Realistically, everyone has a right except for the players, as they seem to be the only ones not rewarded. Football has always been a passion of mine ever since was a small child. It was the one and only sport that I stuck with throughout my life until college. I have a deep interest in sports and football specifically, and it has been a big part of my life, which is why this topic interests me. The very first athletic competition between universities of the U. S. Was in 1852.
Harvard and Yale students competed in a rowing match located on Lake Winnipesaukee in New Hampshire. The race as sponsored and paid for by a railroad that wished to expand in the area (“Harvard”). Sports history experts say that the idea of college sports being created for the love and passion of the game isn’t so true according to history. Kent State’s Mahoney, an expert in sports history and management, says, “The NCAA didn’t come around until 1905 and didn’t start penalizing anybody until the sass; college sports was largely unregulated until then. The NCAA then tried to create a “Sanity Code” in 1 948, limiting aid to athletic scholarships based on need, but it failed when numerous schools refused to follow it (CTD. N Kari). After a “point-shaving” scandal, meaning the games had been fixed, hit the University of Kentucky, the defending basketball champions, the NCAA was able to gain control over college sports. As popularity of college football and basketball increased, so did revenue, creating pressure upon coaches and universities to compete for the best athletes to be recruited to their schools.
Opponents say that too much money is spent on athletics instead of academics, which forces administrators to be distracted by trying to win over more sports fans. However, the NCAA has continued to hold the dead of “amateurism” and keep the phrase “student-athlete” to help colleges battle against workers’ compensation claims from injured players. In more recent news, on April 25, 76 players with scholarships from the Northwestern University football team, in Evanston, Illinois, voted to unionize, which changed athletics in college.
Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot
This vote was followed by a National Labor Relations Board ruling that, because of the demands of practicing 40-50 hours per week, the players were employees of the school (Woolen). This ruling only applies to private schools, but results may not be known for as Eng as months because the actual university itself has appealed the ruling to the NELL. If the players win the case and form a union, they will be allowed to bargain from earnings and they will have workplace rules. The powerful nonprofit organization that creates and enforces rules for college sports, the NCAA is opposed to paying athletes.
President Mark Emmer said earlier this year, “Most university presidents, most college presidents that Vive talked to, are not particularly interested in continuing sports as they exist now if [college athletes] are going to be converted to employees that are hired” “Emmer’). In opposition, the President of the College Athletes Players Association, and former college football player Ramona Human, desires to unionize players, saying, ‘ ‘They’re paid to play. The schools require them to provide a service for receiving their scholarships.
So the question is what is fair compensation and treatment for their services” (CTD. In Kari). The CAP is pushing for college athletes to have the entire cost of schooling paid off, including better health care and additional academic support. This dispute has reintroduced the question: should college athletes be paid? The NCAA website defines the organization as a “membership-driven” organization dedicated to “safeguarding” the “well-being” Of student athletes and providing them with the skills to succeed on the playing field, in the classroom, and throughout life.
They provide high school students with athletic scholarships to continue their athletic careers onto college. Author Reed Kari explains this “decades-old system” in which athletes play consists of players earning scholarships that are used to pay fees for tuition, room, and board (“Paying’). As a result, they must practice and play in a schedule while also maintaining their grades. But, these scholarships still don’t seem to fully pay for the cost of schooling. The means of living for college athletes continues to be limited by NCAA rules and regulations made by individual athletic departments.
Numerous scholarships last only one year but can be renewed by a coach as they please. If the player doesn’t play to the coach’s expectations, they can be stripped of their scholarship (“Remaining”). Full scholarships can fall short by thousands of dollars annually. Last April, during the NCAA basketball tournament, national Hampton Sabbath Napier of the University of Connecticut explained how his lack of money from scholarships left him without food and often “starving’ (Again). In recent response, the NCAA will now provide all Division I student athletes with unlimited meal benefits.
NCAA President Emmer has also tried to provide a $2,000 allowance to athletes with scholarships to help pay for incidental expenses, but it has not been approved by university presidents (Kari). The Nana’s March Madness basketball tournament currently holds a television contract worth $10. 8 billion over 14 years (“Time’). Also, school hat normally play each other in top football conferences earn more than $200 million from broadcasters per year, some individual teams earn about $20 million (Doss).
The money is distributed amongst athletic organizations, paying for coaches’ salaries and the cost for more improved playing facilities. Top coaches often make more than the actual president of the university. Supporters of “high-profile” athletic programs say it helps with school fundraising and recruiting students. Analysts think student athletes should be paid due to how much money is made from their work. They say that these layers are potentially being exploited. Prior to this June, players haven’t been rewarded financially for the millions made from selling video games and merchandise.
A recent article by The Associated Press writes that the NCAA and EAI Sports video game creator agreed to pay former athletes $20-40 million for their use in the game. This resulted from “out-of-court’ settlements in lawsuits, “with a purpose of giving athletes a share of the money made”. One of the recent cases, unresolved, involves former UCLA basketball player Deed Abandon asking a U. S. District court to eliminate NCAA extraction that prevent athletes from earning a profit off their name, since only a small fraction of players actually end up going pro.
Congress and a few states have taken it into consideration to free the scholarship rules and give better treatment to athletes, but the bills do not ask for the players to be paid like professionals (Mandela). Supporters say that it could improve situations for scholarship players and maintain amateur status. Critics think the changes don’t amount to the demands on players and money made from sports. Most opponents of paying college athletes do not consider the current yester to be flawless. They argue that direct payment would ruin the idea of the “student-athlete”. Paying players would mean schools were essentially operating professional teams under the banner of an institution of higher learning”, states executive director of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, Amy Perks. She believes that the duty of being a student should be of higher importance, and paying players would be “immoral”. University of Georgia economist and analyst Jeffery Doorman says, “Colleges are already compensating their student athletes with tuition, mom and board, coaching, nutritional support and physical trainers that can exceed $100,000 per year.
Student athletes are already paid, and the current system is pretty close to as fair as we are going to get”. A study by the National College Players Association shows that Division I football players would make an average of SSL 78,500 annually from 2011-2015, which is way beyond their scholarship amounts, while basketball players at those schools would earn $375,000 per year (“Ramona”). Experts argue that a free education is a fair pay for athletes who generate billions.
In addition, they claim that rewarding football and basketball players would be unfair to athletes in other sports in which not as much money is generated. Aspen’s sports business reporter, Kristin Doss, says that paying college athletes could destroy the competition, because the most successful school could offer higher paychecks (“Women”). Doss also explains how paying players could violate Title IX, the federal legislation that protects discrimination by gender in education. If female athletes aren’t treated equally, it would end sports earnings for football and men’s basketball players.
Others say that the acquirement of equal opportunity from Title IX does not apply if the college athletes become employees of the university. The next big question would be if colleges and universities could afford to pay student athletes. Some analysts say universities have the money but choose to spend it on their coaches’ salaries and upgraded equipment and facilities. Critics also point out the fact that student athletes playing for small schools on Division Ill teams are not awarded athletic scholarships and make fewer demands on their player.
Opponents argue how academic standards for college athletes re not strict enough. They say universities and the NCAA should tighten admission and academic standards to make sure athletes are competing in the classrooms and not just on the playing field. Critics complain that many athletic programs take part in academic fraud by waiving standard admission requirements and cheating to keep star athletes playing, but do little to make sure their players are getting a meaningful education. Those athletes that are taken in by academic fraud are explained unprepared for college.
