So the bottom-line is if you don’t pay college athletes you get the best performance out of them that they can give. If you pay them they lose motivation and therefore start to become lazy.
Because money corrupts, student-athletes shouldn 't expect it or want it and should simply play their game out of love...whilst providing entertainment to the masses and technically earning millions of dollars for TV networks, colleges and the NCAA. While one could argue overly the ludicrous and truly unethical contradictions of the argument "play for free, play for purity," that would dignify the belief that student pensions are the only answer to the current system; which is not true. There are countless flaws with the current system and just as many solutions, only one of which involves universities handing out a biweekly check to their
Some of the athletes get hurt and they are out for the year because they can 't pay for the injury, but if they get paid it will help them pay for their injuries. Some athletes don 't have enough money for sports gear, so buy paying them they will be able to get sports gear. Most athletes try to play a sport and have a job so if they got paid it would give them more time to focus on the sport. Athletes should be paid earlier so it will help them in the pros by giving them confidence so they don 't get worried that they are going to spend all of their money. If athletes get paid earlier it will help the manage their money when their older so it will help them pay bills.
Athletes would are (doesn’t make sense) there just to play sports and don’t care about their degree, it wouldn’t matter how they preform in school because they are being paid. Most athletes who are playing are already receiving some sort of compensation in scholarships and grants. College athletes are not employees in the eyes of the school, they are students who “just happen to be playing sports” (Cooper 12). College athletes put too much pressure on their athletic career, when they should put the pressure on getting a degree and a
The reasoning for the objections can include that “they are just amateurs,” and that they “should be grateful to receive a free education.” For the people who say that they are amateurs, college athletics is just as big of a business as professional sports are, but the difference is that all of the money in college sports go to the athletic directors, coaches, commissioners, and NCAA instead of going to the players. Also, they spend roughly forty hours a week playing, practicing, and training for their sport, which is almost as much as a typical job. That means that their Division I sport is technically their job, so shouldn’t they be compensated for it? Regarding the argument that student athletes should be grateful they receive a free education, this “free education” is only free for so many people.
That a full paid scholarship is plenty enough (McCauley). The ones who introduce this opinion into the conversation fail to understand the daily struggles a college athlete suffers. Without any outcome, college football players are putting forth their utmost effort for no cause. The twenty to twenty five thousand dollar scholarships do not even put a dent in the billions brought in by the NCAA. This is why this situation is so commonly debated as people believe it is highly unfair to the student athletes.
On top of a scholarship, student athletes are also provided with many free things such as game tickets, apparel and equipment. Although scholarships take off a lot of the cost to go to college, they aren’t enough on their own. Most scholarships are not full ride and students are left to pay some school fines. Student athletes need an income to help pay the extra money they owe that the scholarship doesn’t pay for, and also so that they have some money when they come out of college. Paying college athletes is a way to encourage students to play sports.
Opponents say college athletes would be back payed for letting other businesses use their images, but they are already being compensated. Colleges that give athletes scholarships to attend their schools already pay the students by letting them get an education for free. In the words of researchers Ben
One student Logan Klaproth believes, “They[student athletes] should be paid because they advertise the sports teams and merchandise for the school yet the athletes are not getting paid a single cent. Furthermore, since they are paying for college at the same time being paid for playing sports would help them pay student loans and their college
They are making a large number of dollars a year and are not in any case paying their specialists, the competitors. The diligent work and devotion not just profits for the school it additionally gets the schools name out to general society. At the point when schools games are playing admirably and are broadly broadcast, more individuals know about the school this will help an expansion of utilizations and other individuals ' enthusiasm for the school (Stanley 1). School games need a change. Understudy competitors need to begin being compensated fiscally for their diligent work and devotion.
nothing! Except scholarships that as mentioned before, can be canceled if an injury comes in the way. Therefore, there is a necessity to change the system in which colleges treat their athletes because they deserve and should get paid for the sacrifices they do outside of a classroom. In conclusion, despite the fact that so many people argue that college athletes shouldn’t be given a salary because they already have scholarships and also sports are seen as a part of the education itself, these athletes should be awarded with a payment because colleges and the NCAA are not only producing money off of them, but also because college athletes are being exploited by all the activities they do every day and when they suffer an injury, there is a huge possibility that their scholarships get
College athletes take many risks and make personal sacrifices in order to bring in revenue for their school, for this reason, they should be paid employees. The first reason in why college athletes should be paid is that college athletes take many risks. Depending on the scholarship, if an athlete is injured and unable to play they can lose their
Also it would teach them how to manage money and how to become a responsible adult. With so many players getting so little out of their college experience, it would be nice for even just a few players to learn some of life’s important lessons. These student athletes need to learn as much about managing money as they possibly can before some of them make it to the pro’s and start earning a great amount of money more than they 're used to. It would also put some in the situation of financial stakes becoming high. When players get suspended from a game, what does that really teach them?
Should college athletes be paid? I selected this article because I honestly thought they did get paid and I wanted to read more on the topic. In this essay we will discuss the pros and cons of college athletes getting paid. I am on the pro side of this debate. Here is why.
The NCAA gets paid millions of dollars every year and the college athletes who make the money do not see a penny of it, so should they start getting paid? If college athletes get paid you would not see the heart and determination you see now in collegiate sports. College athletes should not get paid because they are getting free education already, they are playing for a school not for a professional team, and they are building skills to someday get paid. Some college athletes would not be able to go to college if their education was not paid for.