Category: Paying College Athletes

When Zion Williamson blew through his shoe and injured his knee in a meaningless game vs UNC on February 20, 2019, it sparked a nationwide debate over whether athletes at the college level deserve to be compensated as if they are professionals. Most people would argue that yes, college athletes do deserve to be compensated because most of them have millions of dollars waiting for them in the professional leagues and are jeopardizing their future by even playing in the NCAA. Others bring up the fact that the NCAA makes billions of dollars year after year so they should spread that wealth to the athletes that make them that money, and the list goes on and on and on. These are more than enough reasons to pay college athletes according to most people, they are wrong, as a matter of fact there are 3 main reasons as to why. College athletes should not be paid because the ramifications that would come from paying them would significantly outweigh their benefits from receiving compensation.

The first reason as to why college athletes should not receive compensation from their respective universities through the NCAA is that if amateurism breaks down at the college level, what’s to stop money from flowing to athletes even younger than the college age? The fact of the matter is that college athletes do not get paid for their services because there has to be a fine line between who is a professional and who is not. They are called “college athletes” for a reason, this being that they are trying to obtain the necessary experience and information needed to succeed at the professional level, just as any normal college student would do. If the NCAA decides to step in now and allow universities to pay students to play sports for their programs, they would be eliminating the word “professional” from being used when talking about pro sports. And if the word “professional” is eliminated, then anybody playing in any funded sport program should get paid, whether they be in college, high school, middle school, and who knows, maybe even elementary? To put it simply, risking having to pay athletes younger than the college age is not worth paying the players of collegiate sports programs.

The second reason as to why college athletes should not get paid is it would create a major gap in talent in the NCAA, as the top schools would be able to pay big money to get the best players on the market while the smaller colleges/universities would be stuck with the below average ones. Cody McDavis of the New York Times states that “among the roughly 350 athletic departments in the N.C.A.A.’s Division I, only about 24 schools have generated more revenue than expenses in recent years. The nation’s top five conferences made over $6 billion in 2015, billions more than all other schools combined…”. This is proof that a tier of universities above the rest of the NCAA does in fact exist. These schools would presumably spend thousands, if not millions of dollars on players, essentially leaving their leftovers for the bottom tiers of colleges to sort through. This would result in lopsided games during the NCAA’s regular seasons of its numerous sports since the talent between a top tier school and a bottom tier school will be immensely different. Is this good for the league? Is this good for the fans? The correct answer is NO. If college athletes are paid, the fans will lose interest in the games because of the poor competition that would be presented week end and week out, outweighing the benefits a college athlete would receive from getting compensated for their play.

Finally, the final reason as to why college athletes should not get paid is it could mean the termination of other sports programs in various colleges/universities. This is something that in a way has actually already happened. Once again, Cody McDavis of the New York Times revealed that “In August 2015, after the N.C.A.A. began allowing Division I universities to adopt ‘cost of attendance’ stipends, North Dakota State University announced that it would offer such stipends in 16 sports, resulting in a new $600,000 annual expense to be paid by the athletic department… the University of North Dakota… followed suit six days later. What happened? The University of North Dakota cut five teams over the next two years to help pay for the added expense.”. This is a prime example of what could happen to colleges/universities if they were required to compensate their players, especially the ones located in the bottom tier of the NCAA as far as their budget and profit are concerned. To pile on, this example of the consequence of “paying” college athletes comes at the expense of other athletes in different sports. Students involved with the five teams that were cut over a span of two years at the University of North Dakota now could not continue to play the sport that they loved, all because the athletes of the more popular sports such as football and basketball wanted to be paid like they were professionals. This is by far the best example you will find of the ramifications that would come with paying college athletes outweighing the benefits of said athletes from receiving compensation from their respective colleges/universities.

To be fair, there are arguments that can be made as to why college athletes should be paid, such as most of them have millions of dollars waiting for them in the professional leagues and are jeopardizing their future by even playing in the NCAA, as well as the fact that the NCAA makes billions of dollars year after year so they should spread that wealth to the athletes that make them that money (Both were discussed in the first paragraph). First off, there is some legitimacy and reason to the idea that the NCAA should share some of it’s massive wealth with college athletes according to Moneynation.com, as “The NCAA makes about $1 billion per year.” and “College athletics as a whole pulls in about $12 billion annually.” However, “96% of all NCAA money gets distributed to member schools or spent on championships. The schools use that money to fund athletics programs and pay staff and coaches. A big chunk of the money is used to build and maintain stadiums and sports facilities and buy sports equipment.” This is a huge rebuttal of the argument that the NCAA doesn’t share its wealth with its players since the quote specifically identifies how almost all of the money made by the NCAA goes back into its universities, stadiums, advertising, and sports facilities, all aspects where the players can benefit from. As for the argument that college athletes should be paid because they are risking injuries by playing in the NCAA when some of them are destined to land big contracts in the pros, college athletes have to take that chance if they want to play in the big league, that’s why it’s so hard to become a professional sports player, only the athletes that really desire the life accomplish it.

This topic of whether or not college athletes deserve to be paid will not go away until the day actually comes when students are allowed to profit off their play and likeness, there are even laws coming into place to potentially move forward to allow college athletes to be compensated. But in the words of William Noack of TCA News service, “While few would deny that money is playing too large a role in collegiate sports today, it’s difficult to see how the situation could be made better by introducing even more money in the form of payments to players.” If college athletes are paid, it would undoubtedly set off a cause and effect reaction in which the ramifications that would come from paying them would significantly outweigh their benefits from receiving compensation. In the end though, we need to ensure that there remains a separation between what is a professional and what isn’t, otherwise, why go to college?

