There have been multiple arguments over the years as to whether college athletes should

get paid. College athletes devote the majority of their college experience to sports, but are never

given a salary for their constant hard work. The National Collegiate Athletic Association must

begin to pay college athletes because sponsors and media networks profit from college athletes

fame whereas the athletes gain none of that profit, college athletes dedicate multiple hours to

their sports as if it were his/her job, and allowing college athletes to be paid would provide an

education on money management for them.

During the 1940s the NCAA made the Sanity Code. It limited financial aid for athletes

to tuition and fees. Aid would only be given based on need. The code was later on revised

because multiple colleges threatened to remove themselves from the NCAA. In the mid 1950s

many still opposed on college athletes being given scholarships. In the 1970s Title IX was

passed and the National Collegiate Athletic Association merged with the Association for

Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW). The NCAA began to govern womens sports. The

constant question on whether college athletes should get paid has been taken into account by the

NCAA, but the possibility of that happening has been shut down multiple times. While

seemingly operating in a purely capitalistic/professional atmosphere, the NCAA continues to

endorse an amateurism concept in college athletics. These competing, and often contradictory,

values lead some college athletes in big time football and basketball programs to question the

status quo of the present system through their words and actions (Johnson). Athletes choose to

fight for a salary because they devote themselves to a sport all through college and there are

arguments that will support them in this fight on getting paid as a college athlete.
 The Media network is one of the biggest profiteers from college athletes games.

Networks broadcast football and basketball games because of its massive popularity in the U.S. .

There are games almost every day of the week and the media makes cover stories and report

details on the games daily. Without college athlete games theses networks would have to find a

different subject to revolve around. This would affect those who work in the networks, if the new

subject isnt successful. Jobs in the media industries rely on these hourly games. Sponsors and

media networks have made millions from an image of a college athlete. College athletes put in

all the work to becoming one of the best and earning a well-known reputation but the media is

collecting all the profit while the athlete is left with nothing. The networks only have to get a

photo or interview with the athlete to gain money, but that doesn't compare the hours of work

and risk college athletes put themselves in, only to receive no compensation.The best football

and basketball players in the Big Ten have produced to the degree that a television network has

become the model for every conference in America, a network worth at least tens of millions of

dollars to the member institutions. Yet, no player can benefit from that work. The players have

become employees of the universities and conferences as much as students -- employees with no

compensation(Wilbon). Both college athletes and media workers try to do their best but the

media work end up with the better deal. The work they do is as a job, whereas college athletes

are just playing for the interest of the sport. Secondly, media workers are not risking their lives

and health. College athletes put themselves at risk every time they step onto the field because of

the body contact that is constantly seen in sports. If an athlete is injured a scholarship is not

going to help support the hospital bills and therapies that are going to be needed in order for the

athlete to recover. He/She must make the money on his/her own.

 College athletes spend so much time on their sport that they can lose a lot of time they

need for their classes, studying for tests and finals. There have been some cases where athletes

are taken out of their class to prepare of leave for a game. Time spent practicing takes away from

studying, homework, and projects. The number of hours an average college football player

spends on games and practices a week is just about the number of hours an average employee

spends working in a job. The average college football player practices 8 hours a day, which is the

same number of hours a software engineer works. College athletes arent being given the

opportunity of an employee of being paid, instead college athletes are being treated as amateurs.

The amount of time that athletes dedicate to their sport and time that is lost from their education

in colleges is worth nothing more than a scholarship. These athletes deserve much more. While

the NCAA contends that college football players are not employees in a legal sense, a study

found that the average college football player committed 43.3 hours per week to training,

practicing, and playing. Considering the standard workweek is 40 hours, those who support the

pay-for-play model argue that playing college football is similar to holding a full-time job, one

that generates large revenues for the parent company yet offers virtually no pay (Should College

Football players get paid?). There are college athletes that fail classes or choose to drop out to

pursue athletics even though their success in an athletic career is never 100% guaranteed. The

NCAA focuses on the number of athletes that graduate and display that high percentage on their

website, but even though that college athlete graduated it does not mean he/she has all the

knowledge needed to get a career and maintain themselves. College athletes are encouraged to

major in interdepartmental studies or general studies, both of which can be considered easy

degrees that arent much help when looking for a job after their athletic career doesnt work out.
Not only has the NCAA done a good job of framing a "success" as receiving a degree rather than

receiving the education necessary to get a job, it has also created its own graduation rate to paint

a better picture than the federal graduation rates. While the NCAA claims athletes graduate at a

higher rate than the general student body, the federal rates show the opposite (Trahan). An

athlete that graduates with a diploma isnt always prepared for creating a successful career on

his/her own.

Money management is one of the main keys to having a successful career. Allowing

college athletes to be paid would provide an education on money management. Many athletes

who have made millions end up going bankrupt because he/she wasnt properly taught or given

the skills on managing his/her money correctly. If college athletes were given this education

ahead of time he/she would be prepared for financial problems that could occur in the future if

he/she were to pursue an athletic carrier. The challenge that most college athletes face is that

unlike most students, it is nearly impossible for them to have a job during the school year. The

balance between school, sports, a personal life and a job would be too much to handle. So, many

athletes can only work jobs during the summer if theyre not competing. Consequently, many

college athletes leave school without having ever developed the skills necessary to handle their

own accounts and affairs.( Mama). Without a side job college athletes are not given the real life

experience of managing their money. When they graduate and have to look into a job keeping

count of the money they earn will be much more challenging.

