Essay On Should Student Athletes Be Paid

Student-Athletes who are recruited to play a college sport are going in with one goal, to play their sport professionally by being the best player they can be. Unfortunately only about 3% percent of NCAA athletes in their respective sport go on to play professionally. The other 97% spend hours and hours of their precious time practicing on the field all for no future in that specific field of work. Actually according to Forbes, Marc Edelman reports “student-athletes work 3 and a half more hours a week than a typical american worker”(Forbes) If an NCAA athlete spends over 40 hours a week practicing their game, then they are working the same amount of hours as people who are in full employment. These hours are spanned over practices, training, games traveling, attending classes, and maintaining grades which is important in order to remain on the team and keep their full scholarship. For people that complain about their jobs and only have to work less than 40 hours a week, think about a student athlete whose job is not only intellectually demanding but brings them to the limits of their physical endurance as
well. Student Athletes who are in the Pac-12 division often say that they are “too exhausted to study effectively [and] Because of travel, athletes say they have fallen behind in homework, studying and sleeping” (CBS). A student athlete who is practicing 40 hours a week for a job that is unrealistic and brings them to their last breath sees no point in doing so, unless they are paid.
The NCAA’s president Mark Emmert often states that paying college athletes would destroy the competitiveness of the sport (Online Athens). This seems to be a valid point since paying athletes would turn college sports into the minor leagues, and according to the Huffington post, the competitiveness in the D-league (minor league for basketball) has gone down since teams are scoring such a low amount of points because they know they are getting paid so little (Huffington Post). However, others would argue against this statement, since professional teams pay their players based on their worth and their performance. The payments offered only contribute to the athletes motivation to work and play harder. This hard work also leads to salary increases with the the team and allows big time athletes to sign deals with sponsors such as nike, adidas, or gatorade. Analysts have noticed that athletes usually work harder during the last year of their contract in order to earn a big contract. David Wright a player for the New York Mets was “at an age when most players reach their prime, Wright batted just .254 with 14 home runs. This year [in the last season of a six-year, $55 million contract] he had returned to form: He's second in the National League with a .370 average” (Slate). A student athlete that is being paid would want to work harder in order for a pay raise, working harder means a better player that is more enjoyable for the fans to watch,
“According to Ohio State University, 70% of nearly 19,000 students surveyed said they’re stressed about their finances” (Time). If the NCAA were to pay its athletes, the students would not worry about where and how to get money. If students did not have to worry about their finances, they could spend more time focusing on their sport and their classes. This helps prevent athletes from underperforming during games. From this motivation these athletes can become better competitors which would in turn make the NCAA more money (KQED). Many people would argue that student athletes should not be paid because they are already receiving full scholarships from the university.
Essentially student athletes receive a full paid education and all they have to do is represent their college in their respective sport. College athletes do not have to worry about the cost of housing, textbooks, student loans, and meal plans. According to Institute For College Access & Success, “in the state of Pennsylvania 71 percent of students leave a public four-year institution or private non-profit four-year institution in debt. The average debt is $32,528.” A cost like that is a major burden on a student who may not get a job straight out of college. After looking at it from a different angle, plenty of college students would be psyched to play a sport for four years if it meant they would not be in debt (US
News).
Many people say that the NCAA, a billion dollar industry has an ideal system for creating cheap labor by not paying college students who participate in competitive sports. While others argue that student-athletes should be grateful for their full paid scholarships and the chance to represent their college on the big stage. The compensation of student-athletes is a revolving issue that is discussed many times during the course of the year especially during the month of march. Being that student athletes now are not being paid, the plan of making a salary for these talented studs would require a long process that could take up to 2 years to structure and initiate (NYT). Even though some analysts are fighting for athletes to be paid “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the NCAA violated antitrust laws by limiting student-athlete compensation, but also ruled against a plan to pay student-athletes as much as $5,000 annually” (ESPN). A declined decision for compensating student athletes could mean the issue could take up to years to decide, however there is no telling what the future holds. Everyone has their own opinion, what do you think, should student athletes be compensated?