“they’ll never have any incentive to go to class.”(Lemmons) Maybe, but they are their for the Education and if the do not get good grades they would get in trouble. Some may say college basketball players will take their money use all of it and not use it wisely. That true that why they should go through a financial class. How will they pay them, will it be fair? Each player should get the same amount of money not that much but a enough to get by.
There is currently nothing systematically in place to provide funds to the sports athletes who generate so much for the universities, and the revenue continues to climb for the NCAA, as they claim a scholarship is sufficient enough even the playing field amongst universities and their athletes and stress that the uproar will change college sports forever.The public has seen the exploitation of these athletes and are asking questions regarding the legitimacy of the structure and are now demanding these athletes be compensated for there hard work. So as the money skyrockets for the NCAA, the athletes are left needing amendments to the power structure that has held them down for so long; in order to change this Congress must step in make sure
Athletes often can’t.” This shows that students who come from poor families can’t work after classes even if they wanted to because of practice. The article, “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?” also states that, “Some Division I athletes came from
Many believe it is absurd to still consider the NCAA amateur sports after all it has become but just as many think the exact opposite and that college athletes already receive fair compensation for their participation. This is a big decision that could impact the lives of thousands nationwide and revolutionize sports as we know it. College athletes should not be paid because of the many benefits that come with being a student athlete and because it is not a realistic resolution. One reason college athletes should not be paid is because of the many benefits there already are to playing a collegiate sport. One being reduced or free admission also known as a scholarship.
Student athletes are not professional athletes or entertainers, and should not be paid for playing on a college team. Although, I no longer play sports the debate of college athletes and whether they should be paid or not still interests me. As a lot of people from Neuqua play sports, many of them should be concerned about the argument, because this could affect them in the future. When deciding what college to sign with, one factor is the amount of scholarship money that they are going to receive. College’s spend much more on athletes scholarships compared to academic scholarships that they give out.
The rule in college is players”may not accept gifts or money from sports agents, booster clubs, alumni , or companies to make life easier.”(DOL 105) Playing in college is just like playing in the pros. The money college schools make from game tickets, tv broadcasting, and food concessions at their games is almost more than some pro games. They deserve the money because people are coming to watch them, not the team owners or the coach or the NCAA board. By reading this book you will find out why but the answer might shock
As we all know, college can be very expensive. With the scholarships and grants, college student-athletes can go to school for free and get their day-to-day needs such as food, housing, clothes, etc. Ackerman and Scotts, purpose is to show that college is a learning experience and with the help of college sports, the student-athletes will have a chance to grow and be successful in life rather than being exploited. However, critics believe that college student-athletes should be paid salary, like professional athletes, because they want people to see the “athletes are the rule, not the expectation” (par 11). They want the audience to think that it’s a rule for student-athletes to go play pro after two years, will no expectation.
I personlly think NCAA athletes should get paid, because they put a lot on the line to play college ball. Yea they might get paid in free education but you got to look on the other side how are they to support they self for personal needs like tooth paste, cloths, shoes, soap, and many more. What about the ones that go out of there home state and play. Their family many miles away so they can’t get to much support from them. Other sports fans do not want to see athletes paid because they say “ it will destroy their notion of amateur athletics.” They stick with the belief that a “free education” is compensation enough for what the athletes provide for the school.
In conclusion, college athletes should be paid because they bring in a ton of revenue for their schools while risking injury and yet are unable to afford the cost of living. The time that is put into the sport is the equivalent, if not more, than the time that is put into a full time job. Only thirty-three percent of students receive scholarships, most of them partial. Also, only one percent of all college athletes will play professional sports after their college tenure is served. The NCAA and Division One Colleges generate profits that do not trickle down to the athletes.
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. After researching this topic, my opinion is that college athletes should be paid.
In case the above forms of payments aren’t enough for all college athletes, there are other options if athletes show the need for more money. The NCAA is willing to provide extra money to “Pell Grant recipients” for personal items and travel home in case of emergencies (Gerdy 8). The opinion that college athletes shouldn’t be paid exists all around the country. College athletes shouldn’t be paid because they aren’t employees, the sports programs don’t have extra money, and the athletes are already receiving compensation for their work on the team. Although there are split opinions among the college students who are not athletes, many high school students who don’t plan on being athletes in college are against paying college athletes.
If his statement is true, then why shouldn’t college athletes get paid? With their success they endorse their college, through ticket sales, merchandise, media, and branding. A Duke Blue Devils sweatshirt can sell for up to $100, but without the success they’ve had because of their athletes would people still be inclined to purchase it? Tickets to attend a Duke Blue Devils basketball game can range up to $1000, but college athletes don 't see any of that money even though they are the ones providing the entertainment which certainly does not seem right. In the same article Brian Frederick said “ Fans must understand that college sports is a big business”, and this is very true, but the reason it is such a big business is because of the athletes.
Do you think college athletes should be paid? This controversy is debated in Opposing Viewpoints: Sports and Athletes. Al Woods titles his argument College Athletes Should Be Paid because the schools are making money off the players, some athletes are being paid under the table, and athletes are giving up on education. However, Krikor Meshefejian titles his argument College Students Should Not Be Paid because students receive scholarships, the payment system is “problematic”, and the experience is payment enough(98-99.) Meshefejian has the better argument that students should not be paid.