Affirmative:

Injuries are a common factor in everyone’s lives but especially one of an athlete. There have been multiple cases of students who couldn’t go into the big leagues because of a bad knee in the lighter cases or paralyzed/brain-damaged in the more serious cases. School’s are not required to pay for any lasting injury. While the NCAA does enforce that athletes must have insurance, students that were paid for their risk could cover what insurance doesn’t or to make of the difference in what they could’ve gone pro.

ESPN argues that college sports brings in hundreds of millions of dollars every year and very little goes back to the athletes and they aren’t required to.

Holes in the Affirmative:

The NCAA pays for athletes who are injured in any NCAA championship event and on any injury with a medical bill more than $90,000. There are some irreversible effects that could potentially plague an athlete, but they understand that risk when they sign up.

Most schools give perks such as gear and better connections.

Negative:

College was created in order for students to further their education in an environment with peers of the same caliber. However paying college athletes, who are already accepted into colleges with much lower GPAs and SAT scores than their classmates, might cause student athletes to study less because they would be more focused on improving their game or following the cash cow. The former NCAA president, Oliver Luck, said “paychecks and the opportunity to do an autograph signing, or an endorsement would distract campus athletes from what’s really important, which is the educational component”.

Most students are already given a money advantage in the form of a scholarship. While some students might get money for being smart, others get money for their athleticism. And at the same time some students don’t get money for getting smart but simply admission into the school, the same goes for athletes.

Holes in the Negative:

The average college athlete already feels like they don’t have enough time to study as it is as football players, for example, spend over 50 hours a week training or playing. In fact, Northwestern University considers their student athletes employees because of the amount of time they play compared to the amount of time they were in school. While sports do take up a majority of the time in an athlete’s life, education is already on the back burner compared to other more time consuming things.

Sports bring in millions of dollars and is a great way to advertise for the school. The education stand point is important but in no way brings in the same amount of money as football.

College athletes shouldn’t be compensated for playing sports at the collegiate level, but for their advertisement and use of their names in video games and products. College athletes do not get exploited by their colleges for playing sports, but by organizations who are taking all of the profit at the cost of the athlete.

Introduction

Looking back, college athletes started playing sports originally to get their college education paid for, nothing more. And even though that’s still the case, college athletes’ names get used for sale of products and advertisement, and they should be paid not for playing the sport, but the use of their name in the media, products, etc. And of course, all of the information gathered for this speech comes from credible sources.

Body

College athletes can get enough money from FAFSA and, at the Division I and some Division II levels, Stipend checks and their scholarship to pay for their education and housing. FAFSA gives students enough money to pay for their college tuition, depending on income.

If expenses are covered, money get’s refunded to student. Stipend checks are given to athletes to cover costs that the athlete can’t cover themselves.Started giving them out in 2015. range from 2000-5000 dollars, nowadays even more.

All the extra money they get on top of finical aid would also change recruiting massively. Athletes getting paid would change the whole perspective on recruiting athletes. Universities with the largest income or revenue would get the best recruits. Would cause low income organizations to go out of business and get shut down. This would let the schools take the control in the recruitment process. Prospects wouldn’t be focused on favorite schools, only salaries they are offered. It would put their priority with their salary fist, not their education.

On top of burdening students and players with decisions, it would also affect taxpayers. Paying athletes would burden taxpayers and regular students. Colleges would have to raise tuition, housing, etc. to get money for their salaries. It would cause a decrease in enrollment of students. Organization would have to ask taxpayers for monetary support for athletes’ salaries.

Tax payers aren’t the only ones getting burdened, players get used the same way by companies. Companies rely on known players to create revenue and income using their image and name. When Zion Williamson’s Nike show broke in the game Nike’s stock dropped by $1,1 billion. NCAA video games use athletes’ names in the game, and got popular of the years. EA Sports payed colleges between $7500-$150000 for being in the game.

Conclusion

Reviewing the speech, I have discussed revenue players bring to companies and colleges using their images, the burden paying athletes would put on taxpayers and non-athlete students, the drastic change in recruiting salaries would make and that athletes get enough money from the country and schools already to pay for all necessities. And even though athletes still shouldn’t be paid for playing for the school, they should at least get paid for making money for it and companies profiting from them.

Have you ever wondered do college athletes get paid? How do they pay for all their expenses? Where does all the money from tickets sales go? Can college athletes get sponsors? If you found yourself ever wondering about these questions on college athletes? Then this article “Should College Athletes Be Allowed to Get Paid,” written by Spencer Bokat-Lindell, a writer for the New York Times in the opinion section, is for you. As I began to read the article, I noticed it was stating that college athletes should be getting paid for playing a highly viewed sport. It gave factual information to back up his argument. I have chosen this article, not only because I myself am a college athlete, but because many college athletes are being taken advantage of by their University being used for their skills and fame in order to receive more income with no pay. In this article, Spencer Bokat-Lindell, states why college athletes should be getting paid for their participation in highly viewed college sports.

Spencer Bokat-Lindell opens the article by stating that the Gov. Gavin Newsom of California signed a law allowing athletes to strike endorsement deals. Which is a move that could upend the business model of college sports that denies student athletes the ability to trade on their talent. Newsom also tweeted “colleges reap billions from student athletes but block them from earning a single dollar.”

