Paying college athletes is one of much debated issues of current times. There are a number of people who believe that paying college students for playing games is not justified. There are various aspects of the issue which affects students, schools and the American society in a larger context. College athletes who bring in the most attraction getting paid would cause problems to those athletes who don’t bring in the most attraction. If they are getting paid should they still get a scholarship to attend college, and would it be right for them to get a profit for doing their job as a student athlete. This paper intends to discuss whether main attraction college students should be paid for playing games.
If college athletes who bring in the most attraction get paid it would demotivate other athletes participate in sport. There are many athletes who participate in the tournaments but not every athlete can win a medal. However, all athletes are equally important to form a team and win a match. It is painful for athletes who participate in tournaments but unfortunately do not succeed in winning medals. These athletes are discouraged when they see that some of their colleagues are being paid while they are not paid amply just because they have not got medals.
The issue would be determining which athletes qualify as the “main attraction.” In the noise of main attractions, various talented players are ignored. Athletes with great potential do not get the attention like ‘main attractions’. The performance of various other talented goes unnoticed and they are discouraged. College authorities and organizers should not neglect this aspect in order to keep the spirit of the sports intact. The problem would not only be that not all college athletes will be getting paid, but how much would those athletes who are bringing in the most attraction get paid?
The college sports industry makes eleven billion annually. This is a huge money and it is not going into hands of the government or policy makers. This money goes into the hands of college authorities and organizers. Even if college athletes who are main attractions of tournaments are paid substantially, a huge amount of money remains unused in hands of organizers. There are bigger chances of manipulating this money for fulfilling private interests. This money is distributed among directors at the NCAA, athletic directors and to pay the various coaches and is not for the college athlete students. McKenzie & Tullock (2012) mentioned that “[m]aintenance of the present system can only continue to produce victims, not beneficiaries” (McKenzie & Tullock). College violates rule set by NCCA and Athlets not actulaly receive money on ground.
There is a big game in the name of sports and college athletes. All the money that is collected by organizing college games and tournaments goes into hands of NCAA authorities. A substantial share is distributed among coaches and other parties including college authorities. College athletes play the most significant role in earning this huge money but they are not the biggest beneficiary of this money. A study finds how college sports have emerged as a money minting machine for organizers, “College athletics is a multibillion-dollar industry. Yet, college athletes only receive a limited share of the profits, and only in the form of athletic-based scholarships. In fact, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), in its capacity as the governing institution of intercollegiate athletics, explicitly forbids any form of player compensation” (Buckstaff).
Some college athlete experts argue that it would be unfair if only those main attraction college athlete players are making a salary and getting a full scholarship to attend the college. By doing this only few athletes would be getting paid and getting a scholarship. The best way to determine the eligibility of getting scholarships is to scrutinize the performance of athletes in the sports, as well as, in the studies. College athletes should never forget that they have got opportunities of playing because they are in colleges. College athletes should not be allowed to overlook their studies and college has a significant role in that. College authorities should never allow sports or tournaments take place in between the studies or academic sessions.
In current system of NCCA, athletes are getting free education, food, lodging facility and board fees taken care of by the scholarship they are provided. College athletes are provided with a number of facilities by colleges. They are also given tuition, coaching, sports equipment and infrastructure. College athletes are given travelling fare and other expenses. A common question that comes into minds of people is that when all these facilities and being provided by college authorities to college athletes then what is the need of paying them (Edelman).
A common question that is often asked is how fair is to pay some students and not paying others. Paying some college students for playing and not others is unfair and unethical. College is not a body that employs students. Students enter into colleges for getting education and in order to groom their personality. Their main focus should be on their studies and their career. College students should study in order to serve and deliver to the society. In light of all these things, when some students are paid for playing, it distracts other students from their studies. College students face a dilemma of choosing between studies and sports (Cooper).
Paying students will affect the entire industry. The issue affects every student, parents and individual of the society. Paying college students affects our society in different aspects. It affects the psyche of students and parents in various ways. The impact might differ from one school to another. Paying college students impacts students of different schools. There are various schools that encourage its students to play and participate into games while many schools inspire their students to concentrate on their studies. When students of any school are highly paid for playing games, it affects the psyche of students who are in other schools and are not paid like college athletes.
