Outline

  • This paper exemplifies the argument whether college students should be paid or not.

  • The first part provides a general overview of the debate that has saturated discourse relating to college athletics.

  • The next part will provide reasons that have been cited by numerous stakeholders why student-athletes should be paid. In the next part a counter argument is provided highlighting reasons why college athletes should not be paid.

  • The last part exemplifies measures that the National Collegiate Athletic Association and education institution can take to facilitate the education of student-athletes.

  • A conclusion is provided to summaries the key issues in the paper.

PayornoPayforCollegeAthletes

Thedebateon whethercollege-athletesshould be paidornot has formedthemainagendain discoursethat relateto collegegames.There is a growingcallamong manystakeholders forthe introductionof a compensationprogramthat would remuneratecollegeathleteswhoparticipatein varioussporting activities.There are numerouscredibleargumentsas to whycollegeathletesshould bepaid,buta majorityof suchargumentsfaildue to thereasonthatthefundamentaldutyof theuniversityis not to entertainbutto educate.Proponentsforpaymentof collegeathletebasestheir argumentonthegroundthatbecauseannouncersandcoachesarepaid,athletesshould alsobe paid.Such a moveis believedto attractmorestudents’o learninginstitutionsandwould lowerthepercentageof freshmenclassexit(Meshefejian 1). Ifcollegeathletesgotpaid,theywould striveharder with their classes,andthiswould pushtheir GPA up.Inthispaper,weare goingto explorebothsidesof thesubject,andhis discussionswill startwith reasonswhycollegeathleteshould not bepaid.

Certainlycollegesportsprogramssuchas basketballandfootballare marquee schools,are bigbusinessthat standto generatecolossalsumsof moneyfortheir respectiveschools.Basedon informationpublishedin theHarvard Journal of Legislation, in thelastone decade, theamountof moneycreatedby basketballandfootballprogramshas increasedby morethan 300% to theextentthatat themomenttheyfundalmostallothersporting activities(Meshefejian 2).Thestudentswhotakepartin suchprogramsarethemainreasonlearninginstitutionsstandto generatehandsomeprofitsthrough broadcasting,ticketsales,jerseysalesandendorsementdeals.Oneof theDirectorsof Athletics at Northwestern University has beenquotedsayingthatathletesthat participatein suchsportsprogramarerewardedby scholarships,whosevaluein somecasestotalsto morethan $200,000 within a periodof four years(Meshefejian 2). Murphy Mark has furtherindicated thatallstudents’athleteshavemadesamecommitmentto their schools, and football and basketball players ought not tohave special attention as compared to other othersporting activitiesthat are not popularor lucrative.Murthy andotherstakeholders whohavestatedthatpayingcollegeathletebeyond a scholarshipwould leadto problemsspecificallythoserelatingto genderequity(Meshefejian 3). Federalregulationsindicatethatanycollegethat is foundto havediscriminatedon thegroundsof genderwill receivelessfederalfunding. In thisrespectpayingmalecollegeathletehigerthan femalecould probablyberegardedas a form of discrimination.

Argumentforpayment

Proponentsforpaymentforcollegeathletesstatethatbecauseathletesare generatinghugesumsof moneynot onlyforthelearninginstitutionswheretheyschool andthat givethem scholarshipbutalsoforTV networks,conferencesandshoecompaniesin which suchinstitutionsbelong(Salmon 1).

Studieshaveshownthata substantialnumberof studentsvacatecollegebefore completionof their coursesbecauseof lackof adequatefundsto caterfortheir billsandjoinprofessionalsportsas a meansof generatingincome(Salmon 2).Theargumentis thatifsuchcollegestudentsreceivedsomelevel of paymentabove thescholarshipthattheyget,theywould probablyremainin o andfinishtheir course.

