Asking whether to pay college athletes or not is one of the most heated debates in NCAA history. Although it may sound good to the students, it will arise devastating effects on society. The discrimination that might occur if the NCAA decides to pay athletes could initiate public riots or violence. The idea of college athletes being paid should be put to rest based on the consequences that would arise (Bokshan). If one didn't know already, the NCAA prohibits payments beyond educational scholarships and specified expenses to students (Goldman). Believe it or not, some college athletes may even have it easier than the regular college student. Most college athletes receive scholarships, and can even benefit from perks that the team provides to them. People must also remember that college is a vehicle for receiving an education (Mitchell). Although those famous college athletes may be headed to the professional sports organization, currently they are still students and should be treated like so until they reach the higher level. Student success is also shown that it can be related to success in sports. For example, the year that Doug Flutie of Boston College won the Heisman Trophy, the average SAT skyrocketed by 110 points (Edelman). …show more content…
Television companies, radio companies, and even video-game companies make incredible money by using these college athletes as their “employees”. In 2011, the NCAA had CBS had a deal of over $11 Billion from March Madness alone (Wilbon)! In 2016, Texas A&M made $192.6 million primarily from men's basketball and football (Gaines). This is just business! Each college needs to make its own money for there programs and the NCAA needs to make money also to put towards to athletes themselves. In fact, only 12 D1 colleges broke even or made a profit in 2011 (Bokshan). How will the other schools find a way to pay their athletes? The answer is, they