Paying College Athletes: a Case for Fair Compensation
How it works
Stadium lights shine on empty pockets while college athletes generate millions. For years, young men and women have dedicated themselves to the dream of becoming scholarship athletes at the college level. This journey often begins as early as three years old and extends through recreational leagues, middle school, and high school. The relentless dedication to their sport is driven by the ultimate goal of earning a full scholarship to a four-year university. Yet, despite these scholarships, many student-athletes leave behind challenging family situations, where the financial strain remains a significant burden on those left at home.
While education costs may be covered, basic living needs are not, leaving families struggling to make ends meet.
The Argument for Compensation
The primary argument for compensating college athletes revolves around the recognition of their hard work, dedication, and the substantial revenue they generate for their institutions. The topic of paying student-athletes has gained increasing attention and will continue to do so until it is addressed seriously. The NCAA and universities benefit significantly from the current system, and at the very least, a comprehensive review should be conducted to explore ways to share these benefits with the athletes themselves.
Student-athletes often face immense pressure to perform both academically and athletically. The pursuit of a four-year scholarship is a significant achievement, yet it places them in the spotlight for potential professional success. Colleges, however, profit immensely from the star power of these athletes. Many student-athletes draw large crowds and generate millions of dollars in revenue for their colleges. Despite this, the NCAA's rules prevent athletes from receiving any financial compensation for their contributions.
The Role of the NCAA
The NCAA, established in 1906, is the governing body of intercollegiate athletics, responsible for setting competition and eligibility rules. It controls nearly every aspect of sports programs, generating millions of dollars at the expense of college players. Critics argue that student-athletes are being exploited by the NCAA and educational institutions. These organizations reap enormous profits from merchandise sales, live events, and media coverage, yet the athletes do not receive a share of these earnings. School teams, though not as prominent as professional ones, are passionately followed by devoted fans. A vast array of merchandise, including jerseys, tickets, and fan gear, is sold thanks to the athletes' performances, yet they see none of these profits.
Many athletes feel disheartened and exploited because they do not receive any share of the revenue they generate. The question arises: Why should others profit from their hard work while they receive nothing in return? Santesteban and Leffler, in their article "Assessing the Efficiency Justifications for the NCAA Player Compensation Restrictions," argue that the NCAA's limits on athlete compensation are justified by the preservation of amateurism in college sports. However, this preservation often comes at the cost of fair compensation for athletes who sacrifice their time and health for their schools.
Fairness and Equity
College athletes are not only denied a share of the revenue they generate but are also often prevented from pursuing business opportunities. While some argue that scholarships are sufficient compensation, others believe that paying athletes would address issues related to agents, team boosters, and rule violations. Critics of athlete compensation worry that it could lead to an intensified recruiting competition, where colleges bid for talent. This could lead to ethical concerns and diminish the value of education for student-athletes, as their primary focus might shift to winning games for monetary gain.
Mark Emmert, president of the NCAA, advocates for maintaining amateurism standards, proposing measures like a $2,000 student-athlete expense allowance, multi-year scholarships, and scholarships based on academic performance. While these measures aim to alleviate financial strain, they do not fully address the issue of athlete compensation.
Economic and Ethical Considerations
The case for paying college athletes is supported by the significant revenue colleges and coaches earn from successful sports programs. Coaches, often receiving multi-million dollar salaries, benefit from the athletes' performances. Meanwhile, athletes, who risk injury daily, receive no compensation. Berry Taylor points out that professional athletes receive compensation even when injured, while college athletes do not enjoy the same protection. This disparity raises ethical concerns about the treatment of college athletes.
The financial burden on student-athletes is compounded by the risk of injury, which can affect their future prospects both academically and professionally. It is only fair that athletes receive a stipend to use as they see fit, acknowledging their contributions to their schools' success.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while college sports programs require substantial funding to operate successfully, athletes deserve compensation for their contributions on the field and court. The revenue they generate through merchandise sales, victories, and the inherent risks they face should justify financial stipends. College athletes work tirelessly to bring success to their schools, and it is only reasonable that they receive a share of the profits their efforts produce. By addressing this issue, we can ensure a more equitable system that values the contributions of student-athletes and provides them with the support they deserve.
Paying College Athletes: A Case for Fair Compensation. (2019, Jun 28). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/about-paying-college-athletes/