If colleges athletes can help better the schools that they are attending, why cannot the school give them money to show their appreciation for what they do for the school to try and better their life? Some say that athletes already get paid with their free scholarships, free room and board, and other expenses that university’s offer. Athletes send in so much revenue to their current colleges and they get nothing in return. The sport that they play brings in money to their university by itself. The really superb athletes who play at really good programs bring in more than enough money to their schools.
College athletes play the game that they love. To begin with, student athletes being paid would only create more problems for other athletes, students and universities. It would be challenging to distinguish who gets paid what and how the universities would raise academic funds? The funds that may go towards academics would be slim if the athletes were being paid. There would not be any money left over for the schools to get tutored, hire better teachers, or acquire updated technology.
Several people agree that providing student-athletes with a full scholarship is enough for them to be paid with; however, others argue that universities are making too much of a profit off of them. With many of these ideas being stated many people don’t realize what a student athlete actually is. A student-athlete is defined as an enrolled student who participates in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the college/university in which he or she is enrolled. Student-athletes must balance the roles of being both a student and an athlete at their school. Many student-athletes are subject to eligibility rules to maintain a certain GPA in order to continue participating in their sport.
Only their education is being paid by the school. Although some people believe that they should be paid, it would not be a good idea at all. So college athletes should not be paid at all because they are basically being paid to study and play a sport. Colleges make a plethora of money off of the sports teams and the players do not see any of that money at all but if they do then their performance would be poor on the field and off the field as well. According to Fred Bowen, “only football and men’s basketball are money-making college sports.
However regardless of the argument, I still feel that college athletes should NOT be paid to play. College athletes are not forced into playing the sport that they have devoted their time to during their years in secondary education. They continue to play into the college level for their love of the game. And for this, many college athletes are offered full scholarships. Today’s tuition for many schools are so expensive that without the scholarships that some of the students receive, they would not be able to attend college at all.
Students that attend college should not get paid for playing sports. People go to college to get an education not to get rich. The experience of college itself is priceless. If the college pays players in one sport they will have to pay players in all sports. Scholarships already pay for individuals’ education.
Many colleges also use the revenue to recruit incoming players. “Division I teams often spend large amounts of money recruiting the best players and coaches. Although players are not paid, they are often given athletic scholarships to attend college” (Cline). There really is no need to pay college athletes since they are given scholarships. Some people argue that they need personal expense money.
Are college sports an extracurricular activity or a job? The argument to pay college athletes has increased in the last few years. Some say athletes have a full time job and deserve to be paid since they are over-scheduled with many school-related activities. College athletes should not be paid because it is a privilege to play a sport for a college. Athletes receive a full scholarship for their participation in a college sport.
Paying college athletes is a bad idea because of the cost associated with it. According to equal rights policies and other rules by the NCAA, colleges are required to pay all athletes, regardless of gender, sport played, publicity for the college from the sport, or proficiency in the sport. This means that colleges like the University of Tennessee, which has over 500 student athletes, would have to devote a large portion of their athletics budget to paying student athletes. According to Jim Walker, these massive costs may cause colleges to close less profitable activities like tennis or golf in an effort to save money for the big, money-making sports such as football and basketball (1). Women’s sports would likewise be targeted, as they usually operate at a higher cost than they bring in revenue (Walker 1).
On the other side of the argument, people argue that college athletics generate enough money for the university, that the athletes should receive more than just a scholarship. Collegiate athletes deserve a small stipend for their services toward the university. The typical Division 1 athletic scholarship provides tuition, room and board, and books. For many athletes that’s where the money stops. Many college athletes accept a scholarship, because if they didn’t have one, wouldn’t be able to get into college.