Itis alsoimportantto statethatitis not thatmoneyis abigissueforthecollegeathletes,especiallyin theeventthat theyreceivea scholarship.However,studieshaveestablishedthatthescholarshipaccordedto collegeathletesdonot coverall thetuitionfeesandmostnotablythecostof living.Opponentsforstudent’spaymenthavecitedthatsuchcollegestudentscan stillapplyforloan,butevenstilla largenumberof them donot qualifyforgovernmentloanandas suchthere is a stillan enormousgapbetween thefundsthat athletesin collegereceive andtheentirecostof attendance.Thispresenceof sucha gaptogetherwiththereasoning thatgamessuchas basketballandfootballgive rise to highamountsof revenue,has providedgroundsforsomeintercollegiate teamsto offertheir playersextracompensation,an aspectthat directlycontravenesthebylawsputin placeby theNational Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA).

Argumentagainst Payment

Conceivablyformulatinga meansof paymentabove andbeyond thecurrentscholarshipprogram,would goa longwayin loweringthelevel of corruptionandquestionabledealsthat takeplace“under thetable”in someof thesesportingprograms(Salvadore 3).Nonetheless,creatingsuch a methodwould frontdifficultchallengesto theschoolsandtheNational Collegiate Athletic Association. Creatinga roomforthis kind of an economyin collegebasketballaswell asfootballcan result to a monetarycontestto buythemosttalentedplayerscountry (Meshefejian 2).

Itis imperativealsoto notethatthegreaterthedisparity,thelessthecompetitionandthisin turnreducesthelevel of excitementthat comeswith thesegames(Salvadore 2). Thiswouldinvariablyaffectthelevel of revenuegeneratedfrom collegiate programssuchas footballandbasketballandlessmoneyfortheschoolandallstakeholders involved.Evensothemainissue forpayingcollegeathletesought not for improvingcompetitionamong schoolsandpreservingteamsfrom schoolswith limitedresources,butto improvethewelfareof thecollegeathleteswhohelpgeneratehighamountsof income(Meshefejian 2).

Thereis alsotheconundrumof which athleteto payandwhich not to pay.Thisisperhapsthegreatestdilemmaof allandthatposesof thedangerof ignitingnumerouscollegeprotests(Salvadore 2). IftheNCAA passesa resolutionforthecompensationof basketballandfootballplayerstheyare thetwo maineventsthat generatehighamountsof revenue,whatabout theotherstudentin othersportactivitiessuchas golf,tennisandevenchess that donot generatesubstantialincome.Moreover,whatabout thefemaleathletes?Paymentwould definitelya leewaythat would seeallprogramsclaima shareof thespoils(Salvadore 2).

EveniftheNCAA would be in a positionto findwaysto overcometheproblemstatedabove,there will nooneto payforthebulkof costthat would comealong with such a program.Whilefootballandbasketballplayerswould receivepaymentwithout difficultiesprimarilybecauseof thepopularityof thetwo events,butthequestionis whatamountwould goto eachstudent(Meshefejian 2). Finally,collegeathletesalreadygetmoneymajority of collegesgivenotable servicesto theathletes,whoareheldtoa greater level than therestof thestudents.Theyalsohaveaccessto thebestgymnasiums,receivefreehealthcoverfrom injuriessustained,freefoodandperhapsmostimportantlyfreetuition.

Argumentsagainst payingcollegeathletesarebasedon thefactthatsuch an endeavoris not theinstitution`sprimaryfunctions.Thefundamentaldutyandfunctionof a learninginstitutionis to giveeducation, thus notto be employingathletefortheir participationon thefootballpitchandbasketballcourt.In addition,allcollegealreadyoffersathleteswith a pricelessassistance.Thebenefitis obtained in theformof collegedegreethat accordslearnerspowersandopensopportunitiesto avenuesin thejobmarketthattheywould not getminus thecontributionof thesecolleges(Meshefejian 3).

