Student Athletes Should Be Paid For Their Sport

Many people argue yes student-athletes ' deserve to be paid and one of the biggest reason many people support the idea of college athletes being compensated is because the NCAA and many universities make millions from advertisements, sponsorships, TV deals, and even video games and players is the cause

College sports is a multi-billion dollar industry. Each year thousands of high school students are recruited to play college sports, but under strict conditions. Students are required to do well in athletics while keeping up with their academics. College athletes spend up to forty five hours per week on practices, training, and games. In addition, they spend roughly forty hours on their academics. The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletics Association) does not think it is necessary to pay these athletes because they want to maintain the “amateur sport” status. According to Stanley Eitzen in his “College Athletes should be Paid, “The universities and the NCAA claim their athletes in big-time sports programs

In the recent past, college athletics has gained massive fame in the United States. The immense fame of the college athletics has developed over the past twenty years. The massive development and fame of the college athletics have resulted in improved incomes for the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA). Due to increased revenue received by the NCAA, the participates in athletics in the colleges has fuelled the argument of whether the college athletes need to be paid and rewarded more than just the athletic scholarships. In this research paper, I will take a stab at to respond the question whether they should be paid by delving the explanations for and against the payment of the college athletes (Adams and Becky 108).

Student athletes should not be paid. A misconception is that all athletic programs in the NCAA make head-over-toe profit. There are three divisions of intercollegiate athletics, and frankly division three athletic programs don’t make as much or have a profit when compared to division one programs. “Critics of paying college athletes note that only a small number of them compete in sports or on teams that actually generate revenue”. (Paying College Athletes) The truth is only a fraction of athletic programs are actually profitable, while most pose a cost to the institution. The question arises primarily in division one programs and typically in the sports of basketball and football. The argument is made that these institutions receive millions of dollars from their student athletes’ performance, in return they should be paid.

It is mid-February and for college athletes and fans everywhere that means that the College Football “Bowl” season is over and “March Madness” is around the corner. The “Bowl” Season is a series of college football games from the elite teams, sponsored by various corporations and “March Madness” is a 68 team single elimination tournament to decide who the best team in college basketball is. For the students involved they get a chance to have their legacy live on forever and for some it is a chance to show professional teams they have what it takes to compete on the next level, but for the universities it is a chance to bring in millions of dollars in revenue. As a student-athlete, and a volunteer basketball coach, I believe that it is unfair that student athletes across the country have decided to give their lives to these sports in hopes that they get lucky and “win the lottery” by making in into professional sports. I believe that student athletes have earned the right to be compensated for their hard work, dedication and commitment to these universities across the country.

College athletes should be paid. The athletes put in as much work as the people who do get paid. Why should they not be paid? There are many pros for why they should get paid, but there are also many cons on why they should not get paid. The athletes should get paid because of how hard they work in season and the off-season. Do not pay all of the athletes, but pay the ones who are at a D1 college. The athletes should get paid because they put in the same amount of time as the pros do, and the pros get paid.

Whether or not student-athletes should be paid has been a hotly debated topic since the 1900s. College athletes spend just as much time, if not more time, practicing and devoting time and energy to sports as they do academics. For this, many athletes are rewarded with scholarship money. However, many people believe it is not enough. Should we pay student-athletes a slice of the wealth or is a full-ride scholarship enough? (Business Insider). What if the athlete gets injured? Where does the money come out of to support each athlete’s salary? The huge amount of money being generated from college sports has led some people to think that the athletes are entitled to some of that revenue. While, some think that student-athletes should be paid, others disagree for various reasons.

For years now there have been the argument if college athletes should be paid to play or not. It is an ongoing debate between many people including the National Collegiate Athletic Association(NCAA), athletes, coach, and other various people. The has debate has gone far enough that a lawsuit has started over it. There are many arguments for college athletes being paid such as; the athletes do not have time to work, their images are being used without any type of pay, and how the NCAA and coaches make millions of dollars off of the players while the players do not make anything. On the flip side of this, arguments that the athletes should not be paid include; they get paid in other varies ways, the average college athletic department loses enough money already without paying the athletes, and the fact that not all college athletes are in school to become professional athletes anyhow so making money from their athletic abilities should not be an issue for them at all.

