Student Athletes

Nicholas Cubillas Jillian Swisher English102- 37 November 12th, 2012 Keeping College Sports In Line Should college athletes authentic tout ensemble(prenominal)y be label as employees qualified to be expecting(a) by the universities they stick to? Or should the uprightnesss enacted by the National College acrobatic Association (NCAA) remain unchanged sledding players unpaid? Whether or non college athletes should be paid has always been a germane(predicate) and controversial topic in the sports land. As a school-age child at a character 1 sports tutor and an devouring(a) college sports fan this topic interests me.Students learn to visualize that tolerateing of college athletes would perhaps affect the bud hits of their in gains, possibly taking away donnish silver towards athletics, and college sports fans also convey to discharge that the punishing integrity of college sports is at stake if athletes dismount to total paid. These athletes should realize t hey argon assimilators at their respective universities just as a great deal as they are athletes, and should be well-provided with the many benefits they gain from sum of moneying discrepancy 1 sports teams.College athletes should remain unpaid because they already harvest great benefits from their schools wish well scholarships, it would be difficult to enact a sporting way to pay off tout ensemble athletes leading to corruption in the dodge, and any(prenominal) athletic course of instructions do non still pass enough receipts to pay off athletes. College athletes do work voteless(prenominal) in their respective sports thither is no doubt about that, which is why nearly moot they should be a format on a salary.Others conceptualize the schools should non be able to pay pupils athletes, for a variety of reasons. Those who do cheek with the overturn of paying(a)(a) college athletes believe that playing a sport at a partition 1 school is a full-time job, an d college athletes should be compensated for the work they put to needher in. They agree that breakdown 1 schools as well as the NCAA as a whole generate enough tax in add that would al clinical depression student athletes to be paid. This currency would be able to attend students with many basic college expenses (Steve Spurrier Wants Players Paid).The other side of the debate, however, pushes that college athletes harvest so many benefits already, the biggest one being a virtu altogethery gratis(p) education, and it would non be fair to pay them. Those advocating for not paying college athletes believe they already jump enough compensation from their universities, and they should be kernel with that. The paying of college athletes, however, wreaks about many problems wish well the distribution of cash between players, what sports teams should be paid and how oftentimes, and the ability of some teams to pucker enough r planeue to pay their athletes.Both sides bring about their respective arguments, which strongly pit of the others sides views, which is why the paying of college athletes is an authorized solution to debate in the sports world. Ever since I was young I defy always been an avid sports fan, which is why I obligate a strong stance on this field. My father love college footb wholly game, and I grew up watching it with him. I also go to a school where nigh of the athletic curriculums are divider 1, and these programs are likely to be conventional if college athletes began acquiring paid.Personally, I would hate to watch college athletes be deduce all about the money, which in my opinion, would most likely happen if college athletes were to get paid. Recruits would purely base their choice of school on how much they would be getting paid, not whether they want to play there or if they see themselves doing well with that program. That isnt how college athletics should be, thats what the NFL is for. Teams with the most tax would get the best recruits, leading to them graceful powerhouse teams solely because their program generates stupendous revenue than others.As a lifelong college sports fan, I would hate to see what I grew up watching last a money centered, corrupt sport that focuses more on revenue than the actual gritty itself. College athletes reap many benefits that do not even compare to other students at the university. They are precondition scholarships, some to prestigious and high-priced schools, and basically are getting a gratuitous education. These athletes need to realize they are students just as much as they are athletes, and that they were granted the opportunity to effect well in their sports and get a free education as well.These students should in no means be labeled as employees under federal law, and the NCAA agrees with this. The frailness President of Legal Affairs for the NCAA, Donald Remy, turn to the issue in saying, The NCAA, in unity with courts that shake u p addressed the issue, believes that student-athletes are not employees, under the law, and that they should not be inured as employees either by the law or by the schools they attend. (Cooper).On the other side of the debate many student athletes believe they should be getting paid for their contributions beyond just the benefits they obtain like their free education, free turn, and inside connections. In the denomination Should College Athletes Be Paid? former NCAA hoops player Jalen Rose states, Collegiate athletes should be paid a stipend of $2,000 per semester (48). Players of eat advocate for them being paid, but are greedy in the fact that they do not realize that the benefits they obtain resume up to a commodious do of money and are beneficial to them.These athletes have the opportunity to get a free education, gain national televised attention for their sports talent, possibly attend a bowl game visiting new stadiums and getting apparel for free, as well as being a ble to build connections in the sports world which they can use when they turn over college. These student athletes need to open their eyes and realize that their education is just as important as the sport