Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

College Athletics: Why Students Should Not be Paid to Play The debate is on whether or not college athletes should be paid or not. Over half of the American voters believe athletes should be paid, especially football and basketball players, with all the money the NCAA brings in during March Madness, New Year’s games, and college playoffs. However, thoughts of college athletes being paid digresses away from the entire purpose of going to college as student-athletes. Paying college athletes to play would just lead to further financial issues within the NCAA program. For example, paying college athletes would aggravate the ongoing problem most American sports teams face. Money. It is the cause of many problems, for instance, unequal pay and the

Do they not deserve to be paid for their hard work and dedication? They put in so much effort to perform the best they can at their games or meets and they do all of this on top of whatever school work they get. In a Scholastic News article, one proponent expresses his opinion on why athletes should be paid. He states, “It's unfair that college athletes don't get paid. They work hard. Players on top college football teams devote 43 hours per week to practice and games, according to an NCAA survey. That's more hours than most Americans work each week.” If the average American is getting paid to do something for that long, why should a college athlete not be? Although this man has a fair point, many do not see how much money college athletes are given to pay for their education. Some athletes will get thousands of dollars worth of education paid for at their university, while others could end up on a full scholarship. Within the same Scholastic News article the author continues to write the pros and cons of paying athletes when they stated, “Others point out that getting a scholarship means getting a free college education and free housing. They say that is just as good as getting paid.” Scholarships are one big paycheck for college athletes. Why do they need to be paid more than they already are to just play their sport? Asking the NCAA to directly pay athletes is incendiary and unnecessary

If larger schools can pay student athletes those sports teams will become overpowered, meaning it would ruin the entire purpose of the NCAA program. John Thelin, Ph.D., and Research Professor of History of Higher Education & Public Policy at the University of Kentucky, advocates for his side of the argument, about why college athletes should not be paid while being interviewed for a ProCons article. The professor expresses, “Paying salaries to players will increase [athletic] program expenditures without necessarily increasing revenues… [and] a handful of powerful programs will stand to gain in competition for athletic talent simply because they can afford to pay salaries. Others will mimic as they try to keep up but eventually will fall short in trying to outbid Auburn University, Florida State, the University of Southern California or the University of Texas in the college player arms race.” If these universities were able to start paying players many of the football and basketball teams would be unfair. This would rig college playoffs and destroy the environment the NCAA has created for its