Over the past century college athletics have grown more popular than most professional sports. Most of its popularity is due to a large student body in addition to its Alumni, but nonetheless it has surpassed professional sports from its monetary success to its fan support. College athletics are also a very important commodity to Universities around the nation. Next to student's tuition, that's where the majority of the money comes from. No one is more responsible for bringing in that money more than the coach and his/her players. In this notion, one would think that such important people should be paid for a job well done. But this isn't the case. Over the years a question has emerged, should college athletes be paid? After all, college athletics is a job. Some coaches make more than professional coaches. Why shouldn't the players have a chance to do the same? In the article entitled, "Show them the Money", Mark Martinez argues why college athletes should be paid.
A question that has been rising to the surface lately is “should college athletes be paid a salary?” One cannot get on the internet now a day and not see some kind of college sport headline. The world of college sports has been changed greatly the past decade due to college athletes. These athletes make insurmountable amounts of money and an unbelievable amount of recognition for the universities. The athletes that provide and make a ton of revenue for the colleges also spend a huge amount of their time practicing and staying committed to sports, and have to maintain good grades in school which requires quite a bit of overtime. Because college athletes generate massive amounts of revenue and put in massive amounts of personal time for their individual universities, colleges need to financially compensate players for their contributions. The colleges that these superstars represent are reaping all of the benefits of the accomplishments the athletes have, yet the big named players are making nothing from what they do.
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.
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.
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.
College athletes drive college popularity and nationalism. Every year hundreds of scholarships are given out to male and female athletes of all sports. These scholarships pay for tuition, room and board, and meal plans. College athletes have most, if not all of their college paid for. Never have college athletes been given a paycheck for their participation in a colligate sport. Over the last few years, some people feel the need for college athletes to be paid with the money they make from advertisements and revenue, brought in from holding an athletic event. Others say that college athletes should not be paid due to the fact that they are rewarded a scholarship paying for their college education. College athletes should not be paid because they are rewarded free tuition, and student athletes learn the values of amateurism.
In today’s world, college athletes may not play a sport for “the love of the game” instead; they may play with the hopes of making it as a professional athlete. While “the love of the game” feeling may have gotten an athlete to a Division I school to play and the chance to display their talent; at the Division I level, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) see sports strictly as a business. Over the past few months, college athletes have started to come forward claiming that they feel they should be rewarded for being one of the main sources of profit for their university. Many people believe that college athletes should not be paid due to the fact they are receiving a free education; however, college athletes may have expenses that their scholarships or grants may not cover, and being paid for what they are good at may help them cover the differences.
College athletes generate millions of dollars for their schools each year, yet they are not allowed to be compensated beyond a scholarship due to being considered amateurs. College athletes are some of the hardest working people in the nation, having to focus on both school courses and sports. Because athletics take so much time, these student-athletes are always busy. College football and basketball are multi-billion dollar businesses. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes beyond scholarships, and it would be tough to work a new compensation program into the NCAA and university budgets. College athletes should be compensated in some form because they put in so much time and effort, generating huge amounts of revenue.
I was not really aware of the amount of people who actually concerned themselves with whether or not college athletes should be paid until I started doing research. There is no coincidence between the absurd amount of money that college sports have begun making and the more recent argument that college students should be getting paid. Going into this, I anticipated that there would be an endless amount of articles against athletes being paid for playing sports in college, but I was surprised that when looking through different databases, I found that more people think that they should. As a college student, and a non-athlete, and also as someone who has to pay full tuition, I just don’t really see why they should be able to receive anymore money than the schools are already providing them through room and board, meal plans, gyms, travel expenses and other things that the rest of us do actually pay for. I think it would be good if athletes and other proponents of them getting paid would see that this is already a great, “opportunity to both receive an education and get the exposure to win a major professional contract more than compensates NCAA athletes for their efforts” (Riely, 2008).
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.
Last September, the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) cut a deal with CBS for a fourteen year, eleven billion dollar contract to broadcast the infamous March Madness basketball tournament. The NCAA also agreed to include sixty-eight teams instead of the previous sixty-five. Currently, there’s talk again between the NCAA and CBS of expanding the tournament to ninety-six teams- all because of money. Of the eleven billion dollars the NCAA will rake in over the coming years, the players actually playing in the games will not get a single cent profit. According to Martin Manley, a prestigious statistical sports analyst, if each player from the 346 Division I schools split the eleven billion evenly, they would receive $2 million each. Similarly, The University of Texas just made a deal with ESPN, a popular sports show, for 300 million dollars to create their own TV station. This station will showcase Texas and carry most of their football and basketball games (Hiestand). This argument is not about handing collegiate players $2 million dollars, it’s about giving them a small cut of the billions of dollars they generate. Athletes that play on revenue-producing teams should get some type of monetary reward for the millions of dollars they bring in to their school and the NCAA.
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.
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
The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many people who are in favor of the change.