More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of being a student-athletes
Essay about student-athletes: experiences, benefits, coping mechanisms, and programs
The importance of being a student-athletes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Student athletes must balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete. The term student-athlete was invented by the first-ever executive director of the NCAA, to counter attempts to require universities to pay workers' compensation. The billions of dollars being made off of college athletic programs has led many to question whether student athletes can be considered amateurs any longer, and whether they should be compensated for their efforts. Through all the recent filed law suits and debates, the NCAA still remains a stick in the mud on the topic. For years, the NCAA and universities have set the price of athletic talent at the value of a scholarship and not a cent more. Defenders of the NCAA may argue that athletes …show more content…
The average college student is expected to complete between 12-20 credit hours per week in class and about 2-3 hours per credit hour studying and doing homework. It’s suggested that we get around 8 hours of sleep a night and eat about 2-3 meals a day. The average full time employee works 36-40 hours a week. Being a student athlete is more than a full time job. The athletes should be treated as if they are working a full time job but the rules, terms, and regulations of the NCAA inhibits them all of the rights they should have as an “employee”. In union with this, because they are working full time jobs, “student athletes are frequently hindered by athletic training and travel; and student athletes often find it difficult to balance athletics, academics, and social roles…Additional to the psychological and physical fatigue from sports participation, student athletes have decreased levels of motivation to study and diminished abilities to benefit from institution…”( Beamon 2008:354-355) Unfortunately for student athletes, the collegiate athlete labor market does not fall under and government antitrust laws or compensation for state worker laws. To add, these rules, terms, and regulations are set in stone for the benefit of the organization and not for the better of the student. Semantics are key in examining and making points against the NCAA
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) formed in 1906. When the NCAA was incepted they created strict bylaws requiring student-athletes maintain amateur status (NCAA Amateurism). The NCAA has remained diligent in enforcing and maintaining those laws. Under NCAA law it is illegal for student athletes to enter into contracts with professional teams, receive a salary for participating in athletics, and receive benefits from an agent or prospective agents (NCAA Amateurism). Presently, the NCAA has justified these regulations to “ensure the students’ priority remains on obtaining a quality educational experience and that all of student-athletes are competing equitably” (NCAA Amateurism). These rules however, have been in place since 1...
The article, “The shame of the NCAA” by Dave Zirin and the essay written by Tim Ajmani, “Compensation for college students?”, have many similarities. Dave Zirin states, “The coaches own the athletes’ feet, the colleges own the athletes’ bodies, and the supervisors retain the large reward (Zirin 205)”, and in the piece written by Tim Ajmani, “they reap the benefits of the athletes competing in their sports(Ajmani 209)”. They both get at the same point but in different ways, student athletes are being owned by these colleges and the NCAA is getting paid for the hard work and skills that are shown on the court. Both writers suggested that students should get paid so they could finish school and not be a one and done.
These professors argue that student athletes, under common law and NLRB’s (National Labor Relations Board) employee criterion, do in fact fall under the classification of an employee (Cooper). Under common law, four tests determine if someone is an employee or not. Three of these rules are as follows: “(1) the right of others to control a person's activities; (2) whether that person is compensated; and (3) if that person is economically dependent on that compensation.” According to these guidelines the employer-employee relationship is plainly synonymous to that of coaches and student-athletes. For one, coaches have a significant amount of control over their student-athletes’ activities, two, athletic scholarship money is considered compensation, and third, student-athletes are highly dependent on these scholarships for their food, living, and education. Even after realizing that a student-athlete falls under what the law defines as an employee, we can agree that any D1 student-athlete who works upwards of 40 hours a week to perform at a high level of competition for the universities benefit is essentially working a full time job on top of school work
College athletes attend post-secondary schools in order to receive an education and to participate in sports. “Student athletes participate in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which he or she is enrolled. Student athletes must typically balance the roles of being a full-time student and a full-time athlete” (“Student athlete” 1). Additionally, some people believe athletes should receive a salary. However, paying college athletes hurts the school, the sports, and the athletes.
