People have debated the century long question about if college athletes should be paid, and in recent years the question has become more and more prominent. The short answer is no, and the evidence that supports that argument is plentiful. Although there are many people who do support the counterargument that college athletes should be paid due to their such tight schedules. There is an argument for both sides of the issue regarding college athletics compensation, but only one side stands higher than the other. That side supports that college athletes should not be getting paid while they attend college just because they play their sport on the side. Student-athletes receive scholarships to pay for their classes, meal plan, and living expenses …show more content…
The purpose of college is to educate those athletes for future careers outside of professional sports. The college is not there to hire entertainers during their time at the college itself. Plus, college will have given the players a much more valuable asset than money, and that is a college degree. College players who receive expensive, full ride scholarships have the opportunity to stay on campus, and learn for 4 years expense free. Not many people can say that they had the opportunity to receive a bachelor’s degree and free college in every way for 4 years. Krikor Meshefejian is the author of this article, and talks about how even some programs give chances for students to enter programs when normally they may not of had the qualification to apply for the program. Krikor stated, “These basketball and football programs also provide some student-athletes the opportunity to get excellent educations for which they normally would have not qualified, or have applied.” (Meshefejian 1). The main purpose of each of the scholarships is to provide a quality education to each of the athletes, so why pay the students when the degree will pay off in the long