Paying a student more than the cost of attendance makes them employees. Goodwin (2013) said that college athletes are students even if they are excessively paid. Everything has a cost and the biggest problem in paying college students is the impact on their personality. The people who pay college students start treating them like employees and it affects their personality. This takes away their nonprofit status from the schools. Involvement of too much money causes schools to deter from their ways. Schools are primarily known for educational activities and for grooming students for their future but when a lot of money comes into the play, schools cannot remain nonprofit organizations. Involvement of huge money diverts their attention and affects their purposes (Goodwin).
It would affect the amount of sports in school. College athletes are not that mature people and when they are paid a huge amount of money and it affects their personal and professional activities. They turn into professionals and do not play games with sport spirit. Their main focus shifts on the money and ultimately sports is affected due to diversified interests of the athletes. Due to change in attitude of college athletes, the sports is unnecessarily get affected (Edelman). The athlets focueses their attention on generating more money by playing sports; they do not play sport with the true sport’s spirit.
Paying students affects the economics in school. Students who get money from sports use to flaunt their money and show-off. There are many hurdles in reference to paying students. Paying students would lead to students selling themselves. Once college students use to get money, they are addicted to it and they always look for money. Their behavior is affected by the money and they become money minded. Their materialistic approach may affect their career and future in a considerable manner. They may not be able to concentrate on their career and their behavior is affected substantially (McKenzie & Tullock).
This could alleviate problems at the high school level. Behavior of players will change and authorities will have to change the rules. It has been observed in a number of incidents that teenagers are spoiled in the game of organizers. One of such incidents is related to “Adair was a Texas high school baseball star and highly touted professional prospect when he was diagnosed with brain cancer. After a successful treatment, rehabilitation and arduous comeback, Adair worked his way back to competitive baseball. He ultimately accepted a scholarship to play Division I baseball at the University of Oklahoma. While he was in college, Adair lost his father to leukemia” (Callanan).
It is better to let amateur student athletes remain amateur. College students may get huge money by playing games but they are still amateur. Their mental level is that mature and they may get involved in various negative activities including consumption of alcohol and other toxic substances if they are given huge money in their immature ages. College students should be given all facilities but not the money that may hamper their career. In the end, star players graduate and get the big athletic salaries. Star players succeed in getting good money.
Main attraction college athletes are paid huge salaries as professional athletes. It certainly affects their study and distracts them from studies. Cooper (2011) in their article mentioned that college athletes are treated like stars and it may make feel in other ways that may affect their behavior and study. Paying them at the college level is only a distraction. Paying such a huge money in colleges is nothing but a mere distraction. Money is one of the most powerful factors that may influence behavior of people. College students can be easily distracted by money. College athletes get huge money in sports which may distract them from studies and their career is affected (Cooper).
Having observed an overview and succinct analysis of the abovementioned subject, this paper concludes that main attraction college athletes should not be paid for playing. There are several negative effects of paying main attraction athletes on schools and other students. College athletes themselves are affected in a considerable manner by the huge inflow of money. College athletes are often found to quit their studies in between and their career comes to an end after college because making career in sports is not that easy. Very few sportsmen succeed and sustain till end. Involvement of huge money in sports affects the behavior of college athletes in a considerable manner. American policymakers should consider this issue in new perspectives and paying college athletes should be banned.
Works Cited
Buckstaff, Caitlin D. "Covering the Spread: An Assessment of Amateurism and Vulnerability of Student-Athletes in an Emerging Culture of Sports Wagering." Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, 16, (1:133) (2014): 133-168. Print.
Callanan, Christopher A. "Advice for the Next Jeremy Bloom: An Elite Lite Athlete's Guide to NCAA Amateurism Regulations." Case Western Reserve Law Review, 56(3) (2006): 687-694. Print.
Cooper, KJ. "Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?." Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 28(10) (2011): 12-13 . Print.
Edelman, Marc. "A Short Treatise on Amateurism and Antitrust Law: Why the NCAA’s No-Pay Rules Violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act." Case Western Reserve Law Review, 64(1 ) (2013): 60-99. Print.
Goodwin, Drew N. "Not Quite Filling The Gap: Why the Miscellaneous Expense Allowance Leaves the NCAA Vulnerable to Antitrust Litigation." B.C.L. Rev, 54(3) (2013). Print.
McKenzie, RB, & Tullock, G. . "Does the NCAA Exploit College Athletes?" The New World of Economics (2012): 325-338 . Print.
