Restore Integrity on College Campuses, 2011). After the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA, Professional Basketball Championship, Nader summoned higher education schools to, as he said, “…take a bold step toward restoring academic integrity in intercollegiate sports…” (League of Fans Proposes Eliminating Athletic Scholarships to Help Restore Integrity on College Campuses, 2011).
They do not face problems of debt and tuition to the extent that the normal college student faces. Student-athletes are fairly compensated through publicity and financial benefits, and the NCAA should continue to refrain from paying them. The varying size and interest levels of universities makes it almost impossible to fairly pay all athletes. In order to avoid problems like those exhibited by Northwestern’s football team, who recently tried to unionize, all athletes would need to be paid equally. The excitement brought on by college sports is immense, and problems created due to paying athletes would only hurt the tradition and charisma that college athletics offer. In conclusion, College athletes are students and amateurs, not employees. “Remember student comes first in student-athlete”
Some feel that by not paying college athletes that college institutions are thereby exploiting their athletes free of charge, which is unfair. However, this article feels that college athletes are paid very favorably by the large amount of money they receive for schooling through scholarships. Also, since college athletes don’t pay to play or go to school they are receiving a free college degree whether or not they decide to stay in school for four years or not. With the training that they receive from professional trainers and nutritionists for a professional controlled diet they save possibly thousands within the 4 years they attend school and perform in collegiate athletics.
Imagine a business that brings in $60 million each year ,and the people fueling that industry receive none of the revenue(Wieberg). These same people work 40 hours in their sport every week, these “people” are college athletes. The NCAA, the governing body for major college sports, is the industry doing this to college athletes(Edelman). This is an issue of exploitation and control by large institutions over primarily poor people, the NCAA is guiding them in directions to make money for everybody while doing everything possible to keep the players out of the money. College Athletes deserve profit because they bring in large revenue into their program, the NCAA, and they invest tons of time into their sport.
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....
In “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid,” a response to the previous argument that also appeared in the Baltimore Sun, former Penn State football player Warren Hartenstine argues that “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid.” Like Marx, Hartenstine is writing to a similar audience, but argues why student-athletes shouldn’t be paid above scholarships like professional athletes are.
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.
Today there are over 450,000 college athletes and the National College Athletics Association (NCAA) faces a difficult decision on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Many people believe that they should and many believe they should not. There are several benefits that college’s athletes receive for being a student athlete. Why should they receive even more benefits than their scholarship and numerous perks?
Pennington, Bill. "Expectations Lose to Reality of Sports Scholarships." nytimes.com. New York Times, 10 Mar. 2008. Web. 17 Dec. 2013.
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...
College recruiting is something that was created for the good of college sports, but is often used for such unethical actions that will make anyone with a soul cringe. In 2004, University of Colorado’s athletic department used alcohol, drugs, and sex to lure recruits during official campus visits (Gerdy). These actions are immoral on a number of levels, and should not be tolerated. If this type of behavior continues to be seen in college sports, then serious changes need to be made. Illegal recruiting that takes place in NCAA athletics is unethical, gives colleges unfair advantages, and jeopardizes player’s eligibility.
The 2012 Heisman Trophy winner, Johnny Manziel, began the 2013 season sitting on the sidelines. Due to a half game suspension handed down by Texas A&M University, Manziel was only allowed to watch as A&M took the field versus the visiting Rice Owls. To “Aggies” fans, this half game suspension came as a huge relief. It had been feared that Manziel may receive a multiple game or year-long ban from the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) for violating NCAA Bylaw 12.5.2.1. The bylaw prohibits athletes from allowing their name or picture to be used in a commercial matter (Berkes, 2013). Luckily for him, a half-game suspension would be his only punishment. Manziel was put into this predicament after reports surfaced that he had accepted money in return for autographs. No proof of this was ever found, but it was proved that someone, probably a memorabilia collector, profited from his signature (Berkes, 2013). So wait, a man can’t receive money for signing his own autograph? The answer is “no”, if he is a student athlete following the strict rules of the NCAA. The only benefits he can accept are those included in a lucrative scholarship given by universities. As more incidents like Johnny Manziel’s have occurred, it has been debated by sports analysts and the news media whether or not these scholarships are a fair payment. Another Heisman Trophy winner, Cam Newton, was accused of trying to sell his services to Mississippi State University after his decision to transfer from a community college following his junior year. While an NCAA investigation would find that his father had indeed tried to shop Cam to prospective schools, Newton was cleared to play (Wojciechowski, 2010). The 2005 Heisman Trophy winner, Reggie Bush, was ...
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).
"College Athletic Programs Undermine Academics." Student Life. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2011. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 July 2011.
If you or anyone else knows a college athlete, especially one who is on scholarship, you would think that they have it easy. Free tuition and room and board; meanwhile you have to work at a part time job and actually pay for your schooling. But in all reality these people earned what they got, because many of these students did not come from wealthy families. According to USA Today, 85% of college athletes who are on scholarships live below the poverty line. So by receiving a scholarship for athletics it is giving them a chance to improve their own quality of life, and as humans we deserve to at least have some sense of self-worth. Athletes get many accommodations while attending school, aside from them going for free; they c...
For decades there has been a debate on student athletes and their drive to succeed in the classroom. From the very beginning of organized college level athletics, the goal to want to succeed in athletics has forced students to put academics to the back burner. In spite of the goal to want to succeed over a hundred years of attempts to check limits of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards still seems to struggle to this day. This brings to surface one of the most asked questions in sports, “What effect does college sports have on academics and economics?” Herbert D. Simons, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington, authors of “Academic Motivation and the Student Athlete” researched the topic on whether athletics and academics benefit each other. Bryan Flynn, the author of “College Sports vs. Academics” poses the question “Should institutions of higher learning continue to involve themselves in athletic programs that often turn out to be virtual arms races for recruiting talented players who bring big money and prestige, but put academics to the back burner?” Although both authors agree that sports have an impact on an athlete’s academics, the focus of their argument differs.