In Neil H. Petrie essay, which was published in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Neil H. Petrie argues that colleges have a hypocritical attitude towards student athletes. After reading and gathering all the evidence from the essay I'm more incline to agree with Neil H. Petrie for the evidence he proposes is to constrain to ignore. Neil H. Petrie’s evidence for these arguments come not from boring old statistics but from fist hand experience witch makes the arguments much more compelling. One can see Neil H. Petrie addresses these arguments towards four main focus groups are the student athletes, the teachers, the coaches and the school system itself.Neil H. Petrie proposes that student athletes are being used for a means to an end and can simply be replaced at a moments notice leaving …show more content…
They must think for themselves for if they let the coaches and teachers do all their college planning who knows where that path might lead them in the end. Throughout the essay Neil H. Petri paint’s the image into his audience head that the teachers and coaches are two of the perpetrators, for they are to blame why student athletes are being abused. The coaches sole concern is for his gladiators to be in tiptop shape for next weeks game they don't care about grades the only thing going through their mind is one word “Winning” and that will never change, while the teachers have the power to stop at any time and assist these student through their college struggles, instead, some are pressured to assist the coaches in landing the big win in next weeks game. So if an assignment or two are not turned in they just look the other way, leaving the students eligible for the game but leaving them with an empty space where the knowledge of that assent could have gone. The only way teachers can fix their wrongs is to stop the abuse today, stop getting persuaded or pressured by fancy dinners and focus on the students
A lot of sports recruits come from the inner city, country or a humble environment. Going to college is a completely new and different experience. A large portion of players are trying to adjust in the classroom and feel inferior in more ways than we care to realize. Many of the students at major universities in the United States typically come from families that have incomes that are above the national average. These players are asked to come to the college’s where they are not socially equal but they are expected to feel good about the situation and themselves.
College is a place for students to obtain a college degree and help them to get ahead on their “real world” careers. Athletic departments in college have become huge money incomes in the past ten years; college football and basketball are even shown on the television. This has resulted in many believing these athletes deserve to be paid for their contribution to the schools athletic income. However athletes in college are given the opportunity to play the sport that they love as well as receive a top education. For some players a $20,000+ per year tuition is not enough, they want to be paid with more than just a scholarship.
College athletes put in a lot of time, effort, and work into the sport they’ve played since they were young, but they aren’t getting paid for it. These student athletes deserve to be paid because they put in countless hours of hard work and balance sports with school work. The first reason athletes in college do deserve to be compensated is because they don 't have time to fit in work with a school and athletic schedule. College athletes don’t have time to get a real job. Student athletes have a very busy schedule, they don’t have time to fit in a job.
College athletes are responsible for their education. School should be the priority first and not the sport. According to Nocera, “Paying students to play would turn them into employees, shifting their focus away from academics” (9). The college athletes work more than 60 hours a week just on practicing. This makes them exceed way above an average employee.
A Rhetorical Analysis of “The Education of Dasmine Cathey” Writer, Brad Wolverton, in his article “The Education of Dasmine Cathey” first appearing in The Chronicle of Higher Education, conveys the journey of a former University of Memphis football player who was poorly educated and how he struggled to be academically eligible. Wolverton’s purpose is to illustrate the widespread of educational shortcomings of NCAA athletes and the complicated ways athletes struggles gets brushed under the proverbial carpet. (Wolverton) In this article Wolverton utilizes a straightforward tone by using pathos to appeal to the readers with Mr. Cathey’s difficult situation also utilizing logos and ethos etc. to help make a presentable argument to which I will be analyzing.
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.
Also, he shows that it is okay to admit student athletes because they learn to be discipline, respect, and leadership based on being on a team environment. He does have a fallacy of a False Analogy because he states that the author of the first essay knows nothing about football because he attendee home games and the author of the second essay would play and he was in this environment while in school. He thinks because student athletes put a lot of their time in to school and football that they should be getting a stipend with their scholarship because they put more hours into college work with all of their training and practicing and with their studies. He also, does not contradict
Mike says”Students all over the world work hard at the sport that true love and don’t get a lot in return for it”. While college athletes may not exactly be employees, they are more than just students. Consider the life of a student-athlete, though. The average Division I football player dedicates over 43hours per week to his sport, meaning that he spends more than a typical American work-week training and playing football, in addition to his class work. Their work, which generates exorbitant amounts of money year in and year out, deserves Compensation.
" This quote proves that the students are bringing in lots of money and the school has plenty to give. College athletes should be paid because they contribute to the school revenues. When it comes to getting fans in the arena it all happens because of the stars coming out of the locker room. Student athletes can be looked at as advertisement because they persuade people to come watch their skills.
Which control the student athlete from doing anything? The NCAA flourished through Walter Byers and the idea of “student athlete” which specifically have “student first”. While reading this article it hard for me to take a stance on weather I Alexis Griggsby should be
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.
Did you know that depending on the sport, students who play sports in college most likely have less than a 2% chance of becoming professional athletes? At middle schools, high schools and colleges across the country, everyone is arguing over whether or not students with failing grades should be allowed to play sports. In my opinion, a good education is so very important for our country’s youth, especially the athletes. Not a lot of kids are good enough to play in the top college sports programs in the country. But even those who are, still have an astonishingly low chance at making the professional leagues.
One of the biggest issues with NCAA sports is should college athletes be able to unionize and play. According to their website, The NCAA is an organization that represents over 1,100 colleges and universities from the Division 1, Division 2, and Division 3 Level (ncaa.org). In addition, The NCAA doled out more than $2.7 billion in athletic scholarships along with other resources, student-athletes can utilize (ncaa.org). Although the NCAA generates mass revenue, only the top programs are usually profitable while most schools operate at the institution cost (Mitchell & Edelman, 2013). I believe college athletes should not be unionized or paid to play college sports.
The fight for payment of college athletes has not been quick one as more and more issues keep popping up. The NCAA has never allowed payment of its athletes, but small steps towards the overall goal has questioned the NCAA’s past. Its’ decisions has stayed constant since its founding in 1906. The first issue in this decision would not occur until 1952 when the NCAA ruled to give The University of Kentucky the ‘death penalty’ for paying their athletes. This ‘death penalty’ is a one year program ban from participation, the harshest penalty the NCAA can give.
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.