Payment of College Student Athletes
On the other hand, some individuals raise arguments that they should not be paid as athletes receive expensive National Collegiate Athletic Association scholarships as compensation for their talent hence there is no need for more payment. More specifically, this discussion aims at evaluating why some people support paying college student-athletes while others oppose. Paying students presents many challenges including the fact that there isn't enough money to pay students. In regards to the argument that student-athletes must get paid, it raises the question about who will or should pay the student-athletes? How often will they be paid? Will there be a salary cap for the student-athletes? (Piccioto, 2017). These issues will help govern the process of settling the college student-athletes. College games yield more revenue than the NBA, an amount of $6 each year (Brill, 2018).
However, players who play in the National Basketball Tournament get paid while those who participate in the NCAA’s tournament are not compensated. Everyone else who participates in facilitating the games such as coaches, athlete's directors, trainers, and doctors get paid except the student-athletes (Ed O'Bannon, 2017). The process is unfair, and since the NCAA has presented itself as a profit-making business, the players have a right to earn a share of the profit that they help to generate. College student-athletes put their bodies at risk every while playing which threatens their life and general health (NCPA, 2017). Why Student-athletes should not be paid. According to the NCAA president Mark Emmert, paying student-athletes salaries is not a likely option (Brill, 2018). Also, a survey conducted by John Dennis in the year 2013 indicated that 69% of the general population did not support the paying of college players (Martinez, 2017).
The percentage that opposed the paying of student-athletes argued that the athletes receive scholarships and other benefits which are enough as compensation. If the student-athletes were to be paid, then the fair thing to do would be to withdraw the scholarships from the deal. NCAA issued data indicating that only 14 games such as football and basketball generated revenue without having to depend heavily on institutional support. Western Kentucky for example, uses approximately $5. 6 million from grant money and sucks $8. 2 million from its own kitty to fund its sports budget (Dosh Kristi and SportsMoney, 2011). Some institutions spend more than they earn from the games. On the other hand, paying vast amounts to student-athletes defeats the primary purpose of college as a preparatory to life.
It is also difficult to pay all student-athletes since not all college games earn substantial revenue. Many student-athletes earn scholarships as a result of their participation in the college championships which also plays a huge role in their education. In the making of a decision, it's important to be rational while making decisions regarding paying student-athletes since it has its benefits and disadvantages. In my opinion, college games and tournaments are capable of paying their players, therefore, they should fulfill the obligation depending on the amount raised in a particular event. collegexpress. com/articles-and-advice/athletics/blog/should-college-student-athletes-be-paid-both-sides-debate/ Piccioto Elad De. “SHOULD COLLEGE ATHLETES GET PAID?” The Perspective Media Limited, 2017, https://www. theperspective. com/debates/sports/college-athletes-get-paid/ Edelman, Marc. Unity Protects Us.
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop