NCAA Paid Case Study

The Injustice of the NCAA The NCAA is making an extremely large profit on the amateur athletic performance of student athletes, without them seeing a penny. The NCAA earns around 1.5-2.0 billion dollars on average every year (compared to the NFL at 1.0-2.0 billion dollars as well). They are additionally qualifying themselves as a non-profit organization, therefore not having to pay taxes on any of the money they receive. College athletes should be able to receive an allowance, besides the scholarships they receive, because many students struggle to get through the week, paying for food, clothing, and other essential items. Student athletes, as stated in bylaw 15.01.2 of the NCAA handbook, are not allowed to take any handout or financial help

The grant in aids that the students receive are not the least restrictive means of carry out a legitimate business purpose. In O’Bannon, the Court ruled “The athletes accept grants-in-aid, and no more, in exchange for their athletic performance, because the NCAA schools have agreed to value the athletes’ name and likeness at zero, ‘an anticompetitive effect’.” This anticompetitive effect is an anti-trust violation under the rule of reason. Experts also concluded that providing smalls amounts of compensation will not affect consumer interest in collegiate sports.

When people hear about if college athletes should get paid they would say no because they think the athletes would get paid millions of dollars. It is not like that, college athletes would not be paid that high they would only need to be paid so they can live a decent life. They have to balance their lives with school and their sports. College athletes should get paid because The NCCA is billion dollar business and the athletes don’t get any money, athletes spend more hours working for the sport than the average American, it helps athletes manage their money.

After graduating from High School one may choose to further his or her education through college. People do this for many reasons. Some people do it for professional benefits, while others do it for sports athletics. This paper will be focusing on those who do go to college for athletic benefits. Specifically, this is focusing on how these college athletes do not get paid and why they should be paid. 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.

Paying college athletes has been a trending topic around the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Universities should not allow players to receive compensation for their performances. When money is involved many problems can arise. There are many different kinds of sports within a university; thus causing, many questions to develop. For example, will all sport athletes get paid and will some athletes get paid more than other? Also, what if an athlete gets hurt will the university still pay an injured athlete? It is not practical for all colleges to pay their athletes. If student athletes get paid, the money will effect the university, the athletes and many other people. Despite the fact that college athletes bring in some of the universities' revenue college athletes should not be paid.

Imagine doing hard labor every day without getting paid. Imagine not being able to recover fully from a traumatic injury and being overcome with medical bills. This happened to many athletes, but one that stands out is Inky Johnson. Inky Johnson was a star football player for Tennessee. He was guaranteed to be in the top thirty of the NFL draft pick in 2006. He only had ten football games left, until his dreams came true. But, Inky’s whole life changed in a different way when playing against the Air Force. Inky tackled a player and tore all the nerves in his brachial plexus, causing surgeries and his right arm to be paralyzed. He could never play football again and instead had to live a more challenging life. This is just one example of how players put their lives at risk for the games they love so much. College athletes deserve to be paid for their dedication to sports. There has been huge controversy over this and it is considered to be one of the most debatable topics in sports. Inequality in sports has been shown in many ways. This includes women inequity, racial inequality, and coaches being paid more depending on what sport they coach. College athletes should be compensated for their work and be given rights.

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.

Division I Athletes Should Be Paid In college there can be a wide of activities to enjoy. Social and academic clubs, fraternities and sororities however, there is one activity very popular in universities that not only gives students a sense of unity and pride as they cheer for their home team but generates millions of dollars in revenue for the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association): college sport teams. With the popularity of college sports and the vast amount of revenue colleges are generating from these sports an argument about whether these college athletes should be given a salary has begun to surface. Tracey M DiLascio, a graduate of Boston University school of Law and a former judicial clerk in the New Jersey Superior Court, states “The NCAA estimated revenue in 2014 was nearly $1 billion, 80 to 90 percent which came from the Men’s division 1 basketball tournament” (3).

Are they students or employees? They spend more time with the sport than in school. Student athletes should be acknowledged for their performances. College athletes should be paid to play because they bring money into the school, advertisement, and they perform the same tasks of pros.

In the documentary schooled: the price of college sports I learned that the NCAA does not treat student athletes like employees but these students are treated like slaves it all started in 1971 when the young Caucasian man by name of started playing college football for TSU, he was the running back for the team and when he caught the ball in running he was hit by two other players from the opposing team which caused him to be paralyzed for the rest of his life. Most of the players feel that they should be paid for playing college sports but the NCAA believes that a student who gets a full scholarship to play any sport at a university should not be paid because they are being paid with a free education, room, and board, and free meals, the NCAA

On average division one athletic programs lose an average of 11 million dollars every year.(NCAA.org) With the 460,000 college athletes(NCAA.org) to monetarily compensate for their time athletic programs.College athletes should not get paid. College athletes should focus on getting a degree, forming unions, and negotiate benefits.

A growing debate in the National Collegiate Athletic Association is whether or not student athletes should be paid. The controversy began in 2011 after three hundred coaches and athletes signed a petition to pay college-level athletes, and since then other athletes have made several more arguments. The NCAA has rightfully denied all of the requests, saying they include too much. To pay student athletes could be hugely expensive for colleges, especially because they would not only pay for each athlete’s degree and equipment, but also provide a salary and give bonuses revenue for tournaments. Moreover, college athletes should not be paid because there is not enough money, it takes away a student’s focus from schoolwork, and not every athlete is guaranteed a professional career after graduating; however it is argued that it they are already paid in a way.

One argument against the payment of college athletes are the scholarships they receive. “The notion that a full scholarship is not a fair exchange for athletic services provided to a university—regardless of how much money an athletic department generates from those services—is ridiculous” (Whitlock). College is very expensive to attend, and with so many students going into thousands of dollars of debt, it is a privilege that some athletes are lucky to receive. Whitlock also argues that the money the athletes will receive from the schools will go towards the purchase of drugs and alcohol, and other unnecessary things.

Between Tv deals, ticket sales, and jersey sales there is plenty of money to go around in college athletics, and it is time that the NCAA steps up and compensates athletes. College athletes are stuck in a brief conflict where they think they deserve to be paid just like the pros do. They consider their sport as a job and think they deserve to be paid just like the coaches do. Colleges make a lot of their money through the sports department. Ticket sales are a big way colleges bring in big money.

Would paying college athletes help or damage the idea of amateurism? The issue of college athletes being paid has been debated recently. On one side of the argument, supporters believe that college athletes should not get paid. However, opponents think they should get paid. Colleges should not start paying their athletes for participating in a sport because the athletes have already gotten paid in education, and they aren’t professionals yet.