More handpicked essays just for you.
Should collegiate athletes be paid
Essays on whether college athletes should be paid
Essay on college athletes pay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Should collegiate athletes be paid
One of the biggest ongoing arguments in the United States today regarding college athletes is whether or not they should be paid for playing. Like every argument in the world, analysts are can fight on either side. Even though there are cons of this topic of discussion, there are just as many pro’s if not more in favor of paying the college athletes. After observing this ongoing dispute, I believe student athletes should be paid for their time and effort. The first point I would like to target is how much time a student athlete puts into the sport that the athlete participates in. According to a study, a male Division I college player puts in 43.3 hours per week in playing for his school. That’s more than an average American workweek, which is 40-hours per week. People who say these student athletes get enough by gaining …show more content…
These universities generate over billions in profits from their athletes yet these athletes don’t see a cent of it. In 2014, the total revenues of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament generated over one billion dollars in advertisements broadcasting the student athlete’s games. In hindsight, according to ESPN this is more than the NBA and NFL playoffs. A prime example of how much a university makes of their student athletes is the University of Alabama. The football team of Alabama last year made $33 million dollars profit. That’s over 10% of what the university receives in tuition from its 36,100 students who attend the school for education. With all this revenue coming from just one sport team at Alabama University, the least the university could do is compensate the football athletes who bring in these revenues by advertisements and even by bringing in students who attend the school solely because they are fans of the Roll Tide football
There are thousands of high school football players across the nation, and a handful of them have what it takes to play at the college level. Those that do have the raw talent normally get reached by college football recruiters and coaches. The NCAA, the National College Athletic Association, has many rules and regulations especially surrounding the rules and conduct of recruiting student athletes. Men's football takes the most notice, as well as basketball, of all collegiate sports in the U.S. today (Smith, 2015). According to Langelett (2003), the NCAA limits each school to 85 football scholarships. With a limited number of scholarships available, schools spend a considerable amount of time and money on recruiting players.
The athletes at these institutions bring in tons of money into their school every year and deserve compensation. These Universities are exploiting these athletes by not giving them back what they make for their school. The numbers say it all when it comes to the scamming of the athletes by their own schools. In 2004, over 40 schools brought in more than $10 million, with 10 of them bringing in over $30 million. Several athletes around the nation are worth more than $1 million to their school(Brown). Both of these statistics are proof that while these athletes are essential to their schools, they are still kept out of the revenue. Even though these Universities won’t pay their players, the schools still have no problem giving their coaches some money. In 40 U.S. states the head coach of the basketball or football program is the highest paid public official(Edelman). 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)...
College sports are a major revenue producing industry. Athletic programs and their student-athletes can achieve national recognition and generate millions of dollars in revenue for their university. Colleges use this revenue to invest in players, pay for their education, and provide state of the art training facilities, which are used to improve their athletic performance. As revenue driven colleges begin to prioritize athletics, the emphasis on the quality and standards of an undergraduate education are diminishing. Compromising their academic acceptance requirements, universities have now found that the educational ability of their newly accepted student athletes are inadequate, to say the least (Gurney). The same universities must then spend millions of dollars to provide these athletes with “learning specialists”, who in turn helps them to meet academic requirements and maintain their eligibility (...
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?
One of the strongest arguments against student athletes getting paid is that many people feel they already are getting paid, through their financial aid package. Sports Illustrated author, Seth Davis, states in his article “Hoop Thoughts”, that “student athletes are already being payed by earning a free tuition. Which over the course of four years can exceed $200,000, depending on the school they attend. They are also provided with housing, textbooks, food and academic tutoring. When they travel to road games, they are given per diems for meals. They also get coaching, training, game experience and media exposure in their respective crafts” (Davis, 2011). This is a considerable amount of income. While the majority of regular students are walking out of school with a sizeable amount of debt, most student athletes are debt free. Plus they get to enjoy other benefits that are not made available to the average student. They get to travel with their teams, t...
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. Most others, such as field hockey, wrestling and swimming, do not attract big crowds or make big bucks.” (Should college athletes get paid?). Also the sports team that give out the most money for athletes to come and play for them, are football and men’s basketball. “Critics of paying college athletes note that only a small number of them compete in sports or on teams that actually generate revenue. They argue that if players were paid, a handful of exceptional athletes would receive large salaries while most players would receive a pittance, and would probably no longer be offered valuable athletic scholarships” (Paying College Athletes). It is not a surprise to anyone that the main athletes that do want to be paid is football and basketball players. They want to be paid because they bring in all of the money for the school and the...
Eitzen, D. Stanley. "College Athletes Should Be Paid." Sports and Athletes. Ed. James D. Torr.
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.
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.
Today more and more people are agreeing that college athletes should be paid for their work. In reality, it is in the best interest of everybody if they were not directly paid for playing. If they were to get paid, where would you draw the line? If you pay one specific group of athletes, all of the sports and all the different divisions in college athletics would want paid. This is just not financially possible. People think that it would be only the lower divisions that would not be able to pay because of the amount of revenue that the bigger schools bring in. Texas, in 2012, had revenue of $163,295,115 with $138,269,710 in expenses. (Berkowitz et al. 2012) Texas has a large number in net income that would allow them to pay their athletes. There are many schools that have a negative income. These schools include Iowa, Oklahoma State, West Virginia, Kansas, Arizona State, and Missouri. (Berkowitz et al. 2012) There are many more schools that are barley positive if not right at even. Also the majorit...
Paying college athletes has been an ongoing controversy for many years because of the NCAA’s mission to position their athletes as students first and foremost; but, are student athletes really going to college to get an education or to prepare for turning professional. Some argue that athletes are paid already with the compensation given such as free tuition, housing, athletic clothing, etc. However, others claim that athletes are not paid their fair market value. Zach Dirlam, a senior analyst for the Bleacher Report, and Jeff Dorfman, a contributor to Forbs, examine paying college athletes for two different audiences in their respective articles “There’s No Crying in College: The Case Against Paying College Athletes” and “Pay College Athletes?
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.
Forbes, 30 January 2014. Web. 29 April 2014. Gutting, Gary. “The Myth of the ‘Student-Athlete’.”
For decades there has been a debate on student athletes and their drive to succeed in the classroom. From the very beginning of organized college level athletics, the goal to want to succeed in athletics has forced students to put academics to the back burner. In spite of the goal to want to succeed over a hundred years of attempts to check limits of intercollegiate athletic programs on colleges' academic standards still seems to struggle to this day. This brings to surface one of the most asked questions in sports, “What effect does college sports have on academics and economics?” Herbert D. Simons, Derek Van Rheenen, and Martin V. Covington, authors of “Academic Motivation and the Student Athlete” researched the topic on whether athletics and academics benefit each other. Bryan Flynn, the author of “College Sports vs. Academics” poses the question “Should institutions of higher learning continue to involve themselves in athletic programs that often turn out to be virtual arms races for recruiting talented players who bring big money and prestige, but put academics to the back burner?” Although both authors agree that sports have an impact on an athlete’s academics, the focus of their argument differs.