“That’s the ball game!”, the announcer screams as the Villanova Wildcats win the NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship. The players just won the biggest game in college basketball and, while millions have been made in the tournament, all the players receive is the satisfaction of winning and an ego boost. Within days they will back in the classroom. In the world of collegiate sports, the debate about paying student athletes is increasing as the revenue the college earns has increased into millions of dollars. Student-athletes are employees to their athletic programs, but they’re not receiving paychecks for their hours of service or overtime. It begs the question, “Are student-athletes being adequately compensated for the time and effort they …show more content…
Some may argue that, scholarships to the universities is more than enough compensation. Yes, scholarships are nice and make it easy for the students. “Being a college student-athlete is a full-time job, bouncing between the weight room, the court/field, classes, and film sessions” (Martinez). Although they do not have to pay for tuition they do not have the freedom or time to have a job to receive spending money. Another argument is that there are too many players and sports for them to receive fair payment. Honestly, all college-athletes shouldn’t receive the same amount, “football and men's basketball players get paid; lacrosse, field hockey, softball, baseball, soccer players get nothing... Not everything is equal, not everything is fair” (Wilbon). College-athletes who do not bring in the revenue should not receive payment as much as the ones who do. Who does a business pay more, the President or the Janitor? The president, because he/she’s bringing in the money. Therefore, if one disagrees with paying college athletes then they need to think about how classes and athletics prohibit them from having a job to provide some