Should College Athletes Be Paid

Should college student-athletes be paid has become a much debated topic. The incentive for a student-athlete to play a college sport should not be for money, but for the love of the game. It has been argued that colleges are making money and therefore the student-athlete should be compensated. When contemplating college income from sporting events and memorabilia from popular sports, such as football and basketball, it must not be forgotten that colleges do incur tremendous expense for all their sports programs. If income from sports is the driving factor to pay student-athletes, several major problems arise from such a decision. One problem is who gets a salary and the second problem is how much should they be paid. Also, if the income

Over the last few years there has been renewed controversy about whether college athletes should be paid. The idea of paying college athletes goes back to the early 1900s with one of the first inter collegiate competitions between Harvard and Yale. The modern position of the National Collegiate Athletic Association is that athletic scholarships provide a free college education in return for participating on the university team. Many college athletes dedicate more than forty hours of training per week. College is expensive. How can we expect college athletes to pay for books and other basic necessities if they are busy practicing or participating in home games or traveling to away games? The NCAA needs to start paying these athletes to supplement

One of the most controversial subjects we as individuals hear about this day in age is whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid. Many people argue that these athletes do intact, deserve to be paid for their time and hard work. NCAA athletes create a name for themselves by playing and performing well on their college teams. The better these athletes perform, the more publicity the school revives. This then leads to higher ticket sales and stores around campus selling jerseys and other clothing items with athletes names and numbers on the back. NCAA schools have become comfortable with using athletes’ names to bring in a revenue for the school, and yet the athletes never see any of that money. On the other hand, many people believe that these athletes do not deserve, nor should they expect to receive payment in return. They believe that these scholarships and the education are payment in itself. Some even bring up the question on if it is affordable or even realistic to pay college athletes.

While catching up on some game day scores for college football, an article popped up on the side with a title reading, College Athletes Deserve To Be Paid. I noticed it was written by Michael Wilbon, one of the hosts from the ESPN show, Pardon the Interruption. Already disagreeing with the title before even reading it, I was skeptical, but I clicked on the link and started to read. Wilbon brought up a number of decent points throughout the article, but for some odd reason, they didn’t seem to add up to me. This is why I took the opportunity to do a little more research behind the points made in the article and came up with a concept of my own. Wilbon’s reasons why to pay the athletes don’t have a

Dribble the ball down the court, pass, shoot, SCORE! Everyone loves you; but a more serious issue is at stake, should you get paid for what you just did if you are a college athlete? Yep, that’s right, a topic that not many people discuss, should college athletes get paid? Studies show that college athletes spend over 40 hours a week practicing. However, with college, comes hard work and responsibilities. Many of the students who receive academic scholarships, will put the same amount of time into their studies, but will not get paid for that. I plan to prove that college athletes should not be paid, because if college athletes were to be paid, this would become a financial burden on the school and put the athlete, already receiving a full scholarship above other students.

Should college athletes be paid? They should because athletes have been raising millions and millions of dollars for there school and they don't receive near as money as they raise for the school. College athletes practice more than than the average american works. College athletes raise millions of dollars in revenue for there school and they don't profit for all the hard work and money they raise for there school. While the NCAA a billion dollar industry take advantage of the young college athletes. College athletes should be paid for all the hard work they put into their sport and all the money they earn for their school.

College athletes being paid has become an interesting debate in recent years. People are starting to get different feelings of the old way of not paying amateurs. Profits are so easily made in today’s age through social media, advertisements, apparel, and ticket sales, that programs are bringing in millions of dollars each year off the likeness of their athletes. Athletes dedicate their lives to the sports they play and it consumes their time. Data shows that some colleges do bring in millions of dollars a year in profit, but many colleges around the US are struggling to break even. Should college athletes be rewarded for their hard work and dedication? Opponents of paying college athletes point out that they are rewarded through scholarships,

The issue of whether college athletes should be paid is a topic that has been long debated, from the very inception of college sports in the 1920s. The NCAA considers college athletes to be amateur athletes and not professionals, this means that they should only be playing for the love of sport and not anything else. The dictionary definition of an amateur is “one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession” (Merriam-Webster). College athletes are supposed to make education their number one priority, with sports being a past time for them. In the real world, ranking an athlete’s priorities can get very difficult, an NLRB probe ruled that:

