College is often referred to as the party years of one’s life. So if your new to college and don’t have any friends, but you have the finances you got paid for being a great athlete. The odds are you are going to throw a party that cost a good bit of money to try and make some new friends. Even if you have friends you are still going to want to go out and buy new clothes and if you have money to do it then what is holding you back. Now I am not saying it is bad to go shopping and spend money, but if you get 9,000 for your athleticism and you don’t know how to save money you can blow that 9,000 in a
NCAA athletes took the NCAA to court. Ed O’Bannon, a former NCAA athlete, led the charge for the student athletes. O’Bannon argued that the athletes are being taken advantage of because the schools make millions off of the players’ likeness, meaning the schools make money on selling a jersey, or bobble head of the players and the players deserve some of that money and it should be put into a trust fund for the player. Judge Claudia Wilkin decided the O’Bannon case and gave the athletes everything they wanted in 2014, but in a court of repeals the ruling was reversed and the college just had to pay for the full cost of attendance at the university and did not have to pay for the trust of each athlete (Nocera). This was a small step for college
Even if it doesn’t cover the whole cost, they are still paying a lot less than a regular student going to college. 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.
College football players deserve some type of income. Colleges generate billions off of players, therefore it should not hurt to compensate student athletes, furthermore, these players are risking their health and well-being without receiving a penny in return, and lastly, getting paid to play can teach these young student athletes financial responsibility. To begin with, colleges generate billions off of players, therefore, it should not hurt to indemnify their student athletes. Paying each athlete even at minimum wage is better than nothing, in addition, it would not even make a dent in the billions the colleges produce because of the players. All jersey sales, ticket sales, television revenue, and basically all outlets of income get dispersed to the coaches, the staff, the schools, the NCAA and any and everyone involved
This argument rides on the coattails of "purity." 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
81% of all revenue generated comes from television and marketing rights. In order to have people watch the games that are televised, these players have to give the audience a reason to watch. Now this brings back the point of doing the work but not reaping the reward. The NCAA has a 14 year contract with CBS to televise all NCAA tournament games. This contract is worth $10.8 billion (“Revenue”).
After seemingly never ending dwindling scores, the NCAA decided to shorten the shot clock to speed up positions and thus create more. Looking at the different leagues around the country, the shock clock is one of the most diversified rules there is. Teams go from high school level where in some states the shot clock is non-existent to the NBA where there is 24 seconds to shoot. "In an effort to speed up the pace of the game and curtail the number of 45-42 final scores..." (Local). Scores are overall the most important item in a game as it obviously how a team wins.
Most athletes are not on full scholarship, which means that they do not get their education 100% for free. Even if some athletes do get any level of scholarship, it is only free for so long. If an athlete does not perform at a high level or if they get hurt, they can easily have that scholarship taken away, and they are left with nothing. These student athletes are supposedly “amateurs” and blessed with “free education,” but in reality, this is not the case. Student athletes should definitely be compensated and recognized for their efforts.
The FCAA is not looking to get revenue from TV outlets. It includes only those funds that end up in the NCAA 's bank account.” The FCAA being the organization that would collect and distribute the capital. This research paper described why college athletes should be paid. They make personal sacrifices, and take risks in order to produce revenue for their schools. Since the NCAA and colleges make these large sums of money, it wouldn 't be unwarranted to ask for the men and women who are the main reason on why they have this much cash to be paid.
The NCAA should indeed pay their D1 athletes. Exploitation means treating someone unfairly to make money off of them. The NCAA is a business that gets away with exploiting athletes for billions of dollars. The National College Athletic Association makes money because there is a low supply for college level athletes, yet a great demand to see these athletes perform. So the NCAA, in a way monopolized the scant amount of college level athletes.
Since it’s founding over a century ago, the NCAA has developed from a minute form of extra-curricular involvement offered to students, to a dominant entertainment industry nationwide. The growing success of this program has promoted a genuinely competitive nature, deteriorating the previous category of “amateurism”. Being that it has become such a popular program, the demand for student-athlete dedication has become exuberant. The development has established sports as the central focus for student-athletes as practices and competitions amount to 40+ hour workweeks for them. Such a heavy involvement in addition to school prevents the student-athletes from being able to work, leaving them unable to form an income to afford living expenses that scholarships cannot cover.
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. Here are the pros of paying college athletes; from the text; “Big time college football and basketball programs generate billions of dollars a year in TV and marketing contracts, ticket sales, and merchandising.” So, the athletes should be paid because the programs fabricate brobdingnagian amounts of money and they do not even pay the people who are actually the crux of the money making process.From the text; “There’s an issue of fairness,” and “The question that’s being raised here is . .
A senior in college sports has no pay rate, and a rookie in professional sports can earn a multi-million dollar contract. The difference can be a one-year gap. College athletes are not allowed to be paid, but receive a scholarship instead. Many college athletes do not put the scholarships to good use, they often end up with low paying jobs after school, and colleges have lots of money to fund pay for athletes. If there is absolutely no way a college athlete can be paid, there are different solutions such as colleges helping students to focus on education more than playing sports.
Paying college athletes is something most athletes would enjoy, and most don 't realize how valuable they are to these universities. The NCAA has growing into a multi billion dollar industry. Athletes cannot, however receive any cut from their jersey sales,ticket sales nor the $10.8 billion broadcast deal NCAA just signed. No wonder why there such a big argument going on whether student athletes should get paid. At least they receive something which is an athletic scholarship, that covers their room and board ,tuition and fees, and books.
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.