Pros of paying college athletes. 15 Big Pros and Cons of Paying College Athletes 2022-10-23
Pros of paying college athletes Rating:
Paying college athletes has been a controversial topic for many years, with advocates arguing that it would provide much-needed financial support for student athletes and opponents arguing that it would blur the lines between amateur and professional sports. However, there are several pros to paying college athletes that make it a compelling idea.
One of the main arguments in favor of paying college athletes is that it would provide them with much-needed financial support. Many college athletes are under a great deal of financial strain, as they are required to devote a significant amount of time to their sport and may not have time to work part-time jobs to help cover their expenses. This can be especially difficult for athletes from low-income families, who may not have the financial resources to support their education and athletic pursuits. By providing a financial stipend to college athletes, universities could help alleviate this financial burden and allow athletes to focus on their studies and athletic careers.
Another pro of paying college athletes is that it would help to level the playing field between athletes from different socio-economic backgrounds. Currently, many college athletes come from more privileged backgrounds and are able to afford the costs associated with their sport, such as travel expenses and equipment. However, athletes from lower-income families may not have the same financial resources, which can make it more difficult for them to participate in their sport at the same level as their wealthier counterparts. By providing a financial stipend to all college athletes, universities could help to create a more equitable environment for athletes of all backgrounds.
In addition to providing financial support, paying college athletes could also help to increase the overall quality of college sports. Currently, many college athletes are not able to focus on their sport full-time because they have to work part-time jobs to support themselves. This can lead to a lower level of skill and competitiveness, as athletes are not able to devote as much time to training and practice. By providing a financial stipend to college athletes, universities could allow them to focus on their sport full-time, which could lead to a higher level of skill and competitiveness.
Finally, paying college athletes could help to increase the overall popularity of college sports. Currently, college sports are not as popular as professional sports, in part because college athletes are not compensated for their efforts. By providing a financial stipend to college athletes, universities could help to increase the overall appeal of college sports and make them more attractive to both fans and sponsors.
In conclusion, there are several pros to paying college athletes, including providing financial support, leveling the playing field between athletes of different socio-economic backgrounds, increasing the overall quality of college sports, and increasing the overall popularity of college sports. While there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate, the pros of paying college athletes make it a compelling idea that is worth considering.
Pros And Cons Of Paying College Athletes
For example, will the star quarterback receive the same amount as the backup catcher on the softball team? Adam Liptak and Alicia Parlapiano, "What the Public Thinks about Major Supreme Court Cases This Term," nytimes. Thus, it can keep a student from transferring to another university. Payment during college would help some people support their family and also encourage them to get a college degree before leaving for a professional career. Extra things on campus may be cut, and the overall quality of the campus will degrade. Athletic facilities would be upgraded to encourage enrollment. College athletes should be compensated for their work and be given rights.
Only a handful of sports actually make a profit for a school. It is giving the athletes what they deserve. It could put unnecessary burden on smaller colleges. Business of College Sports, "Tracker: Name, Image and Likeness Legislation by State," businessofcollegesports. Colleges and universities may be a resource for state law questions. College players are unpaid laborers who generate millions of dollars for others. Social and academic clubs, fraternities and sororities however, there is one activity very popular in universities that not only gives students a sense of unity and pride as they cheer for their home team but generates millions of dollars in revenue for the NCAA National Collegiate Athletic Association : college sport teams.
This process would be challenging to control because the biggest universities could always outbid the smaller colleges that play in the same division. It could also encourage money-losing sports to find ways to be self-supporting, which would bring stability to many threatened programs. It would prioritize athleticism over academics. In no way will it impact negatively on the sport. On the other side of this debate are the numerous disadvantages to paying athletes. This has become more prominent whenever a young sportsman is seriously injured while playing or training for their sport.
Should College Athletes Be Paid? Top 3 Pros and Cons
The ruling changed the broadcast regulations for college football. Before you decide which side to take, it is best to know the pros and cons. College athletes deserve to be paid for their dedication to sports. Throughout the past few years, one of the main topics debated in college sports is whether or not the athletes should be paid. Learn More Some college students qualify for scholarship grants that cater for expenses, such as travel and food. Provides Financial Relief to Families and Students Student-athletes have schedules that are filled with exercise, training, and sports-related activities in addition to their coursework and study.
In addition, the payment of athletes could create budget problems for all athletic departments across the board. Compensating college athletes could also reduce the corruption within collegiate athletics. This disadvantage would likely impact the quality of life, reducing the number of programs that the department would oversee since there would be fewer participants. College sports are a business, after all, and it is the students that bring in the revenue. Will NCAA players get paid? When an athlete attends it is often their goal to showcase their talents and take easy classes. Most people would agree that athletes should be compensated when profits are generated by their likeness and activities.
Should College Athletes Be Paid? The Pros and Cons
It is much easier for a professional team to evaluate the talent of an athlete when there is film available that covers the entirety of their college career. It helps the young players and their families survive throughout their college life. In contrast, the likelihood of an NCAA athlete earning a college degree is significantly greater; graduation success rates are 86% in Division I, 71% in Division II and 87% in Division III. Colleges would be viewed as entering into an employment contract if they began paying athletes for their participation in their sports. List of the Advantages of Paying College Athletes 1. Athletic departments would have to figure out how to balance payment across every sport and among athletes on the same team without creating problems.
Across-domain relationships emerged between athletic identity and academic effort and between perceived academic value and sport effort. Becky Sullivan, "UNC Becomes the First School to Organize Group Endorsement Deals for Its Players," npr. That means the cost of going to college would go down if you were willing to take up a sport and make the team. Should male athletes be paid more than female athletes? Pros And Cons Of College Athletes Paid 1299 Words 6 Pages Why college athletes should be paid for the risk of injury in college? Fewer than 2 percent of NCAA student-athletes go on to be professional athletes. On one hand, it could be argued that college athletes should be paid for their contributions to their respective sports programs and for the revenue that they generate for their universities and for the NCAA as a whole. Although colleges might cater for their medical bills in the short-term, they might not cater for their health care for a long period. For one, the question of how each player should be paid needs to be addressed.
College athletes should be paid. Agree or disagree?
Most would also agree that university programs should emphasize academics over athletics. However, it is important to note that not all expenses are covered by the grants, implying that student athletes would hardly meet the demand of catering for their needs because most of their time is spent in sports exercises and practices. Gabe Feldman, JD, Professor of Sports Law, Director of the Sports Law Program and Associate Provost for NCAA compliance at Tulane University, noted that the last time the NCAA was at the Supreme Court was in 1984 NCAA vs. Transferring schools without due permission from the original institution may result in lawsuits against the student for breach of contract. If those funds are ordered to be used as a salary for college athletes, then the other programs and services might suffer because of it.