When the topic of college comes up, many things come to mind. Those are the glory days for most of us. The college parties, the struggle to find a balance between having fun and maintaining a good GPA, and not to mention the amazing athletic departments that colleges offer. Everyone enjoys sports but does anyone ever stop to wonder how much goes into the preparation for those games? There’s much more effort that’s put into it other than just showing up for practice. It’s definitely a lot more work than your average college student which is why the question of whether or not college athletes should get paid comes up. Football alone brings in millions of dollars a year; and with all of that money floating around, it comes as a surprise that

Big time college athletes should be paid for their efforts because an athletic scholarship does not cover the full cost of college attendance. (“Study of Scholarship Shortfall Numbers Reveal College Athletes Pay To Play”; Thompson; D’Aquila). While in the recruiting process many high-school athletes are under the impression that they will receive a “full scholarship” for college and won’t have to pay anything (“Study of Scholarship Shortfall Numbers Reveal College Athletes Pay To Play”). However, college athletes often end up paying for necessities such as school supplies and clothing from their own pocket (“Study of Scholarship Shortfall Numbers Reveal College Athletes Pay To Play”). This is partially due to the NCAA setting a maximum

Throughout history college athletics has been a source of revenue. As a result of this revenue, it’s always been debated if student-athletes should get paid a salary. According to the NCAA collegiate athletics revenue add up to some $10.6 billion a year (NCAA…). Unfortunately, some colleges claimed that they can’t afford to compensate the student-athlete for their performance. The NCAA states they are student’s first, athletes second. The term student-athletes implies that all enrolled students who play college sports are engaged in secondary, extra-curricular activities that enhance their education (Gutting). Even though the time required to put in, for practice and games can exceed over 50 hours a week. It’s a bad idea paying student-athletes a salary, but I do believe they should be able to receive some sponsorship money. Their scholarship money is towards college academic fees; it’s almost impossible for a full time student-athlete to obtain a job. A financial reward for their efforts could be very helpful to cover living expenses, medical bills and everyday necessities.

A Nebraska state senator who is a longtime supporter of providing stipends to college athletes submitted a bill in 2003 to allow players of Nebraska’s football team to be paid. He stated that they are unpaid workers who just aren’t amateurs. They call it a scholarship but he wanted to see the athletes to have some spendable money. An Oklahoma university football player said that he plays for one of the top football schools in the country and is struggling to get groceries every month.

“The NCAA gets a cut; universities get a cut; coaches get a cut. The only ones not cashing in, it seems, are the players themselves. Under NCAA rules, they’ve been considered ‘amateurs’ who aren’t allowed a profit from their sports” (Majerol). This is something the NCAA has to change if they want more college athletes to be happy. If athletes in college were paid, even a small amount, this could change their lives. College athletes are risking their lives, spending a large amount of time with their team, and paying college expenses, and this is why college athletes should be paid for the dedication of their team and the risking of their

Are college athlete’s players or employees? The idea of paying a college athlete appears to be outrageous to some. The thought of giving someone money for something they have chosen to do may not appear to be fair. The greatest concern is where to draw the line. Should the decision be based on the amount of money and fame the program generates? Why should athletes be treated special and receive compensation for their contribution to the school? One major factor is that athletes make numerous sacrifices beyond that of a nonathletic student. Many athletes can’t seek employment to help offset the expenses of college because they are on the field or court for the majority of their day.

“The recent explosion of revenues flowing to NCAA member institutions and the relative pittance going to the primary input—the players—for those participating in bowl games and the annual “March Madness” men’s basketball tournament have created growing unease over the distribution of the largesse (Sanderson 116).” Players in the National Collegiate Athletic Association or NCAA are looking for financial aid outside of their academics. The NCAA feels an increasing need to distribute more financial aid towards student-athletes, and they would like “to consider changing restrictions on athletes’ opportunities to earn income beyond their grants-in-aid” (Sanderson 117). This will allow athletes do have more disposable income outside of their studies. For a more detailed study on the topic, Allen R. Sanderson and John J. Siegfried dig into the economic side of paying college athletes in their Journal for Economic Perspectives: “The Case for Paying College Athletes”. With the rapid advancement of technology and social media, the National Collegiate Athletes Association is becoming monopolistic in their large-scale commercialized sports programs. The resources are being allocated to different companies involved in the profit making off of student athletes. The NCAA is developing ways to make collegiate sports more competitive, and one of these ways is to pay the athletes participating in big sports programs such as men’s basketball and football. Their argument is that college