No one expects somebody to work two fulltime jobs and not get paid for it. Nobody would think it would be fair to work so hard and not receive any form of compensation. This is exactly what is happening to student athletes. Student athletes are not only fulltime students, but also are fulltime athletes. There are two very decisive sides to this argument. On one side the NCAA claims that the student athletes are amateurs and cannot be paid. They also claim they are paid in other ways such as a full ride scholarship to a top level education. The other side of the argument states that the work load of a fulltime student and a fulltime athlete is almost unmanageable and the NCAA is making millions off of their work and sweat. This is an issue

$9,139 is the average cost of college for a student to go attend an in-state four year public university (“College Costs”). This amount does not include housing, food, books, or supplies; this can end up totaling near $10,000, but imagine if both of these figures were paid for you. This would mean you would pay nothing to attend a four year college, and this is the reality for many individuals today; these people are commonly known as student-athletes. Many student-athletes receive full scholarships to schools covering their room, board, tuition, books and any other expenses they may incur because they are playing a sport at the institution. Not to mention many of these individuals will receive stipends to use at their own will. However, these same students feel like these benefits are not enough (“Here’s”). Some students feel like they are being cheated out of their talents because NCAA uses them in media and in other profitable ventures but they are not paid. Others just feel that the role of a college athlete should include receiving payment since they are like professional athletes and see their sport as their only profession. Student- athletes may have a similar role to professional athletes, but do not deserve the same compensation because they are receiving their payment through a school scholarship.

A topic that is very controversial for everyone is, should student-athletes in college be compensated? There numerous evidence that supports in favor and many against the proposition of paying student- athletes who play sports for their university. As a college athlete, students are putting their bodies on the line each game they play. There’s possibility of suffering a traumatic brain injury or being paralyze after physical contact. These athletes are sacrificing their bodies and physical health at an opportunity to play a game which they love, and hopefully play it in the professional level. While that’s taking place, college football and basketball are big business that keep expanding. College sports bring in a large amount of revenues. The result is that many of them fail to graduate. Paying college athletes would not ruin amateur sport because even though most college athletes do get scholarship and should focus on their education it doesn’t help them if most of the time they are not attending classes to be in practice or games. College sports do make a high-income and athletes deserve a portion of the revenue they bring their programs.

Student athletes in college are held to a higher standard than normal students since they are juggling a lot more in their lives. Student athletes have to set aside a lot of time for practice while still maintaining good grades and a social life. Some people believe that because of this demanding schedule that student athletes should be paid. Where on the other hand many believe that they shouldn’t since they choose to be on a sports team, this is a topic that is debated upon by many. One solution could be to lower the tuition for student athletes since they are offering their talents to the school. As long as the students stay on the team they will get some money off their college tuition every year.

College sports these days are a huge money pit, NCAA makes millions of dollars off of student athletes every year. Should the NCAA start sharing the profits with these student athletes, which every year help grow the NCAA brand? It’s an important question that seems to come up every day on television, the internet, and even in the newspaper. Student athletes are going to college on scholarships which are sold to them by coaches, scouts, and other school administration as a commitment to the student’s future. All they ask is for the student athlete to make a commitment to the school by signing a contract to attend, which is called the “letter of intent”. With the students make a commitment to attend this school for at least a four year

Overall the NCAA is the hub for all collegiate sports and allows many students to get a free education. Some might say that athletes should be paid because they bring in tons of money, paying athletes would bring them some sense of financial awareness and because they often don't have enough money for necessities. But they don't deserve to get paid because scholarships are payment enough, because many college kids are irresponsible with money, and the NCAA makes sure the players' have what they need. Many people think that college athletes should be paid, but they shouldn't.

Is an athletic scholarship really enough of a “payment” to reimburse athletes for the billions of dollars made by the NCAA every year? This issue of paying collegiate athletes, especially football and basketball players, has been around for many years. Athletes, students, bystanders, and NCAA analysts and authority figures have a strong opinion about paying college athletes. Whether college athletes should be paid or not is a debate topic that is more prevalent today than ever.