He then goes on to state facts that he believes we should know. Such as “The National Collegiate Athletic Association,” the nonprofit organization that administers student athletics, made over $1 billion in revenue in 2017. Also, in which athletes themselves are compensated only in financial aid and are forbidden to be paid in exchange for the use of their name, image or likeness.

He then starts to explain on how athletes are being cheated by quoting many professional athletes and spokesman/spokeswoman. Stating their opinions on why college athletes should get paid and their standpoint on colleges using them without pay in return. He also begins to use factual information that universities with top teams can rake in nearly $20 million a year from Nike or Adidas sponsorships from athletes talents that attracts them in the first place. Brian Rosenberg, the president of Macalester College, in The New York Times stated “College basketball players are worth a lot of money, but they aren’t legally allowed to make it. So, the schools, coaches, agents and shoe companies make the money instead.” Which supports Spencer Bokat-Lindell argument on why college athletes should get paid.

California’s law breaks this prohibition, allowing students to book sponsorships, even with the help of agents. But it would also challenge the system of amateurism that has governed college sports for decades, risking N.C.A.A. fines “potentially in the tens of millions of dollars” for California schools whose athletes decide to monetize their renown, according to an analysis by the California State Assembly’s staff, and even risking their teams’ eligibility to compete.As those on opposing sides of California’s law debate how the fruits of the college sports economy ought to be distributed, others assert that the solution is simply to decommercialize the activity altogether.

Jonathan R. Cole, a professor at Columbia and author of “Toward a More Perfect University,” suggests in The Atlantic that the emphasis placed on campus athletics is “totally out of control.” In 41 states, he writes, the highest-paid public employee is not a professor or neurosurgeon, but rather a college football or basketball coach. For students, meanwhile, the difficulty of keeping up with both coursework and demanding athletic schedules has created an incentive for academic fraud. Taken together, a picture emerges of college sports as a pseudoprofessional industry that encroaches upon the mission of higher education.

One school that has provided something of a model on this front is Spelman, a historically black college for women. In 2011, Spelman learned that its N.C.A.A. division was losing three members. Rather than find another conference in which to compete at great expense, the school decided to withdraw from the N.C.A.A. and eliminate its athletics department in favor of a fitness program for all students. Beverly Daniel Tatum, then Spelman’s president, wrote in The Times in 2013: Whether it’s diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease, black women are more likely to suffer from these ailments — and die from them — at young ages. All are linked to obesity and lack of physical activity … We decided that it was more important to support our entire campus with a wellness initiative than 80 student athletes with N.C.A.A. funding.

California’s changes aren’t scheduled to take effect until 2023, leaving the N.C.A.A. ample time to mount court challenges to the law, which the organization has suggested violates the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution. If the law is upheld, the N.C.A.A. will have to decide whether to penalize the schools with fines, which may or may not be legally enforceable, or even expel them.

For now, California is betting that the outsize importance of its universities within the world of college sports will make those threats impossible to carry out. “I don’t necessarily take it to heart,” Newsom said.

Over the past decade there has been a major debate at the hands of the United States that is still undecided upon. Do NCAA Athletes deserve the right to be paid for their commercials, brand deals, and jersey sales? When it comes to the citizens of our current society the viewpoint is split evenly for the most part. In my opinion the athletes of major college teams that bring in millions, or even billions in some cases, for their schools deserve the right to be compensated for their polished skill set.

First, to take a look at one side of the debate. The argument that a lot of anti-paying supporters will present is that these athletes will lose their love for the game and only be chasing money. People are under this belief because they often will consider the National Football League (NFL) as an example. Many NFL players are only playing to be compensated and it shows in their enthusiasm in game. If a college player was to be compared to a professional player, the passion for the game is much more prevalent. This is displayed through college athlete’s willingness to give all they have every play, while professional athletes tend to only give a half-hearted effort. If college athletes were to be paid this would lead to them looking at bank statements in the place of stat sheets to decide their value in game.

A major argument to present from the anti-paying viewpoint is the fact that there is no fair way to pay these athletes. If schools were to try to pay the players based off their skillset compared to the average player of that position, there would be multiple backfires. First of which being would a five-star defensive lineman going to the University of Alabama be paid equally to a five-star quarterback is who also holds the task of being leading his team? Would a football player of the University of Alabama be paid the same amount as an athlete on the tennis team, which brings in significantly less revenue? Theoretically if these athletes were to be paid directly by the school’s athletic department, they would then be considered employees of the school. This would raise questions such as can they be cut for not performing equivalent to their pay grade, can they be fined for missing practices, and do labor laws apply to these students?

Another look is the fact that they are already receiving a free education, worth up to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and do not deserve a penny more than that. College athletes are only allowed twenty hours of team practice a week for twenty-one weeks total, this accumulates to a total of six-hundred and four hours through the entire year. This averages to eleven hours a week per year, a number that part time workers easily outnumber on average. The average wage received is between eight and ten dollars a week, working the six-hundred and four hours would only produce a profit of $4,832-$6,040. Student athletes receive a free education and housing, exceeding a value of $100,000 per year. This is significantly more valuable than what other college students are able to bring in, and yet they still desire more compensation?

