Many college athletes receive scholarships for their efforts on the field, court, or track. NCAA rules allow that universities can cover the full cost of tuition, as well as the cost of living, and provide up to a five thousand dollar stipend to each athlete, each year (“Federal Appeals Court”). Having college tuition paid for is a huge burden lifted from a young person’s shoulders. Furthermore, colleges cover the cost of living, which also helps athletes not have to worry about money to live on. Some programs also provide a stipend to its athletes, where the athletes are given a sum of money, either in lump or segmented, that they can use on almost anything that they want. Athletes also have post schooling benefits as well. Athletes can return to college to earn a degree even after their …show more content…
A normal student cost an average of two to three thousand dollars, while an athlete costs around eight thousand dollars (Shulman and Bowen). Athletes cost much more money for a university. They use more facilities than a normal student. On top of their scholarship, they also have to buy books and pay rent. Athletes also come in contact with their professors, coaches, the training staff, and tutors. Correspondingly, colleges spend millions on academic services for athletes (Wolverton et al.). With colleges investing so much in academics, they cannot afford to pay student athletes. Similarly, questions would arise to how much athletes should be paid, and if all athletes are equal. It is expected that athletes from different sports as well as sexes would not be paid the same amount (Meshefejian) because some sports generate more revenue than others. However, this would cause an uproar between both the sports and sexes. The only solution would to be to pay every athlete the same amount of money, which would prove to be very costly. On the other hand, college sports could remain as athletes who play without
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.
Considering the amount of money made annually by the athletic department, one would think that the college can give the college athletes more than just a few thousand dollars in scholarship money. Students should not be left with a medical bill due to services rendered on the field of a college team, nor should they be left penniless after giving their all to a college sport. Works Cited ESPN.com. The. " College Athletics Revenue and Expenses."
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.
Imagine this you are the star player on your college football team and you get your fifth concussion causing you to be out of sports the rest of your life due to health reason and when you are 40 you get alzheimer's causing you to have life brain problems and having to spend lots of money in rehab and you never feel the same ever again and are in major det and only your are in and out of jobs because of your brain so your wife has to support you with the money to help cure it while you get lost easily when driving and can't remember stuff from the day before like why am I one this plane while heading to get therapy for your brain. This is why college athletes should be paid they should 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 fair. But other say they shouldn't because it ruins their sentimental values and family history.
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.
This points out that if student athletes were given a salary, the only athletes that would receive it are those in basketball and football. The less popular sports athletes would either switch to these two sports, or continue playing the sport they love while their colleagues thrive in the sport they love while getting an incentive. Universities and colleges pride themselves as environments where students seek further education in a particular field of study.
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?
substantial amount of money each year"(Johnson and Acquaviva np). Some athletes do not appreciate the gift of a scholarship given to them and wish for a salary instead. William Casement of Naples, a former philosophy professor, states, "Athletes are fortunate that they received their degrees or made substantial process toward it while competing athletically"(Casement and Haug np). Craig Greenlee, a free-lance sports journalist, claims, "The scholarship does not include spending money allowance to help cover incidental expenses such as laundry or bath items"(Greenlee 62). Why should student athletes receive spending money when students with academic scholarships do not even expect to get spending money. Athletes complain about not getting a salary for the sport they participate in, but they do not realize that education acts as another form of payment.
The college athletes of their respective sports today, have the opportunity of showcasing their talents in competition on local and national programming on a regular basis which has lately brought attention this controversy, paying college athletes. The issue was brought on by the athletes over time, then caught onto coaches, sports columnists, and fans. The athletes dedicate themselves to the sport to a caliber comparable to the professional tier. The idea of paying the athletes could be considered as they play major factor in reputation of their schools, as well as funds for their schools. However most colleges do not have profitable sports teams. Thus, paying athletes would prove to be a very difficult endeavor and this could destroy college athletics as we know them today.
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!
College athletes shouldn’t be paid because there is no fair way to pay all players of the NCAA. Patterson reveals the issues of paying college athletes equally, expressed when she stated "College football, as well as men’s and women’s basketball, are the money makers as far as collegiate athletics is concerned. Most other programs are actually cash strapped." Allowing college athletes to be paid would just create a very large burden of figuring out who would get paid, how much would they get paid, and who would pay them. Patterson also reveals the issues of the difficulty when she states "Is that really fair to the other student-athletes?" This exemplifies the complexity of paying college students and the burden that accompanies
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.
In recent years, the argument about whether or not to pay athletes playing at the college level has become a matter of national debate. Currently, the ruling is that college athletes cannot be paid. This is a stance that should be maintained. Paying athletes to compete at the collegiate level is unfeasible because it would cost colleges too much, influence student’s educational decisions and create an unfair financial atmosphere between athletes and non-athletes.
...ecks and be treated as a farm system for the NFL, NBA, or MLB. If these athletes started getting paid now, at the college level, then the major leagues of these sports would suffer tremendously and lose marketability and money. A final solution to not having players get paid or receive certain benefits is maybe these head coaches of certain universities should not be getting the average 2 million dollars a year to be a coach, in some cases more than the presidents of these universities.(Chicago Tribune) There could be major strides made by simply merging that athletes shouldn’t get paid in whole dollars, but should receive paid benefits in which they would not have to worry about starving, losing scholarships due to injury or sub-par play. That I think would make the world for college athletes a better place, where both the schools benefit and the players benefit.