ipl-logo

Arguments Against Paying College Athletes

502 Words3 Pages

The Argument Against Paying College Athletes

The justification of attending college is to acquire professional training and skills, so why should college athletes be compensated? Paying college athletes more than the scholarships they already have is not a good idea. Even though college athletes should be paid because they don't have time to work, they shouldn't be paid because it could send a negative message to kids and high school students and they already got paid through their tuition, fees, and transportation. While it may inspire more children to participate in sports, it may also convey a negative message and misunderstand why they should do so. For instance, every child, regardless of talent, will grow up wanting to play football because they will be focused on the money. Then, the high school level will also demand compensation. College sports would be sending the message that it is acceptable to withhold additional funds and to pay only certain athletes. It will propagate a false belief about the benefits of sports for children. …show more content…

Furthermore, college athletes already receive superior services that exceed salary payments. Athletes should not be exempt because they receive more treatment and benefits than other students. Since, athletes receive more treatment and benefits than other students, they should not be exempt. College athletes are not held to the same standards as the elite universities, which provide the athletes with the best gyms to exercise in, free health insurance for injuries, transportation, food, and, most importantly, tuition, stated in the article “Athlete Reason Why They Shouldn’t Pay”, page 2. College athletes shouldn't be paid because the services they receive are already covered by a payment for a few year. A salary is neither necessary nor required for these excellent services. College athletes do not require additional support beyond what they already

Open Document