Throughout the country young men and women are losing their priority for an education. To attend a university should be a highly cherished privilege, and it should be an even greater honor to play athletics for the university. Therefore, the writer supports the decision that the “student” comes before “athlete” in student-athlete. Playing for pay should be considered a job for “professionals”. In the rulebook, the NCAA views college athletes as armatures. This statement sums it up best. When athletes go to college, not all of them go in with the mindset that athletics is going to be their future job....
Ever since college students started playing sports, back in 1879 when Harvard played Yale in the first collegiate sports game, the question of whether college athletes should be paid was addressed. From that point on athletes, coaches, and college administrators have brought forward points agreeing or disagreeing with the notion of paying college students. The students argue that they deserve to be paid due to the revenue that they bring for the college and because of the games they play and the championships they win. At first the idea of paying college athletes was out of the question, but now the argument has gone from a simple yes or no to a heated debate. Since college athletes are given a free education, they should not also be paid.
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?
Playing a sport in college is equivalent to working a full-time job (Thomas). There are rules that allow major-college football coaches to only demand twenty hours of the players time each week (Wieberg). However, studies show that those athletes are doubling those hours per week during the season (Wieberg). Other sports are putting in the equivalent of a full time work week (Wieberg). Some NCAA officials are concerned with the amount of time spent stating that beyond forty hours is inhumane (Wieberg). Most of the athletes compete and do whatever it takes to succeed, so they enjoy spending countless hours on sports (Wieberg). Many athletes even have struggles in the classroom because they do not have enough time to study. Student-athletes at top Division I schools think of themselves as athletes more than students (Wieberg). Less than one percent of college athletes actually make it professionally (Wieberg). That means these kids should focus more on their education than on athletics. In reality, these official...
Student athletes should not be paid more than any other student at State University, because it implies that the focus of this university is that an extracurricular activity as a means of profit. Intercollegiate athletics is becoming the central focus of colleges and universities, the strife and the substantial sum of money are the most important factors of most university administration’s interest. Student athletes should be just as their title states, students. The normal college student is struggling to make ends meet just for attending college, so why should student athletes be exempt from that? College athletes should indeed have their scholarships cover what their talents not only athletically but also academically depict. Unfortunately, the disapproval resides when students who are making leaps academically are not being offered monetary congratulations in comparison to student athletes. If the hefty amount of revenue that colleges as a conglomerate are making is the main argument for why athletes should be paid, then what is to stop the National Clearinghouse from devising unjust standards? Eventually if these payments are to continue, coaches, organizations, and the NCAA Clearinghouse will begin to feel that “c...
There has always been a lot of debate on whether or not college athletes should get paid. With as much money as college sports makes from these student athletes, should these student athletes be getting paid? There are many different stances on why I feel like these student athletes should be getting paid. I will talk about some of the reasons on why they should get paid. Being a student athlete is a very stressful thing in life at that age as they are attending school full time and working extremely hard at being the best athlete they can on the field.
Isn't it amazing how one little controversial question can cause so much drama? Take the NCAA for instance. Within recent years the question of weather NCAA athletes should be paid or not has arisen and caused them some unwanted attention. Many coaches and sports enthusiast have been interviewed on their opinion. “Students are not professional athletes who are paid salaries and incentives for a career in sports. They are students receiving access to a college education through their participation in sports, for which they earn scholarships to pay tuition, fees, room and board, and other allowable expenses,” (Mitchell). “There has been major discussion recently if college athletes should or shouldn't be paid while they are in school. The first thing opponents say is, "They're already getting a scholarship! That is more than anybody else! Don't be greedy!”(Hartnett). These are just two men’s opinions, but no one needs to give his or her opinion any longer. The answer to this question is unmistakably clear. NCAA athletes do not need to be paid because they get to go to college for free, their living expenses are paid for, and there would not be a fair way to choose which teams are paid and which are not.
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).
I believe that college sports should be considered a profession. Athletes deserve to be paid for their work. College athletics are a critical part of America’s culture and economy. At the present time, student-athletes are considered amateurs. College is a stepping-stone to the professional leagues. The NCAA is exploiting the student- athlete. Big-time schools are running a national entertainment business that controls the compensation rate of the players like a monopoly (Byers 1).
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.