Also, if athletes were able to be compensated they would no longer be looking at what schools coaching fits them best, what program they will be able to fit in best, what the campus and benefits of that school are like, or what education opportunities they would be able to take advantage of, instead they would be looking at what school would be able to fork up the most money and make that their first option. In Division one football, historically speaking, there are twenty or so teams that consistently remain in the top twenty-five rankings. These teams will repeatedly play on television, giving them the opportunity to seek sponsors much easier than small division one schools. Athletes will be much more attracted to a school that is able to distribute scholar ships at a higher rate because they bring in more profit via sponsors, jersey sales, and ticket sales. If college athletes were given the opportunity to be paid by schools that had the ability to do so, it would lead to an unfair advantage and eventually a throne of power allowing them to recruit for a team that would dominate the college division.

Lastly, the point could be presented is that these athletes are not mature enough to handle the amount of money that would be flooding in, and they would unquestionably make immature mistakes with it. College students can range in age from seventeen to up twenty-four years old. At this age, the chance of these athletes correctly saving money is much lower than them spending irresponsibly and facing debts later in life because of it. College students are known for being young, immature adults who have never experienced this kind of freedom before. If professional level players have track record of improperly managing their salaries by spending money on the wrong things such as nice cars, big houses, jewelry, clothes, and toys, why would we not expect the same of these young college students?

However, the other side of the spectrum has the opinion that these athletes do indeed have the right to some of the money they bring into these big programs. Last year during the March Madness college basketball tournament brought in $1.29 billion dollars in just advertisements. The NCAA created a revenue of $844 million dollars between ads and marketing rights alone. In some cases, college athletic departments are bringing in a total of up to $185,000,000 a year yet disagree with the idea of paying their athletes a fraction of it. These athletes bring in money to their schools in other a variety of forms such as ticket sales, jersey sales, and attending alumni fundraising events. Yet college athletes will reap zero of the income that they have helped produced.

The athletes are doing at least twelve credit hours each per semester, just like every other college student, on top of their forty hours a week sports schedule. The argument of college athletes are only allowed twenty team practice hours a week for twenty-one weeks per year is true. However, this does not put into account the extra hours spent in recovery, watching film, and weightlifting. In a NCAA study on time demands of student athletes, division one football players reported spending a mean time of forty-five hours a week among athletics on average. These hours spent are all in addition to the mean time spent doing academic activities, which averaged out to forty-two hours.

Another point is that these athletes are not all going to be able to make it to the professional level, and they will have nothing to show from all of their hard work. If they are to get injured, deemed unable to play, and end up having to transfer back home due to the loss of their scholarship. These athletes’ step onto their fields everyday risking their bodies for the entertainment of our population and gain nothing from it in some cases. The NCAA released an article stating that less than two percent of its college athletes will go on to be professional. These athletes are supposed to rely on their degree after their four years of eligibility to play sports. Often the grades of these athletes are seriously affected because of the amount of time they are required to dedicate to their sport in order to keep their scholarship. Due to this commitment the average athlete will not get to see their college education pay off and lead to a stable, well-paying job.

If paying collegiate athletes was legalized in all fifty states in the United States it would undoubtedly lead to an increased graduation rate. There have been several reported cases of athletes dropping out of school due to their families back home relying on them for financial support. Javedon Clowney, a University of South Carolina student, was a defensive end in Division one football, and quite decorated too. He was a College All-American as a sophomore, set a school record for quarterback sacks and tackles for a loss, and earned defensive player of the year in the Southeastern Conference. Clowney reported that he would have finished out his college degree if the college was able to pay him so that he could send money back home to his in-need family. This is an ongoing trend of athletes in similar positions and is unfortunate in the sense that if they are to be injured, they will have no degree to fall back on.

Being able to financially support oneself as a college athlete would also generate the proposal that more talented players would consider participating. Even though this is not as common of a case, there are still players who would love the opportunity to proceed to the next level after high school, but are unable to because they simply cannot afford simple necessities, such as food, hygiene products, and clothing, without having some source of income. In some cases, this can lead to these young athletes involving themselves with the wrong crowds and ending up in jail or dead.

150 years ago Princeton and Rutgers University started game we now know as American football, now back then college football wasn’t as big as it is today. There isn’t 100,000 screaming fans in the stands or television broadcasting the game,well back then they didn’t have T.V and only 100 people showed up for the first game, and it certainly wasn’t as exciting or fun to watch as it is today but it laid down the foundation of the for what it would become. That game today is shaped by the Intercollegiate Athletic Association now known as the NCAA, They set the rules all players for all sports must follow. One of the main rules the NCAA has established is the amateurism rule, which basically states that student athletes are students first and shouldn’t worry about money. Now this rule was made to help the players and focus on their school rather than their sport. But that was back in 1906, nowadays student athletes can spend up to 50 hours a week in practice,games, and travel. This is on top of their classes which they have to stay on top of because if they dont they might lose their scholarship. When Josh Rosen former UCLA quarterback was asked about his time in college, he said “it was like working two fulltime jobs”. Now that just one example of Colleges demanding a lot from their players, But for some just playing for the school they love is good enough. Most of the people who say that college athletes shouldnt be paid are former players,representatives of the NCAA, and even coaches,saying it will ruin the purity of the game and the game will be just like the NFL were its all about money.