they play, and with the many benefits given to student athletes, that they can succeed and leave college with a good education allowing them to get good jobs if they do not experience it to the professional level.For these reasons college athletes should be content with and calculate the free benefits they are getting from their universities. If college athletes were to be paid a salary, where would that money come from? In the survey taken by Schneider he erect that, If the NCAA were to allow retribution, college students most frequently believed the additional money should come from the athletics department (56%) and additional revenue generating contracts much(prenominal) a shoe and video contracts (Schneider).It is a common misconception, however, by those who hark ba ck student athletes should get paid that all Division 1 teams generate large revenues. In fact, an article published by NBC sports stated, A recent NCAA cogitation do by professor Dan Fulks of Transylvania University in Kentucky shows that notwithstanding 14 of the 120 FBS schools improvemented from campus athletics during the 2009 pecuniary year (NCAA report shows many college programs in the red). How leave behind the other 106 teams that did not profit from campus athletics pay off their student athletes?It would not be fair for tho profitable teams to pay their players and exclude the teams that confounded money for their programs in a given year. As for the distribution amongst Division 1 teams the NCAA states, Some of the distribution is earmarked for particular uses, such as funds that directly reliever academics (Where Does the capital Go? ). This means that the schools that generate low revenues in their athletic programs would have to use the little money they do have to pay athletes, instead of set forth academic improvements on the school.Is it rightfully worth it to pay college athletes at the greet of taking away money from universities academic programs? Those who advocate for the paying of student athletes need to realize that from an economic standpoint, it does not gull sense to pay these athletes. Another issue arising from the paying of college athletes is whether or not an touch amount of pay from program to program is fair for athletes.Andrew Geisler, a columnist, states that the first issue in paying college athletes is that, it is inherently dirty to pay certain athletes and members of teams more than others (Why paying college athletes is a bad idea). This view proposes that if college athletes were to be paid, they would all have to be paid fairly with the same amount of money. exactly would only the profitable programs like football and basketball pay off their athletes? Or would every Division 1 program at the schoo l, like hockey and soccer, have to pay of their athletes?With this comes another issue, the corruption of the NCAA system that would occur if college athletes were to get paid. Since it would be below the belt to pay one team in the same sports Division and not the other, or pay the athletes on a low budget team much less than those on a profitable team, if college athletes were to get paid it would be based on the schools revenue. This would be unfair for other Division 1 schools because only profitable schools would deplume up good recruits, and these athletic programs would be able to pay large sums of money for star players.This would stool the NCAA corrupt and all about money, and college sports should not be like that. In Schneiders investigation, Examination of the results found that the primary reason advanced by students for supporting payment of athletes was that cheating, in the form of illegal payments, would decline (Schneider). Contrary to this belief, however, allo wing payment of student athletes will actually make matters worse and illegal payment will still happen regardless. Those ho believe the paying of college athletes would decrease corruption do not realize that this would allow college coaches to batch with star recruits about money and it would become a battle of which team puts up the most money. These coaches may even switch over in some other benefits on top of the money to make them join the team, and if paying college athletes were legal, it would be easier for these coaches to sneak in other offers for them to join the team. Illegal payment will happen regardless, but if student athletes were to get paid it would be much easier for coaches to sneak under the radar in giving their athletes special benefits.College athletes really need to take a deeper look into all of the aspects before they believe they should be compensated. non all college programs have the funds to be paying their athletes, and if multiple teams in the D ivision 1 programs are unable to pay their athletes, than all teams in that Division should be unable as well. College athletes gain a free education through scholarships along with many other benefits that will help them in the future. Paying off these athletes would expose the game and make the sport all about money.The NCAA should maintain the same rules and incubate to not pay athletes, because if they do, college sports will never be the same again. Works Cited Aschoff, Edward. Steve Spurrier Wants Players Paid. ESPN. 01 2012 n. page. Web. 6 Dec. 2012. Cooper, Kenneth J. Should College Athletes Be Paid To Play?. various(a) Issues In Higher Education 28. 10 (2011) 12-13. ERIC. Web. 24 Oct. 2012 Geisler, Andrew. Why paying college athletes is a bad idea. miamistudent. net. The Miami Student, 20 2011.Web. 11 Nov 2012. NCAA report shows many college programs in the red. nbcsports. com. NBC, 25 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Nov 2012. Rose, Jalen. Should College Athletes Be Paid?. Jet 1 19. 11 (2011) 48. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. Schneider, R. G. Payment Of College Athletes Student-Athletes And Administrators Perceptions. International Sports daybook 4. 2 (2000) 44-55. SPORTDiscus with Full Text. Web. 25 Oct. 2012. Where Does the Money Go?. NCAA. org. NCAA, 08 2008. Web. 11 Nov 2012.