The NCAA's mission statement is as follows: "Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount."
It is clear that the NCAA has lost sight of their mission statement. In the last few years, the NCAA has gone from questionable to despicable. The best interest of the student-athlete is not a priority.
With that said, going to a pay-for-play system will mean certain death for college sports as we know it. Remember, this is not a matter of simply paying football players. Because of title IX regulations, schools would be required to match the funds that they give to male sports to female sports as well.
Ultimately, both male and female sports will have to be cut because schools simply can’t afford to pay players. Budgets across the collegiate landscape are already struggling to fund sports.
Look no further than Temple University, which recently announced they were cutting five men’s teams and two women’s teams for the 2014-2015 season. Last month the Board of Trustees decided to keep men's crew and women's rowing. However, baseball, softball, men's gymnastics, and men's indoor and outdoor track and field will still be cut after the completion of this school year.
Temple is not alone. This is a growing trend in college athletics and “pay-for-play” would mean only the very elite could sustain the financial blow without major consequences.
Don’t be fooled into thinking that it is just the lower tier schools that struggle to fund their programs. University of Miami president, Donna Shalala, Recently stated, "Our athletic program at the University of Miami is...
... middle of paper ...
...012 season. Boise State wide receiver Geraldo Boldewijn was forced to miss four games that season because he borrowed a 1990 Toyota Camry with 177,000 miles. He was required to pay a charity $700 for his violation.
Boise State, on the other hand, brought in 14.5 million dollars to their school last year and paid their coach 1.6 million dollars. The NCAA continues to suspend players for irrelevant issues.
In the end, none of this will likely take place. Instead, the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big 10, Big 12, Pacific-12 and Southeastern Conference will be granted autonomy from the NCAA current rules or they will break away from the NCAA and form their own league. Allowing them to institute whatever system of compensation they desire.
In the end, one-way or another, college football as we know it will be obsolete and a new system will be in place in the near future.
Schools have to follow Title IX guidelines and make sure that the money spent for athletics is split 50/50 for men and women's sports. Even if there are not as many women competing as there are men. This results in significant budget cuts on the men's athletics. “They correctly note that despite the good intentions of Title IX, the legislation is often used not to augment athletic opportunities for women, but rather to eliminate athletic opportunities for male athletes.” (“Bad”). This was from a former University of Illinois swimmer, whose team got eliminated from the school due to Title IX budgetary reasons. (“Bad”). The school ran out of money for the men's swim team, so it got completely cut from the program and ruined his scholarship. Paul Mainieri, the LSU men's baseball coach said, “I don't know that I've ever had a player receive a scholarship in the amount which was commensurate to his value." (Keating). It is brutal that college sports have to be treated in such a way. Especially for such a big sport like baseball. Schools have to take the scholarship money that was handed to them, and just give it to some women for a sport that is not popular in the NCAA. For instance, a men's baseball team in the NCAA can only have their scholarship money split between 27 players, while on the other hand, women's ice hockey can be split between 30 players.
Over the past 20 years, there has been a major increase in the popularity of college athletes. From 1989 to 2004, there was a 27% increase in ticket revenue (Brown). Despite the rigorous schedules the athletes had, they are still considered just a student. The NCAA cannot continue to allow these schools to work the athletes as much as they do without giving the athletes what they deserve. This is a horrible oppressive system that must be fixed.
College sports are so entertaining because any team can win any game due to the spread of great athletes all over the country. If colleges started to pay the athletes, whatever team had the most money would have the best athletes, meaning there would only be a couple of good teams in each sport and they would dominate. Professional sports teams are a collection of the best and most skilled athletes in that sport that can play for 15 or more years. In college, athletes only have four years of eligibility before they are ineligible and can not participate in college athletics anymore and many of the great athletes leave after one or two years of playing college sports. If money was used to pay the athletes, the corruption of college sports would increase. Money is never a good idea to be involved in sports, because it always causes bribery or exploitation. For example, the recent events with the FIFA organization and how some of the top authority figures have just been banned for many years for taking bribes, illegal ticket sales, and other scandals (Davis). This relates because it goes to show any CEO or president of a company can be bought and if money started to get more involved in the world of college sports it is hard not to think that some authority figure for some team would be bribed. Even the students might be involved in the bribery. If college athletes were to get paid there would be a limit to how much they would get paid. Fans and sponsors of the college teams would then offer additional benefits to get the athletes “persuaded” to come to their school. Then student athletes will not have to attend class or even participate in the student part of student athlete. The college athletes would start to be glorified and treated like kings even though they are coming into their college as just
Many sports people say that if the NCAA pays the athletes to play, it will encourage them to stay in school longer. The money that the athletes will receive at the next level will be bigger than any amount the NCAA can afford to pay them. Athletes argue that the NCAA and ESPN are making billions of dollars off of them to air their games; why can’t they get compensation for it. This argument is valid, but no matter what amount, free education is far more valuable than any financial amount. You’re talking about giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to
...whole different world from professional sports considering they supply men with a family to help grow character with, supply them with a free education, and create a whole community of people that are loyal and generally remain loyal to one school. This bridge between the two sports could be majorly affected if college athletes were to be paid and would then bring up the issue about paying even high school athletes eventually. It is merely opening a can of worms and has been a tradition for so long that it should remain one for years to come. College athletes might not be receiving a full salary but that is not the point of it and they know what they are getting into when they commit to playing a sport. This long-standing barrier between professional and college athletics should remain how it is for the good of everyone but mostly the athletes and college programs.
... was to report to the NCAA every six months if any school that is a member of the organization hired him until the year 2015. This was to report his continued total compliance with the NCAA regulations.
College athletes are manipulated every day. Student athletes are working day in and day out to meet academic standards and to keep their level of play competitive. These athletes need to be rewarded and credited for their achievements. Not only are these athletes not being rewarded but they are also living with no money. Because the athletes are living off of no money they are very vulnerable to taking money from boosters and others that are willing to help them out. The problem with this is that the athletes are not only getting themselves in trouble but their athletic departments as well.
The debate on whether college athletes should be paid to play is a sensitive controversy, with strong support on both sides. College athletics have been around for a long time and always been worth a good amount of money. This billion dollar industry continues to grow in popularity and net worth, while they continue to see more and more money come in. The student-athletes who they are making the money off of see absolutely none of this income. It is time that the student-athletes start to see some of this income he or she may by helping bring the National Collegiate Athletic Association. There are many people who do not think this is in the best interest of the student-athletes or Universities, but that being said there are also many people who are in favor of the change.
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.
"NCAA Requires Loss of Contests for Six Ohio State Football Student-Athletes." Targeted News Service Dec 23 2010. ProQuest. Web. 25 Nov. 2013 .
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.
The first reason is that the college is responsible for athletes. On the NCAA website it states "It's our commitment and our responsibility to give young people opportunities to learn, play and succeed." NCAA admitted that it is their responsibility to give
The NCAA is a global, and well-known company that regulates collegiate sports with thousands of universities across the country. The NCAA organizational assessment shows its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats relative to all competitors. In this current market environment, I assessed and prioritize what strengths and weaknesses were most important and which strengths have to continue to grow and what weaknesses needed to be mitigated. It is tough for the NCAA to have great competition due to the fact that it is far beyond any competitions and doesn’t seem to show any sign of slowing down soon. Issues, whether political or ethical, or whatever the case may be, as long as the NCAA continues to analyze its “SWOT” then they will always be the leader in the current market
...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.