Recent years have seen extensive debates regarding the issue of college athletes' likeness rights. As collegiate sports generate significant revenue and publicity, there is growing concern about the exploitation of student-athletes and the restrictions placed on their ability to profit from their image and likeness. The prominence of sports in American society undeniably influences how colleges and universities handle this conflict. Similar to how progress in science and technology compels us to adapt to the changing times, the increasing significance attributed to athletics by society necessitates a reevaluation of our approach. Nonetheless, the rights of student-athletes mustn't be marginalized in favor of school prestige and financial gains. …show more content…
However, the downside is that student-athletes may find themselves in academically challenging environments without having demonstrated the same academic capabilities as their non-athlete counterparts. Instances abound wherein student-athletes have either graduated with rudimentary reading skills or failed to graduate altogether due to the lack of guidance toward a specific degree path. These situations treat student-athletes unfairly and cast a disheartening shadow on the overall integrity of higher education. To impartial observers, the predicament faced by student-athletes is deeply troubling. Despite the prevailing emphasis on education in American society, numerous institutions of higher learning, ostensibly established with the primary goal of delivering education, have instead prioritized athletics over academics. While clarifying the NCAA’s role in compensating athletes for their educational degrees the statement from the case O’Bannon v NCAA states “At that point, the NCAA will have surrendered its amateurism principles entirely and transitioned from its “particular brand of football” to minor league status” (O’Bannon v NCAA, 200). The argument defends the NCAA's preservation of amateurism principles by asserting that it safeguards the unique nature of college sports. By maintaining amateurism, the NCAA upholds the notion that college athletes participate in sports primarily for the love of the game and the pursuit of a well-rounded educational experience. However, as the NCAA turns its sports championships into large-scale entertainment, it is the players' right to be compensated for their athletic work. By monetizing their NIL, college athletes can generate additional income that can also be used to support their education. This financial support can help cover various expenses,
Summary: This article tackles the question of whether or not college athletes are being unfairly exploited due to not being paid. By specifically looking at a court case that aimed to settle this dispute, the author suggests that the court decided that salaries for players were banned because in doing so, the “product” of college sports was being preserved. Abbott explains that college sports will lose their authenticity because of the fact that providing salaries for these athletes will greatly favor large and well funded athletic programs. The compensation will greatly lessen the chance for any type of “upset” or “Cinderella story” and therefore make college sports boring. Analysis: This article will be helpful in supporting the synthesis
College Varsity Athletes Should be Paid In this paper, I argue that college varsity athletes should be paid for playing sports that bring in revenue. In particular, College football and basketball because they bring in the majority of the revenue for the schools. The revenue accomplished by college sports programs continues to increase, due to the growth in interest of the NCAA basketball tournament and the college football playoffs (Berry III, Page 270). Throughout the past few years, one of the main topics debated in college sports is whether or not the athletes should be paid.
To the contrary, one could more persuasively argue that an athlete is exploited when he is expressly disallowed from realizing his value while his reputation and skill are being used to realize a profit for others. - Jay Bilas (2010), former Duke and pro basketball player, current ESPN and CBS sports analyst According to the NCAA, its version of amateurism is all that is needed to prevent the commercial exploitation of college athletes. The protectionist rationale for its concept of amateurism that has served as the foundation for the NCAA’s position on issues related to revenue-generating player compensation is imbedded in the notion that the NCAA is attempting to, in their words, “maintain a clear line of demarcation between collegiate athletics and professional sports” so as to prevent the undue exploitation of college athletes (NCAA Amateur and Membership Staff, 2010, p. 1). Note the linguistic nuance, as if simply labeling “collegiate athletics” as being distinctive from “professional sports” would be a sufficient barricade to the commercial interests that now include, in modest estimation, a 14 year, $10.8 billion contract to broadcast NCAA Division I men’s college basketball annually with CBS and Turner Sports (Schlabach, 2011); a 15-year
Will Davidson ENGL 1120 11/16/17 Major Paper III College athletics is a defining activity in American culture. Whether it is during the brisk Saturdays of fall watching the gridiron, or during the spring where the best in basketball compete for the title of the best, College Athletics is iconic for our nation. They provide relief from daily life, something to look forward to, and serve as a gathering point for friends and family to enjoy each-others company. With all college sports give back to the people, many have wondered if the athletes which make it all possible should be paid. Some argue that college athletes should remain amateurs, as that makes the unique spirit of the game different than the current pro leagues.
Ryan Vanderfords’ article published in the Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal explores this issue of whether or not college athletes should be paid beyond what they receive in scholarships. Vanderford is currently a law associate at a law firm in Los Angeles, California. He played sports throughout high school and college, so the author can relate to this topic. The payment of college athletes has become a more prominent issue in today’s society then it has been in the past. He argues that at major universities, student athletes help the school generate their revenue and therefore should be paid.
