What the colleges are willing to give the athletes most likely not be the amount the athlete wants. Paying athletes will create tension between the athletes and make them want to go where the most money is, rather than where they will benefit best. The smaller schools would not have the opportunity of having great players on their teams. Tensions could lead athletes to quit their sport or file a lawsuit against the school concerning their pay. College athletes have tutors they can call right away if they need help academically, or financially.
It is imperative that college athletes are paid. Just imagine going to work everyday and not getting paid. By providing college athletes with an income they will not have to struggle to get things that they want and need. This could lead to many other problems that could get a student kicked out of college permanently. In addition, college athletes will not have to struggle to get everyday necessities.
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
If the NCAA was changed, or even abolished, the universities of today would most likely fix the issue of poor college athletes, whether they meant to or not. Universities are typically unabashed to admit that they are indeed running a businesses. They want elite teams that will not only earn the school a large income, but bring them to bowl games and championships. Colleges would have little to no issue with giving student-athletes the benefits of employees if the realm of collegiate sports became a free market. In fact, such a reform guarantees a competitive market to insure that college-players
The primary reason colleges and universities exist is to promote higher education to students and help prepare them for success in the real world. In order to keep this as the focal point of colleges and universities existence, it is important that monetary compensation for revenue generating athletes remain illegal. Although these students often have the end goal of playing at the professional level, education must be kept as the primary goal in colleges and universities. Without this focus, many athletes are simply using collegiate sports and programs as a stepping-stone to professional athletics with little regard for furthering their education. If these top tier athlete’s were given the opportunity to be paid thousands of dollars for their athletic additions to a program, there would be very little incentive for them to focus on their education.
College athletes may forget that their main purpose at school is to learn and study, not to receive money. Finally, if you pay college athletes it would take money away from college budgets that could be used to invest in research, to hire better staff, or to renovate facilities and technology. If colleges are going to invest more money in a program, it should be in academics,
A big issue in college sports is whether or not to pay the athletes that participate in the sporting programs. My side would be with people who think that the players should not get paid. I believe that it would affect their in game performance all together. Even if they did get paid I think most athletes would spend their money on things that would overall get them in trouble. I also think the free scholarship most get is the same as getting paid only they cannot spend their money on what they want.
There are many different ways to earn money. In the article “Should College Athletes be Paid,” both Joe Nocera and Bob Williams have very different opinions. Although these athletes bring in money for the school, college athletes should not be paid because being paid could prevent other students from participating in college sports and it could take their attention away from academics. Many people love to purchase items for their favorite college team or college player. When purchasing these items, the school is given money, as Joe Nocera states,”...
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.
Some would argue that college football players should not be paid for various reasons. One of these reasons is because they think the players are at college to get an education, sports are a secondary or extracurricular activity. The players are generating money for the school, which pays for school and other things around campus. Many people might say that it is unfair to the other sports that are less popular. Football is a very difficult sport to play, these players practice and practice, they need to be rewarded for all this work.
Andrew Merkle resembles this as he argues that student-athletes already have “a leg up on the majority of his or her classmates” because they will be graduating with a degree debt-free (Merkle). This standpoint provides a legitimate comparison, but fails to recognize multiple key aspects. Many non-athletes earn academic scholarships that allow them to also graduate debt-free just as athletic scholarships do, but the stipulations of these scholarships differ drastically. Academic scholarships do not require the demanding extra-curricular involvement that athletic scholarships do, therefore the opportunity to work part-time to cover living expenses if needed is present. The two types of scholarships were both earned and offer the same monetary benefits, but athletic scholarships are much more binding for the
Athletes in college should not only be given a scholarship, but also a salary in their involvement in sports. Countless athletes have scholarships for their sports. Often enough, they don’t gain a good education from it. Since college athletes are offered a scholarship for their athletic performance, “then college athletes should receive the full benefit of their bargain-a worthwhile undergraduate education” (Brown 11). Athletes are usually traveling with their team, competing against other colleges.
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.
Why do colleges think that they can get millions of dollars off of college athletes and not give money back to them for earning it all? Michael Rosenberg, Laura Pappano, and Joe Posnanski were three out of the four authors that I read about that shared their views on college athletes getting paid or not in their articles. Between all of these three writers i noticed they all mentioned how much money colleges receive from just ticket sales. Joe Posnanski and Michael Rosenberg both agree that college athletes should get paid, Laura Pappano on the other hand was more focused on the money that the colleges are receiving from just ticket sales, booster donations, and cable deals. She also expresses her concern on how every time the basketball and football team win three games in a row , the GPA of the players goes down by 0.3.