Throughscholarshipschemes,athleticprogramssuchas footballandbasketballprovidestudentswhoparticipatein athletics an opportunityto acquireexcellenteducationforwhich under normalcircumstancestheywould not haveattained.Suchavenuesalsoaccordstudent-athletes a chanceto becomeprofessionalathletes.

FacilitatingEducation forStudent- Athletes

Regardlessof thereasonsthat makeitdifficultto paycollegeathletes,there are intrinsicproblemswithintheNational Collegiate Athletic Association that needsto be addressed.TheNCAA should makesurethatthegapthat existbetween thescholarshipaccordedto student-athletes andcostof attendanceshould filledby therespectiveschools,particularlyin circumstancewherea givenstudentdoesnot qualifyfora governmentloan(Meshefejian 3).Such an arrangementwould be veryeffectivein ensuringcollegestudentwhoparticipatesin theseprogramsdonot vacateschoolin searchof moneyto paytheir bills.Learninginstitutionsshould be in a positionto offerat leastenoughmoneyforstudent-athletes to meettheir basicneeds.In is an effectiveformof compensationthough differentfrom thetypeof paymentthatmanystakeholders andstudentshavebeenseeking.Asmentionedabove theprimarygoalandfunctionof academicinstitutionsis to provideeducation,buttheseschoolsshould formulatea programthat rewardsstudentsthrough grantsbutnot via a marketsystemof demandandsupply(Meshefejian 3).

TheNCAA wascreatedbased on theconceptof amateurism, a modelthat waseffectivein the20th centurybecauseathletics didnot consumea lotof timeunlike in themodernworldwhereathletemust trainall theyearround(Institute of Sports Law andEthics 3).TheNCAA formulateda formof athleticscholarshipthat avoidedunionization andwagesforcollegeathletes.In thesamevein,thiswould havemadesensein theearlydecades of the20th centurybutnot todaywhencollegeathletic generatebillions of dollarsandrequiretotalcommitmentandtremendouseffortsfrom athletes.Paymentof collegeathletesis necessarybecauseitis appropriatethattheonewhohelpscreatevalueshould at leastsharea portionof thatvalue.Itis essentialto rethink theconceptof amateurism becauseprevailingenvironmentandchangesover theyearshaverendereditobsolete(Institute of Sports Law andEthics 3). Thehugesumsof moneygeneratedby educationsinstitutionsandthedegreeof commitmentmajorityof collegeathletesmakeinorderto be successfulshould be considered.

Conclusion

Thispaper has provided grounds why college athletes should be paid andwhy they should not be paid. It is evident that the body that wascreated (NCAA) to control and regulate college sporting activities isloath to allow payment of student on the basis that the scholarshipprovided is adequate. It has been illustrated that such scholarshipsare not commensurate with the cost of attendance, commitment andefforts made by players. It is paramount that all stakeholder searchfor ways to redress this issue so that the problem is solved once andfor all.

WorksCited

Instituteof Sports Law and Ethics (ISLE).ShouldCollege Athletes Be Paid? SantaClara University. 2012. Retrieved from:http://law.scu.edu/sportslaw/.

Meshefejian,Krikor. &quotPay to Play: Should College Athletes Be Paid?&quot TheJournal of the Business Law Society(23 Mar. 2005). Rpt. in ShouldCollege Athletes Be Paid?Ed. Geoff Griffin. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. At Issue.OpposingViewpoints in Context.Web. 5 May 2015.

Salmon,Barrington M. &quotCollege Athletics: To Pay or Not to Pay.&quotWashingtonInformer17 Nov. 2011: 40.http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&ampdb=pwh&ampAN=69755748&ampsite=pov-live

Salvadore,Damon .Top10 Reasons Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid: A List that TellsYou Why We Shouldn`t Pay College Athletes.2013. Retrieved from:http://toolboxforteachers.s3.amazonaws.com/Core/PBL-Nuggets/Athletes/Athletes_Reasons-NOT-to-pay.pdf