Should college athletes be paid? This has been a long-running debate in the collegiate sports industry. Every student knows that they cannot be paid as an athlete in college. (Text 4, line 36) The college sports industry generates a hefty sum through its revenues, around eleven billion dollars yearly. The money is then distributed among NCAA executives, athletic directors and coaches as a form of salary. (Text 1, lines 1, 9-10) There are people who believe that student athletes shouldn’t be paid as they are amateur players who are bound to earn more when they become professional players. (Text 3, lines 26-27) What this misjudged opinion fails to address is the fact that these athletes' lives are so heavily involved in sports and should be compensated …show more content…
To start, there is a rule by the NCAA that prevents colleges from paying their athletes, Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which states “every contract, combination… or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce… is declared to be illegal.” (Text 1, lines 25-27) “Applying this language, any agreement among NCAA members to prohibit the pay of student-athletes represents a form of wage fixing that likely violates the antitrust law.” (Text 1, lines 27-29) Based on this law, it’s obvious that the organization is violating its own law, thus further justifying the fact that these athletes are obligated to receive some form of wage in return. Furthermore, non-supporters believe these players are being compensated through the broad sports exposure they may receive but this isn’t advantageous to everyone. “Few ever benefited more from the exposure factor than the man behind the attention-grabbing lawsuit against the NCAA over player media likeness.” (Text 3, lines 31-32) Consequently, not many see this type of payment as serviceable; there are other ways in which players may gain exposure. Besides, many of these athletes may not continue their athletic career and choose to go professional in a different field, so this form of payment will certainly not benefit …show more content…
As a matter of fact, players are virtually full-time employees for their colleges. “College athletes are mass-audience performers and need to be rewarded as such…players spend 40 hours per week on their sports… [and] are essentially working full-time football jobs while going to school.” (Text 2, lines 5, 10, 15) Therefore, unlike other students who may attend the same university/college, student athletes are required to put more effort into what they do, ensuring their best performance on the field while maintaining their grades for school. There are some seasons where school becomes a second priority, and the players would practice hours on end to put on an exciting game. All this effort and work they put in, certainly should amount to some sort of reimbursement for these athletes. In addition, the athletes practicing 40 hours a week for their sport goes to show these athletes are basically working a full-time job as for a job to be considered full-time, the amount of hours required per week is 40. Moreover, many student athletes aren’t that wealthy or well off. “A 2011 report entitled ‘The Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sport’ confirms that 85 percent of college athletes in scholarship lives below the poverty line.” (Text 1, lines 22-23) As student athletes, sports take up a majority of their lives, it prevents them from getting other jobs that may