In the article, “The Billion Dollar Industry that Has Never Paid its Money-Makers: The NCAA’s Attempt at Compensation Through Names, Images and Likeness” by law school graduate from Pennsylvania State University and Touro College, Christopher Palmieri, touches on the resemblance of student-athletes to professional athletes. He states, “Apparel deals, ticket sales, and school reputations have made it so that some college games have over one billion dollars at play when student-athletes gear up. Despite this, the NCAA still prevented all college athletes from making a single cent from their own popularity without facing serious repercussions. … The plaintiffs argue that it is unjust for the universities, apparel companies, and many others to profit from the hard work of these athletes without allowing them to earn money for themselves” (Palmieri 1607). These athletes give up so much of their time and work so hard, both physically and mentally, to only be rewarded with cheers and praises.
Although most schools prioritize academics over sports, Colleges should compensate student-athletes fairly because of everything they provide. For this reason, college sports programs
However, despite the high value of a free education, college athletes are often exempt from attending classes and held to low academic standards, both of which greatly diminish this value (Richter). The exemption from attending class and the low academic standard is a large disadvantage to each student-athlete individually because without receiving a full, authentic education the majority of college athletes who do not become professionals in their sports after college are left without the skills that they need to start a career that relies on academic knowledge (Richter). This also allows college athletes to fall deeper into debt because of the fact that college sports usually do not allow enough free time to obtain a job to pay for personal expenses
College athletics is a core part of society, especially the colleges. Colleges themselves make a lot of money off of their college athletes, however, they do not treat them with the same respect. College athletes face terrible obstacles in their life balancing both their athletics and academic life. These problems lead to the debate over whether or not college athletes should be paid, to lessen the burden of college life. Throughout time, there has been an ongoing debate about whether or not college athletes should be paid to play.
This shows how cruel and greedy colleges are to the people making the money for them. Another reality is that college athletics generate billions of dollars every year, and everyone wants a piece of the action. Everyone, that is, except the players.” To conclude, this shows why college athletes should get just a little portion of the money they make for the colleges because it will affect how they play in a very positive
These students lead to believe that they will be compensated for their abilities with a quality education that will be paid for with scholarship funds. Instead they often find that they participate in a minimal academic program to allow for excessive hours of practice and travel for sports participation. While scholarships may cover the majority of the scholastic financial burden they do not account for the cost of living for an unemployed student athlete. The National Collegiate Athletic Association profits millions of dollars off the skills of it’s players and until recently was not required to share any of this monetary gain with these students. Careful consideration should be given to rulings prohibiting student athletes from receiving financial reimbursement for collegiate play.
College sports is one of the best-known entertainments around the world. But for the athletes, they are students first then athletes second. For college student-athletes, there are a variety of scholarships and grants to help pay for college or college debt. However, some critics say that student-athletes should be paid a salary like pro athletes would, with help from scholarships or grants. The authors of, College Athletes are being Educated, not Exploited, Val Ackerman and Larry Scott, argue that student-athletes are already paid by free education and other necessities.
The author centers around the system of how wages would actually be worth less than that of scholarship benefits and that the increase in wage demand for athletes would put universities under financial pressure. He mentions those who support paying college athletes for their hard-earned work and those who do not when he states that “On the surface it seems ideal and fair to pay college athletes for the hours of labor they put in each week; however, it’s important to analyze the trickle down of effects such a drastic change would cause.” (Marcus) By addressing both sides of the argument, Marcus lets his readers know that he is aware of athletes deserving a salary, but remains in his stance against the topic. He refers to sports fans in particular who disregard and ignore the actual complications that would be caused if the NCAA were to pay college athletes.
Should college athletes be paid? Annotated Bibliography Benedykiuck, Mike. “The Blue Line: College athletes should be paid.” Dailyfreepress.
Amateurism in college athletics is an exploitation of the athletes who participate in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) sports. The amount of work that is done by these athletes to help their respective institutions generate millions of dollars in revenue, goes seemingly unnoticed when identifying the substantial amount of money flow in NCAA sports and the amount of people, from stakeholders to alumni, that benefit from this source. Amateurism, the foundation of NCAA sports, has been in place for over a century of time dating back to the early 1900s. Any athlete who is making money for work they’ve done outside of their institution is not being exploited, however, an athlete can easily be placed on the other end of the spectrum when he or she is withheld from recognizing the true monetary value of their talents and likeness that are being used for the profit of the school or others. The NCAA is understandably satisfied with the continuous growth of its’ revenue each year, yet the problem they face of having people accept that “student-athletes” are just amateurs is growing as well.