But when the NCAA signs a multi year bargain worth nearly $11 billion with CBS and Turner Sports that would give them the rights to show the games and some coaches are being paid almost 10 million dollars a year, now I don’t know about you but that doesn’t seem like the coaches are doing for the love and purity of the game. Now i’m not saying that the coaches shouldnt make a living but when your players are putting in more hours at practice that the study hall I think they should make some money for their time. It’s not as easy as handing out checks to every football and basketball player who plays for the best team in the nation. There are a lot of factors that must be accounted for, one of the main reasons being title 9 which is the equal distribution of money for every sport the university provides. So if you want to pay the Heisman trophy winner you have to pay the second string goalie on women’s soccer. Now this is not what people think of when we’re talking about paying the students, far from it. There are some ways of getting around this with the new “pay to play” law passed by California.

But before I go into more detail about paying the athletes I first want to go into more detail as to why some people don’t want to pay the athletes, like I said before many friends people saying athletes should be paid are representatives of the NCAA, coaches and even some of the games biggest stares like Tim Tebow. When Tebow was the starting quarterback at the Florida University his jersey was one of the best selling jerseys in America,and when asked if he agreed with California’s new law that allows student athletes to make money off of their image and name he said that “when I went into college I knew it wasn’t about the money, it was about the pride to play for his school and win a championship”. But for many other players pride for your school doesn’t pay the bills,feed them or help support their families, and while paying the athletes may have an effect on the game and the decisions future players make it’s still the right thing to do.

Now I’m one of the biggest college football fans you’ll ever meet, I’ve gone to many San Jose State and Stanford as a kid and even played the NCAA video game with all of my friends. But as I’ve gotten older and seen and heard some of the injustices the players have gone through. For example earlier this year Memphis university basketball star recruit and potential No. 1 NBA Draft pick James Wiseman has been suspended 12 games by ncaa, for his mothers involvement in accepting $11,500 in the recruitment of their son. Now Wiseman just wanted to help his mom move into a better neighborhood, but because the person who gave him the money was a “booster” he not only got suspended but has to return all the money he accepted. This is not the first time a player has accepted money under the table from teams trying to get them to commit to their school.

Back in the 1980s Texas’s Universities were basically the wild wild west of trying to recruit the best players in the nation for their school, every school in the state had boosters go to the hometown of the best players and try to buy their commitment. This included buying the recruits cars,giving them money even going as far as buying their families a house to live in, and no school was more guilty of these actions that’s Southern Methodist University(SMU). They were caught not only giving their players monthly payments for how well they played, but even going as far as moving players families halfway across the country just to live near their son’s. This resulted in SMU’s downfall as they received the “death penalty” for multiple rule violations within 5 years, this resulted in the school losing scholarships canceling the football program for two years and being illuminated from a bowlgames for five years. Now the question can be asked why go so far and break so many rules?

Well in the short answer it was to win some football games but I’m not here to talk about the short answer. The long answer is there are no real way university will be caught unless there’s someone is willing to leak information, this was the case for SMU when a former linebacker Sean Stoppers was kicked out of school for not meeting expectations and also having drug problems off the field they decided to ignore. So when he went back home to Pennsylvania the NCAA flowed and asked Stompers and his mother about some of the stuff that was happening at SMU. But most players don’t want to give up information that will hurt the school they went too so they keep their mouths shut and the schools just keep doing the same thing over and over again.

Off course SMU’s story hasn’t stopped other schools from exploding their players and bending the rules to help them win games, it’s just made them more careful of how they do it. So to the people who say that players are doing this for the love of the game and that college sports are pure, I say there is so much corruption in college sports that we need to take the boosters out of the equation and just allow the players to make money the legal way and keep on playing the sport they love without any worry of losing their scholarship or hurting their team.

So how do we pay the players without hurting the players, school or the way the game is played, well recently the state of California has passed a new law the “pay to play act” saying that players may make money off of their name and likeness. This goes for all sports and helps pay the bigger names in college sports like Zion Williams or Tua Tagovailoa, it doesn’t make the schools pay the athletes but it’s a step in the right direction. But in my opinion the school not paying the players directly can be a good opportunity for players to make some good money and build up their personal brand. Once California passed the new law, the NCAA saw the writing on the wall and applied the new law to all schools. So hopefully players will make the most of their new opportunities presented to them, and still keep the integrity of the sport. For the most part student athletes have gotten a monthly severance check to help them on their daily needs, but with this new law will be marking a lot more and might even encourage players to stay in school longer and finish their degree.

So in conclusion the paying of college student athletes is not an easy question to answer. There are a lot of factors to consider when going into the topic like title 9, smaller schools that don’t make that much money and dirty practices that have been paying players under the table for years. But with the new “pay to play” law and players being able to make money of their name and likeness, this can open the door for players in every sport to make money off endorsements, making their own YouTube Channel and even having their school use them more in advertisements for their sport. So the NCAA can still make as much money as their making right now, and help the less popular sports stay active. This new law is a step in the right direction for not only the players but the NCAA as well. So hopefully players can unionize in the future and make partnerships with their schools and agents so that none of the players get taken advantage of.

Many children start off playing sports at a young age. From there, it’s when they decide if it’s something they want to continue or discontinue. As they become of age the question: “Is this something I want to take serious?”, surfaces. Student athletes work twice as hard as anyone else in school. Not only are they focusing on keeping their grades at an acceptable range, but they’re also working to perfect their sports skills. Playing at a college level makes them one less step from going pro. They do everything else the pros do in the league, so why are they not receiving the same type of reward/pay? The NCCA generates billions of dollars from college athletes, but they’re not getting paid and that should change.

