rahim Martinez Throughout the last century, college athletics have turned into a high revenue generating. industry. There have been several issues that have faced the college athletics, one of those being whether or not college athletes should get paid. The issue has been but in the spotlight has been due to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This association was put together in 1905 to set rules and regulations for college athletes, some of these regulations were made to protect players and not restrain players. This was the idea behind the rules for not paying athletes. This was not an issue until college sports became a large revenue generating industry and college students started to want a piece of it. …show more content…
The argument for not paying athletes is simple and easy to understand. If athletes are getting paid it is unfair for the students that are not athletes. They put up with different struggles that could be potentially harder for them as opposed to the student athletes. Another argument, which is the argument of the NCAA, is athletes in college still fall under the umbrella of “amateurism”. This is because they are in a “self bettering” league that students are participating in voluntary, therefore they should not be …show more content…
when it comes to football and basketball season especially, division one colleges and universities make a ridiculous amount of money. Again take into consideration that the coaches get paid. I think that money made from sponsors by an individual students should be given to the students but not right away which leads to my next point. If an athlete is in the lower divisions I think it is okay if they do not get paid, because the odds an athlete in the lower divisions making it to the professional leagues are significantly less therefore there should not really be any compensation for it. But the division one students should at least have enough money to eat, sleep, and live healthy. For the amount of money that these athletes bring in, they need to be compensated. Athletes should get paid according to the area they live in, due to the variance in prices. Five hundred dollars in Dallas, Texas will not hold the same value in Los Angeles, California, therefore the compensation rate should be variant of the area that the athlete is in and should be enough for the athletes to live peacefully and give them the ability to focus just on their talents. I consider it to be a win-win for the school and the athletes, because the athletes will perform better and the school will reap the benefits through these bettering
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Many people believe that the money generated from the sports played by these kids should be given back to them as they are the ones drawing the fans to these events. However few realize how little schools actually gain money by participating in the National Colligate Athletics Association. A recent study conducted by USA today showed that there are only 40 schools that consistently turn profits from the sports that they host. (Whiteside, USAtoday.com) This means that out of approximately 200 schools who participate in division one sports, only 1/5 actually would have money available to give back to the student athletes. Furthermore, it would be unfair to provide the students who play the sports, the money that is generated from their events, rather then putting the money back into the schools. Although these students participate and spend much of their time playing, they are no more special then the average student who attends the school. Putting the money back into the school itself allows everyone a better education, rather then just a few students, some spending money.
This argument has been trying to settle people’s minds with coming to a conclusion of whether or not the athletes should be paid. Many people love college athletics because it is just that: college athletics. The bidding on March Madness made more money than bids that were placed on the Super Bowl this past year. People love to watch young stars develop into the greater athletes that they are capable of being. The amateurism of college sports is why so many people are drawn to it. If the athletes were to be paid, it would forever change the organization and how it’s run. College athletes are amateurs, not professionals; therefore they should not be paid.
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.
Today more and more people are agreeing that college athletes should be paid for their work. In reality, it is in the best interest of everybody if they were not directly paid for playing. If they were to get paid, where would you draw the line? If you pay one specific group of athletes, all of the sports and all the different divisions in college athletics would want paid. This is just not financially possible. People think that it would be only the lower divisions that would not be able to pay because of the amount of revenue that the bigger schools bring in. Texas, in 2012, had revenue of $163,295,115 with $138,269,710 in expenses. (Berkowitz et al. 2012) Texas has a large number in net income that would allow them to pay their athletes. There are many schools that have a negative income. These schools include Iowa, Oklahoma State, West Virginia, Kansas, Arizona State, and Missouri. (Berkowitz et al. 2012) There are many more schools that are barley positive if not right at even. Also the majorit...
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.
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.
College athletes should be paid so that way the athlete can have some money to get around, and buy things. I know this because the college athlete travels a lot and they need some money to get things that they need. The athlete just needs enough money for important things, they don’t need as much money as a pro athlete. If a college athlete does not get paid then they would not be able to buy things like shampoo, and other important things. That is why college athletes should be paid.
While football and basketball players would receive payment without difficulties primarily because of the popularity of the two events, but the question is what amount would go to each student (Meshefejian 2). Finally, college athletes already get money; majority of colleges give notable services to the athletes, who are held to a greater level than the rest of the students. They also have access to the best gymnasiums, receive free health cover from injuries sustained, free food and perhaps most importantly free
College athletes for years have dedicated their bodies and many hours of their college careers for their university, with small compensation of tuition for the athlete and large amount of money brought in it has been debated if college athletes should be paid for their time. Many think that all athletes get paid by receiving scholarships to pay towards tuition and room and board, however many think that colleges capitalizing on games and marketing students without compensation is also wrong. While this debate is directed towards college universities and more specifically college athletics the change would if any would effect much more than just athletes. Numerous people are not aware of the pros or cons about this situation and many do not
...it off of their likeness. No we should not be paid millions of dollars, or even hundreds of thousands, but I do believe that student-athletes should receive a small amount of money .It is only fair to the student-athletes because they are the ones out there putting in work on the field, weight room, film room, and traveling half the time to represent the university on top of trying to maintain a grade point average. I feel that it does not only deserve, but I also believe that getting a stipend would help student-athletes learn to manage their money. There is a reason so many athletes that make it to the professional level end up broke. It’s not fair to the players that they cannot make a profit off of their god given talents and their likeness. In a certain aspect college athletics is sort of like slavery, the university controls almost every aspect of your life.
Although some college athletes can afford to pay for their needs, I believe they should receive some kind of compensation. They should be compensated because some athletes can’t afford to feed or house themselves, they don’t have time for a part time job, and the NCAA makes billions of dollars off the athletes each year.
These athletes receive free tuition, textbooks, rooms, meal, and training. So they should not be paid extra money on top of that. Athletes may have to train hard, but while they are training, non-athletic students are out working to pay off debts. By paying athletes, it would hurt many smaller universities without much athletic funding, as they would not be able to buy the best players like bigger colleges could. College sports are meant to bring players and fans together to celebrate their school, but sports are becoming too big a part of college life. Colleges were created to help further educate students and all college attendees should be focused on education and not extracurricular activities like
The question about if college athletes should be paid has an unknown answer to many. There are two sides, the athletes should get paid and they shouldn’t. College athletes should and deserve to get paid because they bring money to the university when or if they win, with all their hard work and dedication, they already can be paid with scholarships, the NCAA pays for clothing expenses, medical and emergency travel, so why can’t they give some of that money to the athletes.
Whether or not college athletes should be paid has been a major argument for a long time. My opinion on this particular subject is that, I believe college athletes should get paid while they are in school. One reason I believe this is, because college athletes bring in a lot of money for businesses like NCAA and CBS/Turner Sports for March Madness, but receive none of the profit. This money is not even, at least, distributed back into their education. These companies are making income off things such as their names and merchandise like jerseys with the player’s names and sometimes even video games(SmartAsset, 2017). It is not right for businesses to be making money off the college athletes that are also student struggling to keep up their grades,
For many years, student athletes in college dedicate all their time and efforts into the sport they play. Athlete’s passion for the game has lead them to a University where they can showcase everything they’ve been working for. Athletes that are involved in a Division 1 level, are basically considered employees for the University, they have a full time job. The student athlete’s job is to bring in the profits to the University they are representing. In the past few years or so, a very touchy question has been lingering in many people’s minds: Should student athletes be paid?