Summary: College athletes are considered "amateurs" by the NCAA, and therefore prohibited from collecting any kind of monetary compensation. As profits grow each year, a growing contingent of former players and advocates are calling on the NCAA to start allow student athletes earn their fair share. They say the NCAA, is exploiting students by profiting from their skill and celebrity status without providing appropriate compensation.
Analysis: I believe it is unfair that college athletes can't be paid or make money off their names. If they are good enough to promote for their school and good enough to make money for the NCAA, they should have the chance to make money for themselves.
Questions:
1. Do you believe college athletes should be paid?
2. Should all college athletes get paid or only the best players get paid?
14 comments:
Colleges generate so much revenue off the players, yet the athletes don't make any of it. Coaches make a boat load of money and so do the athletic directors, but the so called "product" is left short sided in the end. So, why do coaches get a reward but the players don’t? They all are under the same pressure to win and they both work extremely hard. So, it doesn’t make sense that one person gets paid while the players don’t. The primary source of this large revenue comes from the players, so they rightfully deserve some of that money. People pay money to watch the players, so that same money should come back to the players. Without the players, no one would come to see the games. I think this applies to all the players because these athletes sacrifice a lot of time. This time can be used for social events, sleep, and even more dedication to their school work. They sacrifice their bodies and their health.
I agree that college athletes should be paid, because like Alexander said, they bring in so much revenue for the college but don't get any of it. College athletes spend so much time training, at practices, and at games that oftentimes it's nearly impossible for them to have the time to get a job to make the money they need to support themselves. Playing a sport professionally is seen and treated as a job, so I think playing a sport in college should also be treated like a job so that athletes can at least forgo having to get another job that just overworks them.
I believe college athletes should be paid. the time consumed not eh court is being taken from getting their degrees in collage, having a job, or working hard in school. select athletes are merely being paid their tuition to compensate being an athlete for the team. I also believe that they should be paid because even when the team wins the championship,such as march madness, coaches and staff are the one who recieve the revenue increase.
College players already get paid: it is called their scholarship and a free ride to a major university. However, much of this education is not fair, as most athletes spend a lot of their time practicing, when they should be studying or exploring other opportunities in college. I feel like it is better for colleges to improve their education specifically for these athletes, as it will help them in life because only 1% of all college athletes become pro.
If your saying that college athletes should be paid, then high school athletes should be paid as well, as they make their high school a ton of money, as well as other youth athletes.
I do think that college athletes should get paid because the amount of time that they put into training is like having a job. It is demanding and time consuming and I think that the players should get paid in order to economically support themselves. However, college is ultimately a place of education and I think that if these athletes receive scholarships and special benefits, that is an appropriate compensation.
I have to disagree categorically with prior comments. In theory, if there was an infinite amount of money in the world? Yeah, maybe-it's only fair. However, there's one big question: who would be paying these athletes? The school? Why should the school pay student athletes to play? The school doesn't pay other students to attend-in fact, it's the other way around. And what if the school runs out of money? Remember that most schools are either state-funded schools, or non-profit organizations. Also keep in mind that salaries for coaches and the upkeep for stadiums will have to remain the same. In all probability, colleges will have to go into the general tuition fund to pay their student athletes.
I'm not paying $40,000 a year so some frat boy can dribble a ball. I do not care about him or the team or the school enough to pay for that. These students can find jobs off-campus, or even on campus. They can make it work. If someone could give me an alternate method of payment for these student athletes, I'm all ears; otherwise, this is kind of a stupid proposal.
I believe that these student athlete's should be getting paid because of all the time and effort it takes for them to compete at their level while also continuing their education. These students are cramming all their available time that could be used towards their education or working to pay for their tuition. But I do agree with Granger, his idea of where the money would come from does lead me to the conclusion that it shouldn't come out of other students tuition.
Athletes are paid. They don't have to pay tuition. In my opinion, the problem lies in how those athletes aren't able to take advantage of their free education and not how they aren't being paid for their work.
I think that college athletes should be getting paid. To be a part of a college team, especially D1, requires a tremendous amount of time and effort. Most of the time, the grueling hours of practice and games that come with being part of a team consume so much of the day that free time must be allocated to their actual school work. College athletes rarely have time to actually get a paying job; playing a sport is basically their job. Yes, college athletes already do get free tuition which definitely helps I think, but regardless they are responsible for a lot of money that the school rakes in. Why should they not take a cut, even if it is minute, themselves? The coaches, trainers, and athletic directors all get so much money that it seems reasonable to me that the athletes get some themselves as well. Without the athletes, the school would not be raking in a lot of the money they generate from sporting events like March Madness.
I think that college players shouldn't be paid. After all, most D1 college athletes are getting a full ride scholarship and free education. If they really wanted to get paid they could player overseas, get paid, and then they can enter the NBA draft. I also think we have to take into consideration the NBA's rule "one and done" where a player has to attend at least one year of college. If this rule was to be removed players would be able to go straight to the NBA.
I believe that college athletes shouldn't be payed because they are already receiving a free education. Many college athletes have their entire tuition payed for them and at some schools, that can be worth around $200,000 over the four years. Although it is demanding and takes up a lot of their time, the students know what they signed themselves up for. Furthermore, most college athletes receive special help in school, such as 1 on 1 tutoring that will help them do well. College athletes work hard at what they do, but I believe that the free education and the special treatment is appropriate payment for these players.
I believe that athletes should be paid. Many people here are arguing that a full ride to a college should be the main pay. However, many college teams make millions of dollars and paying for athletes tuitions is nothing to them. I feel like the players are the reason for the success of school sports revenue. They deserve to get paid at least a little bit for their contributions.
I agree with other comments above, that college athlete should be paid especially during March Madness because the students are making so much money for school, yet the athletes themselves aren't receiving anything in return. The athletes are the ones practicing and performing in the games, while the school earns money off of them. I don't think that's fair for them not to be paid. Professional athletes are paid, so why aren't college athletes? College athletes are working harder because the time they spend practicing for hours everyday cuts into the time they can spend on studying or even getting a job. However, like others stated, they are being compensated with a full ride or scholarship, making their tuition fee less than other students, but like Alex said, they should be paid somewhat for their contributions to the school.
I believe that college athletes should receive payment for their services and fundraising benefits they contribute. College athletes spend most of their time dedicating themselves to represent their university and although some receive scholarships many do not. The NCAA claims to be a nonprofit organization, however, makes billions of dollars of March Madness and College Football Bowl Season alone. One problem which would need discussion regarding paying athletes is how the funds would be spread from school to school. What system would be used to discern if athletes are paid equally?
Post a Comment