College athletes should be making money in some way related to the sports that they play. It’s unreasonable as to why they don’t get to see any monetary gain for what they’ll potentially be doing for a living. Sports is one of the most popular industries in the entire world, and it is still growing. Due to this, it’s only fair that college athletes receive some of the same financial opportunities as their professional counterparts. It serves as a motivator to continue fighting to reach their dream goal.

One argument that has been made to justify why college athletes are not being paid is; they’re not professionals and should not receive any income due to that. This argument does have some logic behind it, but it simply does not hold up when one takes into account, that the fact the head coaches are making millions of dollars per season. The increasing amount of money being made in college ports each year is making it more difficult to argue against paying players. According to a Times article by sports writer Sean Gregory; “Nick Saban, who is the head coach of the Alabama Crimson Tide football team, made $11million this past season. Also defensive coordinator Jeremy Pruitt and offensive coordinator Brian Daboll were both paid over $1million. How is it okay for the players who work hard on the field to be paid less than the coaches?

Of course most players are receiving scholarships and special privileges such as first priority when it comes to registering for classes. Yet, that’s not enough for those who represent their schools reputation on the field. It’s no secret that physical sports and injuries go hand in hand, which can sometimes result in a player receiving a career ending injury. Not only is his top career choice being thrown away, but he’s now stacked high in medical bills. Being paid can also chip in on players medical bills when they do have to make a hospital visit for any injury. The safety hazards of the sports alone should be reason enough for players to earn some kind of revenue as they go out and earn a name for the school they’re representing.

Using money to influence a high school student to select a specific program and to hire a business manager is a felony-level conduct. Allowing college athletes to be paid would help eliminate this issues, which will result in a decline on the investigation costs across the board.

Athletes risk their bodies every day when playing a sport. During the NCAA tournament in the year of 2013, Louisville’s basketball star named Kevin Ware suffered a shocking and truly terrible injury to his lower right leg while trying to reject an opposite player’s shot. About six months after the incident, Kevin eventually healed and started planning his return to practice. He was one of the lucky ones. There have been many events of instrumentalist becoming (shuffling someone unable to move or flavor ) by hits or tackle on football game domain , or agony career-ending off-white -to-bone connecting band injuries on the basketball court. While professional jock who suffer such injuries may have already brand million over the course of their careers, it’s a very different story for unpaid college athlete. Elite college athletes almost at a (happening sometime in the time to come) professional career may be faced with the hope of/future of never (understanding/making real number /achieving) their professional aspiration – and never earning a clam for their skills. These athletes are risking their bodies and physical health at a prospect to play a biz they love. That attack surely deserves payment.

To conclude this argument, payment serves as opportunity to the players. It gives the players a sense of accomplishment along with their wins. The money speaks as a “I see you working hard, keep it up.” Not only that some of the players who are lucky to play on great teams, come from hard backgrounds. The money they receive from the hard work they put in can go towards helping their loved ones back at home. The money isn’t just being given for fun. The money is shaping the players into something bigger and better, showing them what it’s like to be in the big leagues, and what all their hard work is for. Sometimes the player just need to feel like they’re not doing all of this for nothing. Its better that they see their hard work being paid off earlier in the careers before it’s too late and they reach a point in life where they want to give up. Be part of the reason more students push hard to be great at the sport they play. Every game and practice, athletes put their bodies and life at risk for no money at all. Start paying college athletes. There’s no reason coaches should be getting millions while players do not get a dime.

Works cited

1. https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6778847/college-athletes-deserve-paid
2. https://www.thetriangle.org/opinion/college-athletes-deserve-to-be-paid-for-their-play/
3. https://fod-infobase-com.db21.linccweb.org/p_viewvideo.aspx?xtid=145752
4. https://go-gale-com.db21.linccweb.org/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&u=lincclin_pjc&id=GALEIA605928722&v=2.1&it=r&sid=ebsco

Imagine working for countless hours, six days a week, then making multiple performance just so someone else can be paid millions. That is the life of a college athletes. College athletes should be paid and here’s why. They are working their butts off so that their team can have a good record and to draw more attention and fans to their arena and to get more money to their school from all the fans buying their tickets to watch the game but at the end of the day they don’t even get a penny for what they do for the school think of it as this the boss are the coaches and trainers and also the NCAA and the athletes are the coworkers putting in their long hours of work just to make their school more popular but at the end of the day they don’t get what they deserve and the coaches are making money from them without doing anything just telling the players on what they are doing.For some college athletes, things such as tuition, gear, recovery items, and other necessities needed to perform are not free or cheap. Many college athletes pay money out of their own pockets to be able to perform at the level they need to, but who gets all the financial benefits? The NCAAand the university itself.

The NCAA is a big sports program sponsored by different colleges all around the united states making a lot of money from the athletes playing sports for their team and the most money they get all year from is a huge tournament called march madness $1 billion dollars from this which is a lot of money but the thing is that all the head coaches and trainers get the money but the players who work there but off this season just to get to the tournament and doesn’t even get anything for their hard work that’s crazy and we need an end to this madness players are complaining about where is their cut even some celebrities had something to say about this Lebron James said that these kids deserve every single penny they get from their hard work and dedication to the sport their putting their bodies on the line every single time when playing even if they get badly hurt they still don’t get anything even sometimes coaches will take away their scholarship they worked for and give it to someone else who deserves it.

The athletes put in more work then the coaches do the players have to wake up early for workouts, have a good and balanced diet, and keep their body in shape while the coaches are in their offices writing down what plays they should and what plays they shouldn’t do while players to this every single day they get nothing out of this at all. Some big time brands like nike are making a fortune off of these athletes while if the athletes try to make money they’ll get kicked off the team or something like that.

