College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

Secondly, there is a major difference between professional sports and college sports. “Students are not professional athletes who are paid salaries and incentives for a career in sports. They are students receiving access to a college education through their participation in sports...student athletes are amateurs who choose to participate in intercollegiate athletics as part of their educational experience, thus maintaining a distinction between student athletes who participate in the collegiate model and professional athletes who are also students” (Mitchell). The collegiate athletes’ incentive is the access to an outstanding education. College athletes playing a college sport is not a career or a profession. “The NCAA plays a critical role in the maintenance of a revered tradition of amateurism in college sports”(Ross). This quote is laudable because

Jameis Winston, Dwayne Wade, Giancarlo Stanton, and Dalvin Cook all are very big people in Florida’s sports market. They all are important to their team’s success and considered leaders on their teams. The major difference between the four players is that 3 of them are compensated for their work, but on the other hand, one which is a college student receiving a free education, isn’t paid for nearly doing the same kind of work. Many people would argue that it’s not fair that college athletes aren’t being paid for bringing in millions of dollars to the institution they play for, putting their lives in danger to play the sports, and missing tons of class to prepare for their sports games without being paid. Those who argue against the compensation of athletes would say that most college and universities don’t make nearly enough revenue to pay all the college athletes as well as saying college athletes already receive a free education with scholarships and that should be the real reason to be in college. This issue has been a debate for many years among players, the National Collegiate Athletic Association & even outside influences like celebrities and law officials.

Kim Kardashian’s ex lover is not just famous for dating a “Kardashian”; he was more famous for the controversial issue with the NCAA due to proceeds given to him for his ability on the field. Reggie Bush made a lot of accomplishments while being a college athlete. Because of his skills, he was rewarded an amount of money. While Reggie Bush was playing at the University of Southern California, statistics show that the college generated roughly fifty-five million dollars. That’s a lot of money for one athlete to bring in. Every day we hear more and more stories about NCAA investigators and colleges being punished for “paying” players. However, college athletes bring in a lot of money. Therefore, they should get a percentage whether it is a small amount or a large amount. It will depend on the athletes’ ability. While some may argue that paying college athletes to play is wrong, college athletes have a marketable skill and should be paid for their skill.

Should NCAA Athletes be paid? Getting paid to compete in collegiate sports has become a hot topic of debate for the world of sports. Many sports analyst would argue that without athletes, the big money in college sports disappears. Some sports analyst would say that college athletes are already paid when athletes receive an education. Both sides of the argument have valid points. Is there a price for education? Should athletes benefit from revenue generated from games?

For decades college athletics have been a huge money making business and for decades the players at these universities have been the ones making the majority of it. The issue with this topic is that college athletes receive nothing more than a scholarship which is sometimes not enough. Many college athletes have spoken out about this issue and the NCAA has fired back in response. The NCAA argues that these athletes are not professionals and do not deserve payment. If college athletes were to receive payment they would no longer be amateur athletes. Some fans think it would ruin the integrity of college athletics because college athletes are supposed to be working towards making it to the professional level, if they were to receive payment for play it may tarnish some athletes work ethic. What is at stake in this piece is that college athletics make billions of dollars a year and the main attraction to the events that make the money are the athletes that play in the game and those athletes do not receive any of the money made. The NCAA does not want to pay the athletes because you cannot just pay the top athletes you must pay all athletes. If the NCAA were to do this they would lose a lot of money from what they bring in now.

College athletes spend numerous hours every week playing games during their season and working to strengthen their athletic abilities. With long hours of practice, exercising, and games, it can make managing school work and their sport difficult to handle. According to Rodney K. Smith, author of “A Brief History of the National Collegiate Athletic Association 's Role in Regulating Intercollegiate Athletics” in the Marquette Sports Law Review, “In 1905 alone, there were over eighteen deaths and one hundred major injuries in intercollegiate football (Vol 11:9).” With a history of an abundant amount of players getting injured while playing, the discussion of paying college athletes was debated between different colleges. The issue of whether or not to pay college athletes was recently brought to attention in the public eye. In 2013, Johnny Manziel held up his Heisman trophy on the cover of Time Magazine and stated, “It’s time to pay college athletes” (ESPN).

