There have been a few questions that has been asked for a long time regarding why certain things don’t happen, but the main one is rather student-athletes should be paid or not. I believe that student- athletes should be paid for what they do for the school. Even though the student-athletes are given scholarships for their skill, there are some who wound up giving the college more money than the money that is equal to their scholarship. People may think then why should you give money to the lesser athletes who don’t contribute as much to the prestige of the school, but if you just paid certain individual it would be the same as it is now. By that it means it would basically be the same as athletes getting paid by others to go to the school or just to have money to walk around with while in college. Of course, it can be understandable when some accept it to help their family, but that wouldn’t be a problem if the athletes were further compensated for their sport.
The NCAA classifies Division I players as amateurs, not professionals, student-athletes, not employees, which is how colleges get away with paying them nothing. But during post season play it is temporarily relaxes the rule for
…show more content…
The modern Division 1 college football player will devote 43.3 hours per week to their sport, which is 3.3 more hours than the average American worker. Reducing the times of practices could lower that, but until then it is too much time a athlete should spend on the sport. Claims that the college athletes are just students, doesn’t hold up when in some situations like the NCAA tournament schedule will require them to miss classes to attend those nationally televised games that bring in so much revenue. For some schools, during the road to the NCAA men's basketball championship it may require student-athletes to miss up to a quarter of all class days during their Spring