Those who say college student-athletes should not be paid argue that they receive scholarships as a form of payment for their talents. Would athletes be paid differently depending on the sport they play? Where would the money even come from?
Tuition, room, board and books were compensation enough. Where exactly would the money come from?
Would the quality of the broadcasts or the coverage or the staging of the events be somehow diminished? Not everything is equal, not everything is fair.
Using the inability to distribute the funds equally as an impediment is an excuse, a rather intellectually lazy one at that. Nothing about the way hundreds of millions of dollars is distributed is equitable or even fair. In question right now is whether the BCS even conducts its business dealings in a manner consistent with principles expressed in federal anti-trust laws.
Players like Andrew Luck, who are the face of their university, deserve to be compensated. Their revelations, short of Heisman Trophy winners having to return their statues, wind up penalizing only the kids and coaches who remain on the team and in the vast majority of cases have done nothing to merit a penalty themselves.
If somebody is willing to give A. If a car dealer wants to strike that deal then good for the player in question. If a music student goes out in the summer and earns 50 grand, who objects? The student-musician is no less a college student because he struck a lucrative deal.
Neither is the student-journalist who spends his nights writing freelance stories and picking up as much money along the way as he can. The best college athletes in the two revenue-producing sports have always been worth much more than tuition, room, board and books.
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, which not only violates common decency but perhaps even the law.Football players make schools a ton of money and should be able to reap some of the rewards.
Players are risking permanent injury by playing for free. Players are being used. Oct 21, · I'm not saying we should be paying athletes $5, or even $10, per semester. If each athlete got $2, paid over the course of the semester, . Many coaches earn at least $, per year to coach one of the major sports like baseball, basketball, or football at a school.
These coaches will receive bonuses for getting to the playoffs, winning championships, or breaking school records. The question of whether college athletes should be paid to play sports has been debated for years, and CBS columnist Gregg Doyel, formerly a holdout, now thinks football players deserve more than.
Should College Student-Athletes Be Paid?
Both Sides of the Debate. by Madisen Martinez Would athletes be paid differently depending on the sport they play? How do you quantify the true worth of a college sports team, especially if it’s making the school much more popular overall and bringing in lots of students?
College football and.
The pros list the arguments for why college athletes should be paid and the cons list the arguments for why college athletes should not be paid. Check out our student loan calculator. Pro #1: College athletes put their bodies on the line each game they play.