Now let’s talk about the ncaa which is a huge organization that work with college sports program and makes a huge load of money every year especially march madness which is a two months basketball tournament happens around the country with different colleges every year they make about 1 billion dollars each year and teams this year get so much money from the tickets they sell and the popularity they get when their team goes deeper into the tournament Not a slice of the billions of dollars paid for TV rights for their games. Not a pay-for-play contract like their NBA and NFL brethren. The biggest crime in college sports isn’t that the system is rigged against paying college athletes, it’s that money-worshipping American culture is set up against educating them.

The clamor to pay players arose a new this week when North Carolina basketball coach Roy Williams earned $925,000 in bonuses after his team won the national championship. “The players got awesome T-shirts and hats,” observed Associated Press sports writer Tim Reynolds in a viral tweet.

The NCAA collects $1.1 billion per year from CBS and Turner for broadcast rights to the basketball tournament. Even ESPN pays $470 million annually for the College Football Playoff Conferences and individual colleges make additional millions during the regular season. Many have argued over the years that, morally and legally, the players deserve to pocket some of that money.

They do. But our Money Over Everything society is minimizing or ignoring what’s currently within players grasp which should last far longer than a six-figure revenue sharing check.

Right now, college players receive up to six figures worth of education plus the life changing opportunity to elevate intellect and character. Yes, athletes are too often pushed into fake classes to keep them eligible, as in the infamous North Carolina academic scandal that threatens the Tar Heels championship or hindered from serious study by the 40 hour-per-week demands of their sport. But these athletes, and generations of their descendants, would benefit more from reforming their educational experiences than from extra cash Start with four years of tuition, fees, room and board that total $80,208 for in state students and $180,536 for those from outside North Carolina. Add the benefit of a diploma from a top institution with an influential and passionate alumni network. UNC is nationally ranked No. 5 public university and the No. 30 college overall. The name “North Carolina” on LinkedIn or a resume opens doors and gets phone calls returned and that’s without including 2017 NCAA champion. And for the majority of UNC players who won’t make NBA millions, lifetime earnings for college graduates are 66 percent higher than those with just a high school diploma. That can be worth more than an additional $1 million.

So as you can see it is unfair to be a college athletes if you aren’t going to be paid for your hard work and effort that you for your school so this is why I wrote this so you can see all the trouble student athletes go through.

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed paper on both sides of the hot topic about college athletes being paid. The problem involved in this is that there is a contract stating the NCAA can’t pay college athletes but more and more people are calling for a change towards that.

One of the biggest arguments in the sports world right now is whether or not college athletes should be paid. A big reason that the discussion of paying college athletes comes up often is because college athletics bring in billions of dollars of revenue to both the NCAA and the colleges themselves. This argument would affect more than 450,000 college students that play athletics. It would be hard to start paying college athletes as the NCAA and their contract states that they are amateur athletes and cannot be paid. Another important thing to know about when discussing this topic is the one and done rule in college basketball which allows basketball players to leave college after one year and go into the pros.

There are two simple sides to one of the biggest sports discussions of this decade which is whether or not college athletes should be paid or not. Many college leaders and presidents do not approve of paying college athletes because they are paid with high tuition and the fact that college is for learning and it would ruin the culture of college sports. The first reason why college athletes should not be paid is because college athletes are receiving a scholarship from the college which is basically how they are being paid (​www.listland.com​). Many people few this as a big problem because many of the athletes who receive this free education don’t even like school and often skip as they don’t care to learn anything. This is taking away plenty of scholarship offers from kids who are actually looking to go to college to start a career in their life.

So the people that actually want to go to school have to pay a large amount of money to get in and complete a major but the kids who would rather just play a sport get to go to college for little to no cost at all. Another interesting point is that most of these student athletes don’t deserve these big types of scholarships as their gpa’s are low and in some cases are barely passing high school and it’s taking away scholarships from those students who have worked hard for years and have a higher gpa than them. Diving even further into the academic part most college athletes won’t even stay in school for 4 years to receive their degree as many will go for a year or two and then go into the pros (​www.theodysseyonline.com​). This side also argues that college is to learn and gain a higher education and not to be paid for participating in an extracurricular activity. Discipline and how to handle the real world is what is taught in college they are not supposed to be handed money for playing a sport. Moving onto the athletic side of the argument, paying college athletes would ruin the culture of college sports. These athletes go out and play with heart and the pride they have for their respective college because it’s the school they love and want to be apart of the great culture college athletics provide.

If you take that away and allow the bigger schools to pay more money to an athlete than the smaller schools then that player would no longer be playing for the love of the game and the school they are just playing at that specific college for the amount of money that they offered them. To add on to the athletic argument this would increase the skill gap between bigger schools such as Michigan versus a smaller school such as Eastern Michigan. This would ruin the competitiveness of college sports as the smaller schools would no longer be able to even compete in games against bigger schools. Another fact is that the athletes who bring in all the fans and money for the school are often the best players and that means that they are going pro within a few years so they will receive millions of dollars once they leave college. So therefore the college doesn’t need to help pay thousands of dollars for the academics when they’ll never use them in life after college. Finally, playing college athletics is a privilege enough in itself that not many people get to experience even though they’d love to have the opportunity to. On the other side of the argument, many people believe that college athletes should be paid because they say that tuition is not enough for them to live comfortably. The first reason for this is the amount of time they have to dedicate to their sport that they are playing. Statistics show that the average college athlete spend 43.3 hours per each week for their respective sport.