Many argue that a scholarship is enough of payment for a college athlete. Scholarships

cover tuitions, rooms, board, and books, which is helpful to student athletes with little money to

fall back on. College athletes are already paid in the form of scholarships. They basically get four
years or more, depending on redshirts and injuries, of tuition free living. That is an average of

$27,000 a year ( Lennox). College athletes receive compensation in a form of a scholarship. This

may be enough for some athletes who are set on becoming professional. Leigh Hadaway has a

similar viewing to Kevin Towards this subject. There needs to be a clear line between amateur

sports and professional sports. Students are not professional athletes that should receive paid

salaries, they are students that through the participation in sport, receive access to scholarships

and a college education (Hadaway). There are thousand dollar scholarships that college athletes

are granted but it is not enough when it comes to the endless work and sacrifice they put into a

sport. Schools make millions of dollars off of athletes. The identity of an athlete is used to

benefit everyone except the actual athlete. College athletes place themselves in danger when on

the field. There is no certainty that they will never be injured. In the cases when a student is

injured he/she needs to find a way to pay for the medical care. This becomes a problem for

students who are from the lower class or are struggling to sustain a job and continue playing a

sport at the same time. College athletes may not be professionals, but they do devote themselves

to the sport just as much as professionals do. Being paid starts college athletes toward a better

future and may give them a better chance of creating a career from the sport they love.

In conclusion, The National Collegiate Athletic Association must pay college athletes

because sponsors and media networks profit from college athletes fame whereas the athletes gain

none of that profit, college athletes dedicate multiple hours to their sports as if it were their job,

and allowing College athletes to be paid would provide an education on money management for

them. College athletes work for their sport like they would for a job, but the unfairness of
receiving nothing that can help these students thrive in this hard working world we live in cannot

go unnoticed.
 Annotated Bibliography

Mama, Raman. Viewpoint: College Athletes Should Be Paid. USA Today College, Raman
Mama, 24 Dec. 2016, college.usatoday.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

This document discusses the reasons according to Raman Mama why College athletes should be
paid regarding the amount of money the media networks make from college athletes image, but
the athletes themselves make no profit.

Should College Football Players Get Paid? Gale Student Resources in Context, Student
Resources in Context, 2016, link.galegroup.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

This document addresses the arguments on whether or not college athletes should get paid. It
discusses the amount of time college athletes spend on his/her sport, which is equivalent to the
amount of time spent working in a job, but the players earn no profit unlike regular employees.

Wilbon, Michael. College Athletes Deserve to Be Paid. ESPN, Michael Wilbon, 18 July 2011,
www.espn.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

This document states multiple reasons as to why college athletes should get paid and strategies
that can be used to accomplish these demands without harming the system that has already been
put in place regarding scholarships and school funding.

Johnson, Dennis A. "Point/Counterpoint: Paying College Athletes." The Sport

Journal, 15 June 2012, thesportjournal.org . Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

This article states the history of the NCAA and its involvement in College athletes being paid. It
also claims and supports the reason on why they should or shouldnt be paid.

Trahan, Kevin. "Athletes Are Getting Degrees, but Does That Actually Mean
Anything?" SB Nation, 9 July 2014, www.sbnation.com. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

This article argues that a degree is not enough for a college athlete in being successful out in the
world. It claims that NCAA covers up the amount of college athletes that are successful in life
with a lie.
Lennox, Kevin. "College Athletes Should Not Get Paid." Logos Lite, 14 Feb. 2017,
www.niacc.edu. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

This document discusses reasons why College athletes should not get paid. It argues that college
students should not be considered as professionals and earn a salary a professional earns.

Hadaway, Leigh. "Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid." Odyssey, 24 May 2016,
www.theodysseyonline.com. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

This article talks about how many argue that college athletes should be paid a decent salary, but
counters this argument by claiming that a scholarship is enough of compensation of a college
athlete.
 Works Cited

Mama, Raman. Viewpoint: College Athletes Should Be Paid. USA Today College, Raman
Mama, 24 Dec. 2016, college.usatoday.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

Should College Football Players Get Paid? Gale Student Resources in Context, Student
Resources in Context, 2016, link.galegroup.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

Wilbon, Michael. College Athletes Deserve to Be Paid. ESPN, Michael Wilbon, 18 July 2011,
www.espn.com. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.

Johnson, Dennis A. "Point/Counterpoint: Paying College Athletes." The Sport

Journal, 15 June 2012, thesportjournal.org . Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

Trahan, Kevin. "Athletes Are Getting Degrees, but Does That Actually Mean
Anything?" SB Nation, 9 July 2014, www.sbnation.com. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

Lennox, Kevin. "College Athletes Should Not Get Paid." Logos Lite, 14 Feb. 2017,
www.niacc.edu. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

Hadaway, Leigh. "Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid." Odyssey, 24 May 2016,
www.theodysseyonline.com. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

McCauley, Kieran. "College Athletes Shouldnt Be Paid." Daily Local News Sports,
28 Apr. 2015, www.dailylocal.com. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.
Critical Thinking Paper

Bianca Hernandez
Green Group
4/2/17