In his article “Should College Athletes be Paid? Why, They Already Are”, Seth Davis is able to effectively argue why Branch’s argument in “The Shame of College Sports” is incorrect through his use of rhetorical strategies to the Sports Illustrated audience. Davis’ use of ethos addresses Branch’s trustworthiness in what he includes or does not include in his article. Through his use of logos Davis is able to point out why Branch’s logic does not add up. Finally, Davis’ accusatory tone asserts his opinion of Branch’s writing, which tears down why Branch’s own article is flawed.
It is an undeniable truth that college athletes nationwide have participated in an excessive amount of criminal activities compared to non-athletes. This issue has existed for an extended time, and prevailed especially during recent years. The history and continuity of this problem encourages most to pose the question, what can the NCAA do to stop this? There are multiple perspectives taken on how to act on reducing these crime rates, but all are similar as they attempt to attain the same goal. Many critics argue that these athletes wouldn’t commit these crimes if they were paid enough to cover necessary living costs or allowed to receive other outside payments, but a great amount of others believe that they are already compensated enough with the scholarships and other miscellaneous benefits they receive.
College football, as an “amateur” sport, produces nearly $3.5 billion dollars a year, but the young men who play the game, primarily African American, don’t see a penny of revenue. Yes, student athletes get tuition, room and board, and lots of Nike, Adidas or Under Armour gear, but they’re really free labor. The world refers to them as “student athletes,”. There are three different levels of competition under the NCAA. Division I, Division II and Division III are the three levels associated with the NCAA.
With the revenue quickly escalating, college athletes appear more as employees because of the money they are generating for their school program (Berry III,
College sports is one of the best-known entertainments around the world. But for the athletes, they are students first then athletes second. For college student-athletes, there are a variety of scholarships and grants to help pay for college or college debt. However, some critics say that student-athletes should be paid a salary like pro athletes would, with help from scholarships or grants. The authors of, College Athletes are being Educated, not Exploited, Val Ackerman and Larry Scott, argue that student-athletes are already paid by free education and other necessities.
Should college athletes be paid? Annotated Bibliography Benedykiuck, Mike. “The Blue Line: College athletes should be paid.” Dailyfreepress.
Would paying college athletes help or damage the idea of amateurism? The issue of college athletes being paid has been debated recently. On one side of the argument, supporters believe that college athletes should not get paid. However, opponents think they should get paid. Colleges should not start paying their athletes for participating in a sport because the athletes have already gotten paid in education, and they aren’t professionals yet.
Why College Athletes Shouldn’t Get Paid? Free education! Free lunch! Free books.
The fight for payment of college athletes has not been quick one as more and more issues keep popping up. The NCAA has never allowed payment of its athletes, but small steps towards the overall goal has questioned the NCAA’s past. Its’ decisions has stayed constant since its founding in 1906. The first issue in this decision would not occur until 1952 when the NCAA ruled to give The University of Kentucky the ‘death penalty’ for paying their athletes. This ‘death penalty’ is a one year program ban from participation, the harshest penalty the NCAA can give.
During this year’s college football bowl season, the spotlight turned away from the actual games and towards conversations surrounding star players skipping bowl games. LSU running back, Leonard Fournette and Stanford running back, Christian McCaffrey both decided to skip the final game of their collegiate career in fear of injuring themselves prior to the NFL draft- a highly controversial move that makes sense. While these players get an incredible athletic and academic experience playing college football, there’s only one thing on these players’ minds: the league. Players are willing to put their body on the line while these universities are making millions of dollars off them just for the chance to a part of the 1.6% of college football players to be drafted by an NFL team. These players dream of the NFL for many reasons, whether it’s the love of the game, competitive drive, or to simply support their family.
It includes only those funds that end up in the NCAA 's bank account.” The FCAA being the organization that would collect and distribute the capital. This research paper described why college athletes should be paid. They make personal sacrifices, and take risks in order to produce revenue for their schools.
Another reason that it would be bad for college athletes to be paid is because the colleges would build a bad reputation for being all about the money and not about education. Already, some colleges are accused of using money to influence players into going to their school. "If a high-school football prodigy reported that he chose Michigan not for its academic quality, tradition, or beautiful campus but because it outbid all other suitors, a connection to the university’s values would be lost." (Yankah). Ever since the first college institutions were founded, they were either known for their academics or athletics.
For years, the use of performance-enhancing drugs has haunted all levels of sport, baseball taking the majority of the publicity. Many have lost sight of the fact that baseball players are not the only athletes that face this life threatening addiction. Due to the amount of padding they have to wear, football players can easily disguise their size therefore keeping them from receiving scrutiny from the public. This has allowed more and more players to look to PEDs in order to gain an edge over their opponents. The issue spans to not only the professional level, but the high school and collegiate divisions as well. Because the National Football League sits on a higher platform, they bring in an exceptional amount of money compared to that
A growing debate in the National Collegiate Athletic Association is whether or not student athletes should be paid. The controversy began in 2011 after three hundred coaches and athletes signed a petition to pay college-level athletes, and since then other athletes have made several more arguments. The NCAA has rightfully denied all of the requests, saying they include too much. To pay student athletes could be hugely expensive for colleges, especially because they would not only pay for each athlete’s degree and equipment, but also provide a salary and give bonuses revenue for tournaments. Moreover, college athletes should not be paid because there is not enough money, it takes away a student’s focus from schoolwork, and not every athlete is guaranteed a professional career after graduating; however it is argued that it they are already paid in a way.
But this applies to only those who resort to cheating ways. Sports persons always hit the headlines for a lot of controversies like using drugs, playing for two clubs, abusing the fans of other countries or clubs or inappropriate behaviour in the field or breaking the code of conduct and so on and so forth. The problem does not stop here; the sports medicine which the players take is also causing serious debates and discussion. Issues like faking injury, losing intentionally to get a stronger opponent and failing the gender test had also surfaced in the
