“Out of the 120 FBS (formerly named division 1) schools, only twelve broke even or make a profit last year” (Bakshan, 2011). Over the past years college athletics has gained vast popularity. The outcome of such popularity is increased revenue for the colleges and the NCAA. The increase in revenue has caused many disputes on whether or not college athletes should be compensated. So should the athletes receive compensation? The answer is no. College athletes should not be compensated because they receive enough through scholarships, education would be depleted, and money could not be dispersed evenly throughout sports teams and athletes.
Scholarships play a large role in the commitment of student-athletes to a certain college, as they can
…show more content…
For the large amount of students who are not on scholarships, they are forced to pay for their school experience. Student debt is quickly becoming a national crisis in the United States, as more than seven million Americans face ruined credit scores due to college debts (Kyle McCarthy, 2014). To not be in that number is something that should be considered, especially if you are a college athlete. Along with the thousands of dollars you would not owe as a result of your scholarship, you would not be in debt thousands of …show more content…
This gives most athletes the drive to attend certain schools due to television exposure and even conference. In college athletics, schools are put into conferences based on location and talent. In the NCAA, the “Power 5” conferences are the top grossing conferences in football. These conferences are usually always in the limelight, while the other conferences are not. Smaller colleges are struggling to keep their programs alive, due to the raising prices of keeping their programs relevant. Kansas State President Kirk Schulz (2015) described the struggles in full, stating that the smaller schools are forced to raise tuition due to the amount of money that athletic programs cost to keep up. “Ultimately, the numbers for many Division I schools outside power conferences are tight. Conference USA doesn't boast the same television deal benefits as power conferences. According to projections obtained by Mike Carmin of the Lafayette Journal and Courier, 11 Big Ten schools will receive $30.9 million in revenue in 2014-15.” (Ben Kercheval, 2014). As explained there, the smaller programs are continuing to struggle alone with getting viewership for their games. If the smaller programs are struggling to afford to play and to be watched, how would they be able to pay athletes? The numbers just can’t add up for them to do
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 ...
Tyson Hartnett of The Huffington Post once said “Even with any type of scholarship, college athletes are typically dead broke.” This quote regards a tremendous controversy that has been talked about for the past few years. He talks about whether or not college athletes should be paid for their duties. Despite the fact college athletes are not professionals, they should most certainly be paid for playing for their respective schools due to many factors. These factors include health risks and the income bring in for their colleges as well as to the National Collegiate Athletic Association.
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.
Paul Dietzel, former head coach of LSU, once said, “You can learn more character on the two-yard line than anywhere else in life.” Ever since the beginning, not only children but also college athletes have been playing sports for the love of the game and have used it as a way to grow character, teamwork, and leadership. Although when playing for a University an athletes job is to bring in profit for the school, this is not why these young men and women have continued with these sports they love. It is usually these students passion, a way for them to express themselves like others have art and music. The question has been up whether these college athletes should be paid for their loyalty and income for the University but by paying these students more than their given scholarship, it would defeat the purpose and environment of a college sport versus a professional sport, cause recruiting disputes, and affect the colleges benefits from these school athletics.
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.
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?
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...
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 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.
“A scholarship doesn't equal cash in a player's pocket. Even with any type of scholarship, college athletes are typically dead broke” (Hartnett). Being an athlete in college is as demanding as a full time job. They also have to put the time in to be a full time student as well. That is a lot of time they have to commit for their university. Additionally if the student does not come from a wealthy family or a family willing to give them money, he or she may also have to add on a part time job on to that if they ever want to do something fun on a day off or get some food from somewhere other than the dining halls. Even when a student athlete has a job, it is almost impossible for them to keep it during the season because of their demanding schedule, ...
Abstract: Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.
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. For these students, college sports offer a great avenue to obtain an education that otherwise would not have been available for them. This allows them opportunity to study something that they can use to build a better life for themselves and their families.
The world of sports has grown larger than life over the past century, especially in college. Being a collegiate athlete is, without question, the hardest athletic profession in the world. Not only are students devoted to their sport, which requires an obscene amount of time of preparation, but they are also devoted to their school work. And the award they receive for their hard work? Of course there are the great memories, friendships made, “free education”, or national championships, but are theses students receiving their fair share? Should college athletes be paid? It is a question that has been asked, but never truly answered. College athletes should be paid for their work. I even have the perfect system to see that college athletes get their fair share- Pay up! It’s that simple.