This time isn’t counting the time they spend in class or the amount of time they have to spend on homework. If you add all of this time up college athletes do not have time to go out and get a job to afford food and everyday essentials by themselves. Paying college athletes would help a young kid out and help create healthier student athletes and at the same time this is helping multiple families as they wouldn’t have to worry about still providing for another person. Another point people for college athletes make is that college athletes are treated unfairly by the NCAA. The NCAA uses the players to make money and the player receives none of that. Colleges will sell jerseys with the players numbers on the back of them and people will buy those because everyone knows the star players numbers and want their jersey. So schools are selling kids jerseys and making millions of dollars off of their likeness. At one point NCAA was also profiting off of the NCAA college football games which involved the players from every team in division 1 football and included their names. Many people bought this game and it was very popular and this was unfair because all of the people in this game received not a single dollar but were the main reason that the game was that popular. The last point that people make is that the NCAA and colleges have the money to pay college athletes. Each college brings in millions of dollars each year and a lot of the money comes from athletics and the amount of people that are invested in it. It’s obvious that colleges have enough money to pay players because many coaches receive millions of dollars to coach not even play but then the kids playing and practicing for hours and hours a day don’t even receive a dime. NCAA statistics show that the average college football and basketball coach makes $100,000 (vittana.org). But at a big school such as Michigan, football coach Jim Harbough is making over $7 million a year for multiple years.

In conclusion this is a debate that has always been around and will continue to be around for years to come. Recently 2 states, California and Florida, have passed new laws that allow student athletes to make money off of their likeness. These laws will officially start on January 1, 2023 and student athletes hope that this will become a common theme more around the nation, hoping other states will do the same.

Participation in sports such as basketball, American football, soccer, track & field on a college level has recently ignited issues which have caused controversy both in the United States and across the world. Players are most commonly 18-19 years old when they accept scholarships to play these sports at some of the world’s top universities, predominantly within America.

The scholarship gives the student-athletes free college tuition, and provides them with equipment and facilities, but does not offer or allow any sort of income. It is this issue of whether these student-athletes should be able to receive income during their stay at college which has become increasingly debated.

Paying college athletes has recently gained widespread consensus since the release of a new report slamming the NCAA. The NCAA is the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The purpose of the NCAA is to regulate competition in a fair, safe, reasonable and sportsmanlike way, and to help athletes find a place at universities.

Against the billion-dollar backdrop of the March Madness in 2019, which is a world-renowned sports tournament, there was a scandal involving the black market for star college basketball recruits. This raised the question about whether athletes should be paid, and the debate has now reached Capitol Hill. There was a time when nobody questioned whether college athletes should be paid… this was because universities did not want to divide the student-athletes from the actual student body. It was believed that if student-athletes were paid then they would be seen as peripheral and not as real students.

However, it is almost impossible for student athletes to be seen as regular students because their games are viewed by hundreds of millions of fans worldwide. Some players already have celebrity status, and they are often only a few months away from playing their sport at the highest possible level. Basketball legend, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar talked about his college experience and said “Our efforts earned millions of dollars for the university, both in cash and in recruiting advertisement to attract new students. But I was generally too poor to do anything but study, practice and play.

The little spending money I managed to scrape together was earned on summer jobs. That money had to get me through the whole academic year. It was frustrating to win championship after championship every year, hear thousands chant my name, and then go to my bedroom to count my change so I could buy a burger.”

People are calling on the NCAA to “fairly compensate” athletes for their labour. In recent times there has been criticism of the $14 billion-a-year campus sports industry for spending more on coach salaries than player scholarships, concluding that the system enriches “broadcasters, apparel companies, and athletic departments” at the expense of athletes.

The revenue collected by college sports programs rose from $4 billion in 2003 to $14 billion in 2018. The 25 highest-paid football and men’s basketball coaches earn an average annual salary of $5.2 million and $4.5 million. Everybody is getting rich off an incredibly profitable industry… except for the athletes. Is free tuition a reasonable payoff for these sportsmen, who are potentially garnering publicity for their college? How about the direct revenue from sporting tickets, merchandise and advertising?

Public opinion on this issue is divided. One reason for this division, is race. Most of the people who oppose pay for play are white ;and most African Americans support it. 61% of African Americans believe college athletes should be paid whereas 26% of white Americans believe college athletes should be paid. This is because a disproportionately large percentage of college basketball and football players are African American. This means debates over NCAA compensation are implicitly debates about race.

The NCAA has spent much of the past decade fighting litigation from current and former student-athletes seeking compensation for their contributions in revenue-generating sports, with one sociologist calling the uprising “the civil rights movement of our times.” Basketball and football generate the most income to the NCAA, and a large percentage of players at Division I schools are African American. Their families, and the rest of the African-American community don’t want to continue the same cycle of having their efforts exploited while others profit.

Ultimately, there are more people who oppose pay for play. However, the majority of these people are white, and there are more white people in America, than African American people. Unfortunately, there is also a long history of white Americans opposing political reforms that would benefit African Americans. Should the rule against paying college athletes remain? No. Legislation simply hasn’t caught up with public opinion yet. Just as the laws around slavery changed over time, and civil rights laws changed over time, no doubt the pay for play laws will change as well.