The Grand Debate: Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

857 Words4 Pages
The Grand Debate The grand debate of whether to pay college athletes continues today. Yet, today there are so many other amenities provided to the athletes that they are practically paid through those. College coaches receive sky high salaries, the booster clubs donate millions of dollars to the university 's athletic program but those who are actually performing and competing do not get paid. As a former athlete, I do not think college athletes should be paid. Most already have paid tuition and amenities. Plus they get the recognition of being on a collegiate sport team. The most successful teams are indeed spending more than the rest. For instance, Auburn spends the most expenses on their football team than any other school… EXPENSES: $39,069,676/…show more content…
It would be unfair to pay college football players and not athletes of other sports especially women’s sports. In a interview with SEC coaches, we find out their perspectives on whether athletes should be paid to play or not. According to Coach Mark Richt, college football is a big business, "It 's a big business because there 's a passionate fan base.” “Some college coaches make as much or more as coaches in the NFL, which begs the age old question: Should college athletes be paid to play?” "I don 't think we can get into pay for play because if we do then they 're not amateur athletes anymore," Richt said. “College athletes can receive an athletic scholarship worth anywhere between $20,000 and $50,000 a year. It often includes tuition, room and board, plus books. University of Alabama coach Nick Saban thinks they should get more so athletes leave college truly debt-free.” "I just think they ought to get whatever it costs to go to school, but I think it has to be a level playing field," Saban said. “University of Florida Gators coach Will Muschamp
Open Document