There has been on ongoing discussion between college athletes and the NCAA on whether they should be compensated for the work they do for their selective school. Student athletes deserve to be paid to invest in their needs, and the schools have the money to do so. College Athletes have made the case that they are no longer student athletes, but are on the clock workers. The NCAA accumulates around 11 billion dollars in revenue a year, more money than the NFL, NBA, and MLB. Many writers such as Joe Nocera, a sports business columnist for the New York Times, talks about how “The NCAA and college sports establishment exploit the players who generate the billions that the grown-ups pocket.” College Athletics’ is the school’s number one money

Athletes who are given full ride athletic scholarships receive free tuition, housing, books, meals and money for basic needs. In addition, they get to attend a top college which they might have not been accepted into without excelling at a particular or multiple sports. With all of these benefits, some people think college athletes should be paid a stipend. College athletes in the United States should not be paid because of the negative effects on the athletes, colleges and the public.

With another academic school year passing by, college football fans were able to join another out the seat nail-biting highlighted NCAA football season. Majority of the people would agree that college football is just as competitive and popular as the NFL. The annual revenue of the top 25 college football teams can reflect that assumption by grossing over 1.2 billion dollars alone. There is one major difference between the two associations which is NFL players are paid off the money they help bring in and college student athletes are not. Providing scholarships to the athletes isn’t enough anymore if the NCAA Football wants to perceive themselves as a money making competitor, and not reward the athletes that helped bring in that type of money.

“ Let’s go,” are the sounds of crazy fans at the NCAA March Madness event with fans yelling and cheering nonstop. You can feel the adrenaline rush and it feels like a real NBA basketball game. The stage is big and the atmosphere is unbelievable. As the players come out, you can see how they feel that all their effort and time has been leading up to this incredible moment. They all seem like professionals, but wait, these athletes do not get paid. The NCAA does not pay athletes no matter how good or bad they are. I believe the NCAA should pay them because college sports are their full time job and the media will overall benefit colleges and strike the players.

There has been much scrutiny over college athletes receiving illegal benefits over the years. What should be looked at more closely is why these benefits are illegal in the first place. The NCAA has such a stranglehold on college athletics that college athletes are not allowed to do what many other college students do. Many recent scandals have sparked the debate of the payment of college athletes. There has been controversy as to whether college athletes should be paid, or whether they should be happy with their scholarships.

Asking wether to pay college athletes or not is one of the most heated debates in NCAA history. Although it may sound good to the students, it will arise devastating effects on society. The discrimination that might occur if we decide to pay athletes could initiate public riots or violence. The idea of college athletes being paid should be put to rest based on the consequences that would arise (Bokshan).

For example, the athletes bring revenue into the college from jersey and ticket sales; however, colleges are rewarding their athletes a lot more than what these athletes are awarding the college. The fight of whether college athletes should get paid or not will always be a controversial topic in the sports world for many years to come. However, no matter the amount that the athlete gets paid, it will never be enough and there will still be a conflict to resolve. In the world of sports, we need to take a step back and look at the big picture. College is a place for students to come and earn their degree and help jumpstart them into the “real world,” not a place where athletes come to get paid and play sports. That is the reason they are called student-athletes not athlete-students, even though it sounds

Every year in the United States thousands of collegiate student-athletes participate in a variety of different sports, and currently they do not receive paychecks for their performances. College athletics have attained an extensive popularity increase among Americans over the past few decades. The result - increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA); therefore, the participating colleges are fueling the debate of whether or not college athletes should collect an income. College athletes should not be paid to play because it will negatively affect their college experience. Rather, they should be compensated for their dedication to the sport. Many student athletes accept scholarships to play at a college or university, which allows the student to attend the school for free. This is fair compensation to the athlete as a college education today can cost as much as $20,000 to even $50,000 at some higher level schools. Essentially, they earn a free education and in return they have the opportunity to represent their school in a particular sport. Furthermore, athletes will begin to feel like they are playing at a professional level and that is exactly what they are not.

Many others believe that college students should be paid. Athletes bring their schools money (Nocera et al.1). Therefore, many believe that the students should get some of the money that they help bring in. Players are part of the labor source and get nothing. There is no other industry where labor gets nothing. (Nocera et al.1). It is only fair if athletes get paid too. Athletes work hard to do what they do but do not get