There has been a lot of debate lately about paying major college athletes. There are some valid points that can be made in doing this. At some of your larger universities they are making tens of millions of dollars off of these athletes and they are seeing none of this. The revenues that these colleges get from media and endorsements is also off the charts. Many of these universities are getting rich off of these student athletes and have to pay them nothing but the cost of their education. Others however argue that the athlete is already getting paid because they have a full scholarship that includes the cost of food and housing. I know many college athletes at the college i attend and while they are busy during the season they have all off season to get a job and earn money if they need it to get through school so i do not believe that college athletes should be paid.
Another troubling thing for major colleges is that of boosters paying their college athletes. In just the past year there have been many instances of this happening including at the University of Miami (link) where a boost claims to have paid over 72 athletes in the last year. He also claims that he gave them cars, hotel rooms, hookers, and let them throw parties on his yacht. Ohio State also had a problem when some of their star players sold their jerseys and other accessories to a tattoo parlor in exchange for free tattoos. These are just a couple of the instances of this happening, but it is happening all over the country.
This is a hot-button issue, but what's important to remember is that these kids are amateurs, not professionals. Yes, many major universities make boat-loads of money off of these athletes who see no profit, but they knew what they were getting into when they signed to play. Money needs to stay out of college athletics because it will cause more trouble than the trouble that is going on now.
ReplyDeleteWhat's also important to consider is the fact that video game companies, like EA Games, can use the athletes names and faces in their games without any consent by the players. So if athletes aren't getting paid by the school, I think they should at least receive royalties from the sales of the video games in which they are featured.
ReplyDeleteI am a strong believer for paying college athletes, they are the reason why the big D-I schools make all the money that they do. I was watching a special on ESPN about a college athlete who got in trouble for receiving money from someone. He said that he did it because he can't afford to buy food and clothes, it wasn't a substantial amount of money that he took, just a couple hundred dollars. Should players have to suffer?..No. I also agree with Chris, the players should get some sort payment from the maker of the games.
ReplyDeleteIf the players are good enough to get paid, they should just grow pro. Maybe a new league should be created, like a minor league/farm system for the NFL. If college players get paid, their wages should correlate to their grades...THEIR grades, not their "tutor's" grades.
ReplyDeleteThis is a hot-button issue that will not go away for a long time but one thing that kills me is the definition of "improper benefits" and what constitutes a violation some common sense has to be used by both the NCAA and the athletes, should a dinner with the coach be called improper, and should the athlete take a brand new car with out thinking of the repercussions.
ReplyDeleteBeing a college athlete, I can sympathize with both sides. I take workstudy and part time jobs while doing football year round, just to make enough money to pay for rent (in a really crappy place) and for food. So more money for me would be a great thing.
ReplyDeleteYet some of these athletes don't have to do anything when it comes to school and getting a degree, most of them already don't go to class and have people do their how or take tests. So I kind of find it unfair that they should receive even more of a benefit, so I'm not sure on which side to back.