In the world, college athletics grows and continues to bring large financial benefits to colleges, universities and even sponsors. This leads to many debates concerning the payment of the athletes. Some people think that scholarship paid to colleges for these student athletes is enough while others claim that the payments might make them to leave the college early for participating in the athletics. This essay brings out the pros and cons about the issue and also some people's views on the issue.
Pros and Cons of College Athlets Being Paid by College
The college athletes bring in a lot of money to their institutions. The players should receive some of this money because without them the schools cannot be able to receive all the popularity and the money. College athletes make enough money for colleges that it would not hurt to give some back. They should take better care of their student-athletes by paying them for their services (Ziemer, L. 2000).
Many College athletes live in poverty because the money they get is not sufficient enough to pay for all of the expenses and basic necessities. The athletes that graduate from colleges stay because their parents support them by giving or sending money to them. If college athletes are paid, there would be more athletes graduating from colleges. Paying athletes would be good for everyone and players would be forced to go for college education instead of only concentrating on the sports. The colleges athletes are not allowed to work hence do not get money to purchase the necessities. This leads to players accepting any illegal money, cars, clothes, etc.
Most college athletes don't turn professional, so the athletes won't have any working experience when they get into the real world. This would give the non-athletes and advantage in the working world over the athletes. Most of the athletes that have the opportunity to leave school and turn professional do so, because college athletes live in near poverty. To avoid all the illegal gains, the athletes should be paid. Maryland's Gary Williams says ".... some of these guys are pretty poor coming here, and a lot of college students have some money -- you feel out of place, you don't feel competitive academically sometimes, and I think it could do a lot of good" (Eisernberg, J. 2010).
If colleges don't pay the athletes the professional leagues should. Professional leagues such as the NBA, NHL, NFL, and MLB use colleges as minor leagues. Most of the players in these leagues come from universities across the U.S.A. Since the leagues get the athletes from the universities, they should pay them the same way they league players. College athletes should receive money for all of their needs, or if they can't do this the athletes should be given the opportunity to work, which will assist them, learn about working in real world (Becker, G and Nashat, G. 1998).
Many people who state that college athletes do not need extra money do not consider the psychological aspect of the issue. Ryan Keith argues that the talented college athletes are between the opportunity to further their education or start playing and get big money, which perhaps makes the not to complete their education. Being in such situation, people whose personality still develops feel a lot of tension from the outside i.e. from friends and potential sponsors. Therefore, college athletes should be paid some amount of money that allows them to make their decisions freely and continue their athletic career and education.
Athletes are not supposed to be paid because the main reason why they go to college is to learn and many students who go to college each year; some play sports, others are in student organizations, and some participate in theater. Each of these groups is equally important to the colleges and should be treated equally. If the athletes are paid for playing sports then going to other students will be forced to ask for payments because they participate in different activities. Paying athletes will create serious conflicts among the students, for why one group is paid going while others are not (William, E. 1997).
Secondly, the athletes receive scholarships and some support from the colleges. The money that athletics get is always given back to them in the form of grants and scholarships. For example, Notre Dame gives grants to student-athletes which amounts to $5 million annually. Even if athletics generate billions of money in revenue for colleges, there also is much money in expenses, which directly or indirectly help the college athletes. Also, Pell Grants are available to t needy, and general student loans are another option. Because of these, there is no need to pay college student athletes.
Thirdly, paying students will direct the concentration and emphasis to sports as compared to education. The student-athletes at American colleges receive the benefits of the high quality education system in the world from which they can go on in life. Student-athletes entertain people with skills and if the managements decides to pay college athletes, they will move the colleges further away from the main stated goals by making them more businesslike and disrupting the main point of college which is to learn. Also much money will make the athletes feel superior over others in money, power, and reputation.
call nowstart chatorder now
Also they will be compelled to start thinking about other additional things that will in turn prevent them from athletic and academic schedules. Also college athletes leave the college earlier in order to participate in the professional sports. Thus, many athletes do not finish their education. They have a good job that brings good money, that is why, they do not even think about completing their courses or graduating from the universities. At the same time some people offer that if college athletes are paid, it is less obvious that they will leave university early (William, E. 1997).
Finally, Dr. William W. Williams, who is the director of the government's department for overseeing sports in colleges argues that college sports requires about forty hours in a week for training, practicing, viewing relevant films, learning plays, travelling and participating in actual sports. Because of this, many of the student athletes do not get enough time to study the academic course material as compared to other students in the college. These athletes take a lot of time to finish college. Also, the American Coaches Association says that more than fifty percent of student athletes do not graduate on the required time and others even do not graduate. For those who manage to graduate, they have a disadvantage because they did some less competitive courses which require little work. To avoid this, the athlete students should not be paid (Becker, G and Nashat, G.1998).
Since there are variety of opinions concerning the athletes' payment, more reasonable decisions should be implemented in the near future which will help in enabling the college athletes as well as other students to come up with the right decisions concerning their future in a free way, not being limited by any restriction. Whatever the decision is, it should especially consider rights and needs of the college athletes as well as the available opportunities in their future life.
All first-time users will automatically receive 15% discount
- Invention Lab
- A Gap Year
- Are We Safe
- Whats Animal Rights
Should College Athletes Be Paid?
College athletics have gained immense popularity among Americans over the past few decades. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and the participating colleges which has fuelled the debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. This paper will attempt to answer the question as to whether college athletes should be paid by exploring the reasons for and against the payment of college athletes.
Reasons why college students should be paid
Athletes form the basic unit of intercollegiate sports. Despite the success of NCAA tournaments, athletes do not receive any monetary compensation. The main reasons fronted by the NCAA for lack of payment are that it wants to maintain its amateur status and that payment would compromise the integrity of intercollegiate athletics. It has increased its profits through the sale of merchandise, television rights and licenses for video games. Athletes play an active role in the promotion of these activities but do not benefit from the profits that are generated. This can be viewed as exploitation and is unethical.
Other students on scholarships are paid when their offer their services to their schools and the same should apply for athletes. This is because athletes offer more to their colleges than other students to the extent where sports have become the foundation of some universities. In this regard, universities like Alabama and Indiana are appreciated more due to their prowess in football and basketball respectively instead of their academic excellence.
Reasons why college athletes should not be paid
Paying athletes would undermine the primary role of universities which is to offer education. The lifetime skills and education that athletes receive while in college cannot be equated to the amount they would receive were they to be paid.
Athletes are also aware of the contractual agreements with the universities when signing scholarship papers. The university caters for their upkeep and gives them an opportunity to play their preferred sport at a higher level as well as earn a degree. Monetary compensation is not included in the agreements and should not be a matter of contention during the student’s tenure in university.
The growth in intercollegiate athletics has resulted into enormous revenues for colleges and NCAA and also attractive payment packages for coaches. College athletes deserve a share of the money that they help to generate.
Published on November 26th, 2014