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.
People believe that paying college athletes will ruin the tradition and innocence of the game. However, people forget that Olympians get paid, and most of them are amateur athletes. "Gold medallists from the United States receive a minimum of $15,000 for their success (from the U.S. Olympic Committee and the national governing body of the winner's sport), USA Today, Final Ed." These Olympians can also capitalize on endorsement deals and other additional bonuses, most of which are illegal in college athletics. The innocence of the game is already in jeopardy, in a June 24th, 1996 issue of The NCAA News, " Studies indicate that 75 percent of underclassmen have received cash or gifts from an agent." That’s a pretty high number, three out of every four are involved in illegal activities involving agents, and 90...
The huge amount of money being made off college sports has led some to question whether student-athletes can be considered amateurs any longer, and whether they should, instead, be paid for their efforts, the argument can be made that the opportunity to both receive an education and get the exposure to win a major professional contract more than compensates NCAA athletes for their
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.
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.
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).
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).
College football has been a sport in American society for decades. Yet the players playing the sport are not receiving their fair cut of the prize. It has been debated whether or not college football players should get paid for playing. The supporters say that the players are not being compensated fairly and the non-supporters say that the education the players receive is payment enough. They also say that the universities the players attend are providing them with the basic necessities so they should not get paid. College football players should be paid though because they put their bodies at risk, make a lot of money for their school, and the play to entertain audiences.
Another reason that college athletes should not be paid is because they are, under NCAA rules, to be considered amateurs. In the National Collegiate Athletic Association Rules it states, “College athletes are not to be paid, not to cash in on their prominence, never to cross any kind of line of professionalism.” Steve Wieberg, of the USA Today, studied the rules that the NCAA has placed on paying college athletes. He concludes that, “Athletic programs are meant to be an integral part of the educational program” (Weinberg). The reoccurring theme here should be obvious now —education is the most important part of the student’s time in college and being an athlete should come second.
Those who play popular and highly competitive college sports are treated unfairly. The colleges and universities with successful sports like football and basketball receive millions of dollars in television and ad space revenues, so do the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which is the governing body of big time college sports. Many coaches are also paid over $1 million per year. Meanwhile, the players that help the colleges receive these millions of dollars are forbidden to receive any gifts or money for their athletic achievements and performances. As a solution college athletes ...
There is one topic that has been pondering the mind of every sports analyst for the past few years. The topic at hand has been argued back and forth for quite some time now. College athletes have been debating this topic as well. At the Division I level, there are 176,000 student athletes and 346 colleges/universities (NCAA). College athletes should not be paid because only certain sports can create enough money for the payment of athletes. This is proven when researching which sports can generate the most money, another form of payment, how it would change the world of college sports, and how much the schools are spending.
College athletes should be paid! College athletes are often considered to be some of the luckiest students in the world. Most of them receiving all inclusive scholarships that cover all the costs of their education. They are also in a position to make a reputation for themselves in the sporting world preparing them for the next step. The ongoing debate whether student athletes should be paid has been going on for years. These athletes bring in millions of dollars for their respective schools and receive zero in return. Many will argue that they do receive payment, but in reality it is just not true. Costs associated with getting a college education will be discussed, information pertaining to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), and benefits student athletes receive. First, I’ll start with costs associated with college and most of all why student athletes should be paid!
The National Collegiate Athletic Association(NCAA) has a long standing, successful history defined by amateur student-athletes, who play simply for the love of the game. However, after profiting of young men and women for years without compensating a single athlete, it has come time for a change. The NCAA's greed and refusal to change their definition of an “amateur athlete” has lead to the denial of star student athletes from building their brand and raising their financial ceiling.
There will always be debates on whether college athletes should be paid or not, but the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) came up with a fair and right way to award athletes for what they deserve. The beginning of the case study mentions that “The possibility of a future collegiate athletic scholarship was a motivating force to excel for many families and youth athletic competing in Pee Wee, Little League, middle school, and high school sports.” I agree with this statement considering that many athletes have a dream of playing for college one day, as a child. However, throughout the years there were many issues dealing with illegal ways of college athletes being paid.
College athletes have been playing without pay for a very long time. As we watch these athletes play for our amusement, we look at them as just athletes. But they are more than just a group of talented kids who love to play a particularly popular sport. They are students, and student-athletes do not get paid like professional players do. They are paid in practically free schooling to the college they play for. Some think that this type of pay is very fair and is an adequate way to pay these talented students. As others believe that this type of pay is not enough and that the student-athletes should be compensated for all the billions and billions of dollars that they make the NCAA each year. Whatever someone may think, these student-athletes