Should NCAA athletes be paid? This question came up in within numerous lawsuits against the NCAA. The NCAA was reportedly being sued because many former athletes were angry because they didn't receive any compensation during their time at the school. Many people believe college athletes shouldn't be paid because they are amateur athletes; however, they should be paid because they create a lot of revenue for the school and athletes aren't able to work during their athletic term.
In 2011 multiple lawsuits were filed against the NCAA for not paying athletes, as they felt they deserved to be paid because their program created lots of revenue. The multiple cases, on wether athletes should be paid brought attention to everyone is the United States. Out of countless public polls, Americans were split on wether athletes should be paid or not. Americans believed that athletes were getting paid in a scholarship and if they were to get paid they wouldn't be amateur athletes anymore. The other side of this argument states that athletes aren't able to pay for necessities during their athletic term such as food, toiletries and books. Players also create a lotof revenue for their school with little return. The NCAA has stated that they are a non-profit organization, so why did the NCAA create 2 billion dollars in revenue during the March Madness basketball tournament and, give none to the players who helped showcase this tournament. The NCAA has been very strict on amateurism throughout their athletic department and the NCAA believes that paying athletes would ruin amateurism throughout their department.
Admittedly, many would argue NCAA athletes shouldn't be paid because they're amateurs and they're being paid with a scholarship. For example a college scholarship costs about 50-300 thousand dollars. This is 50-300 thousand dollars the university could be using to upgrade facilities and programs but instead giving their students an opportunity. Colleges are giving their students opportunities to go pro and if they don't, they're giving them a great education. Research as shown that the averages are very low, the two main college sports, basketball and football have a probability of 1.2% and 1.6% chance to turn pro. (http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/probability-competing-beyond-high-school).Many players will not go pro and will have to stay at their colleges for an extra year which will cause the school to give them a continuous free education. So if colleges are giving them a free education and chance to go pro, why should they be paid? Amateurism is another reason why college athletes shouldn't be paid. On their website the NCAA has stated (http://www.ncaa.org/amateurism) "Amateur competition is a bedrock principle of college athletics and the NCAA. Maintaining amateurism is crucial to preserving an academic environment in which acquiring a quality education is the first priority. In the collegiate model of sports, the young men and women competing on the field or court are students first, athletes second.The NCAA membership has adopted amateurism rules to ensure the students’ priority remains on obtaining a quality educational experience and that all of student-athletes are competing equitably... In general, amateurism requirements do not allow: Contracts with professional teams, salary for participating in athletics, prize money above actual and necessary expenses, play with professionals, tryouts, practice or competition with a professional team, benefits from an agent or prospective agent, agreement to be represented by an agent and delayed initial full-time collegiate enrollment to participate in organized sports competition". The NCAA doesn't care who breaks their amateurism rules, even their biggest money making stars such as Reggie Bush, NFL running back had violated the NCCA amateurism rules when his family moved into a large house owned by a business who Bush had done business contracts and deals with which were related to his football career. The NCCA also gave out penalties to Bush's university for his wrong doing (USC) . After Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel was investigated for allegedly receiving money for autographs. Manziel was later punished for his wrong doings and breaking the amateurism rules that the NCAA clearly stated. (Paraphrase?) As the NCAA stated amateurism doesn't include playing athletes, and if they NCAA is an amateur organization, why should athletes be paid? Wouldn't it be fair to change the rules after numerous colleges and athletes have been fined for breaking the barrier between amateurism and professionalism.
Initially, college athletes should be paid because of what they do for their college. College sports is a very big industry, in fact during the infamous March Madness basketball tournament the NCAA hauled in 2 billion dollars. The players in the tournament who's names were shown in commercials, on billboards and on shirts got nothing. In 2008 the Alabama Crimson Tide football team had made 123,769,841 dollars in one season. The sport has expanded since then and the organization has grown more fans after recent success. How much did the players get you may ask? The answer is 0 dollars. These players put heir bodies, dignity and careers on the line to play this sport and their getting to stay at their college in return. A NCAA football player has a 1.2% chance to go pro. Many players chose their colleges because of their success in sending players into the pros. One may argue that a scholarship provides everything a student needs for their term. Paying them during their college years will help them during their earlier years into their new life and reward them for what they did for their college. Colleges try to recruit the big names to gain more revenue and win more games. Many college stars believe their colleges should be paid. More talent equals more people wanting to view which ends up in more revenue for the college. Former Okalahoma Sooner running back Adrian Peterson has said because of his stardom, his college created lots of revenue and without him they wouldn't have half as much of what they earned. Peterson also made a very good point during his interview. LeBron James arguable one of the greatest basketball player ever to step on the face of the earth didn't attend college. Peterson had said "How much money would that college have made off LeBron James? They would have made so much money off LeBron James. It’s about the freedom to do as you want and make your own decisions.” (ESPN.go.com
Some athletes didn't grow up in the greatest towns or cities with a family creating a lot of income. Athletes from low income family can’t rely on their relatives for money, and due to their devotion to the game, they don’t have time to find jobs. Many students outside of classes have a part time jobs to earn some extra money. After the cafeteria is closed for the day it won't be reopened until the next day. If athletes are training and at practices they may only get a scarce amount of food as the athletes come in after the students. Many big names in college sports such as Shabazz Napier (Uconn Guard) has said that "He goes to bed starving some nights" because he can't pay for food after practice and he simply doesn't get enough during the day. How is it fair for university to be gaining millions of dollars each year but leaving their athletes hungry?
On the argument of not paying athletes because they wouldn't be amateurs anymore, the WHL, OHL and QMJHL are all amateur hockey leagues that are used for molding players into professional ones. Each player on each team does get paid even though many of these players are still in high school. A former QMJHL player stated that the 470 dollars he gained per month helped him eat, drive and buy new equipment each month. The NCAA could still be amateur even if they did pay their players.Why are these amateur players making more than these colleges players who's teams are making millions?
On the topic of wether college athletes should be paid, you may have some questions such as if they're paid where will the money come from? The answer is from the 2 billion dollars the NCAA is creating in revenue. If the NCAA doesn't act soon players will become more angry and ruin college sports.
|, Ben Goessling. "Adrian Peterson Backs Pay For play." ESPN. ESPN Internet Ventures, 27 July 2011. Web. 16 Feb. 2015.
Dosh, Kristi. "The Problems With Paying College Athletes." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 9 June 2011. Web. 21 Jan. 2015.
Gamin, Sarah. "UConn Guard on Unions: I Go to Bed 'starving' - CNN.com." CNN. Cable News Network, 12 Apr. 14. Web. 22 Jan. 2015.
"Infobase Learning - Login." Infobase Learning. Info Base Learning, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 25 Feb. 2015.
Press, Associated. "NCAA President: Not a Good idea." ESPN. ESPN Internet Ventures, 5 Sept. 2011. Web. 25 Feb. 2015.
Strauss, Ben, and Marc Tracy. "N.C.A.A. Must Allow Colleges to Pay Athletes, Judge Rules." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Aug. 2014. Web. 25 Feb. 2015.