Free Rides Controversy strikes as talks of payment to college athletes are on the rise. Recent cases have brought about whether or not the country’s beloved student-athletes should be paid to play. The answer to that question is no, reason being that these “athletes” are students before anything, including a celebrity. College athletes, especially those who play football or basketball, are being compensated more than fairly enough through their scholarships as is. It’s public perceptions that the NCAA and/or the university these students attend are blatantly neglecting them. No, there is simply more to it. Most schools barely come by enough money to pay student-athletes, whether it be basketball, football, baseball, or even tennis and golf. If it’s not a top 5 school then the revenue gain is rather mediocre, if there is any at all. Not to mention, an overwhelmingly large percentage of athletes already see sport as career when in reality only a handful will make it big, whether it be the NBA, NFL, or etc. This heavily contributes to athlete’ extreme amount of those who do not graduate. College players should ultimately accept the terms that were first given when asked to attend the university and should not be paid because athletes are receiving opportunity and experience free of charge, already are being compensated fairly enough …show more content…
Somes schools can be expecting a rise of $2000-5000 in the upcoming year or two (Gregory 1). With stipends being introduced to more college athletes and the quantity being substantially increased, we can see more student athletes affording the cost of living much easier. Though that means more money in stipends possibly being distributed to the other conflicted non-athlete students who are just as deserving to receive financial aid. To accompany this is the worry that smaller sports will not be compensated as much as bigger ones, especially female