Twenty-two points, six rebounds, and three assists are the stats of Shabazz Napier, star point guard for the University of Connecticut's basketball team. Napier has just won the NCAA championship game and receives the Most Valuable Player (MVP) award. Because of this, Napier has become somewhat of a poster boy for the NCAA. Thus, the media will be rushing to hear his now valued opinion. When being interviewed about a week after the game, Napier says that there are "hungry nights where I'm not able to eat, but I still gotta play to my capabilities" (Sherman). Napier also comments on seeing his jersey being sold by saying, "to some credit, you feel like you want something in return" (Thomas). Many may think that scholarships cover all aspects
…show more content…
The only ones not cashing in, it seems, are the player themselves." This does not seem fair that the ones who are making the money are not receiving any of the money. Greg Johnson, sports editor at The Daily Targum, and StudentNation, organization who give first-person accounts from student activists, organizers and journalists reporting on youth-oriented movements for social justice, economic equality and tolerance, says, "Coaches and athletic directors can negotiate million-dollar contracts, billions are available for installing state-of-the-art facilities, but the whole enterprise hinges on maintaining an arbitrary benefit to the student athletes." Supporters of the notion that college athletes should not be paid argue that there are problems with payment. Johnson, who spent sixteen years working in the School of Sport Sciences at Wingate University (NC), and Acquaviva, professor of sports science at Wingate University (NC) say that refuters ask the questions "how much should the athletes get paid and will payments be based on performance? What if the athlete gets hurt? What if the athlete is a bust and despite …show more content…
According to Sanderson and Siegfried, since they are considered students instead of employees, "they have not been covered by general labor laws." Because of this, "university athletic departments can dictate many aspects of a student-athlete's routine and engage these individuals in long hours of practices, something that might not be possible if general labor laws were in force." This also illustrates another reason how the college athletes are dominated, managed, and controlled. The NCAA does not have to pay the college athletes since they consider them to be students even though they treat them as if they are employees. Also, the athletes do not have a voice in NCAA regulations pertaining to them. The NCAA "maximizes its profits by steadily expanding regular season games," but "the players have no voice in these decisions to expand the schedule" (Sanderson and Siegfried). College athletes should be paid because the NCAA uses their power to stretch out as much money possible by using the athletes to their advantage without paying them for their services. However, arguers try to say that this is acceptable because they are students and are not employees and should not expect to get paid, but if this proposition turns out to be true, then the NCAA is treating the athletes as if they are
The only ones not cashing in, it seems, are the player themselves." This does not seem fair that the ones who are making the money are not receiving any of the money. Greg Johnson, sports editor at The Daily Targum, and StudentNation, organization who give first-person accounts from student activists, organizers and journalists reporting on youth-oriented movements for social justice, economic equality and tolerance, says, "Coaches and athletic directors can negotiate million-dollar contracts, billions are available for installing state-of-the-art facilities, but the whole enterprise hinges on maintaining an arbitrary benefit to the student athletes." Supporters of the notion that college athletes should not be paid argue that there are problems with payment. Johnson, who spent sixteen years working in the School of Sport Sciences at Wingate University (NC), and Acquaviva, professor of sports science at Wingate University (NC) say that refuters ask the questions "how much should the athletes get paid and will payments be based on performance? What if the athlete gets hurt? What if the athlete is a bust and despite …show more content…
According to Sanderson and Siegfried, since they are considered students instead of employees, "they have not been covered by general labor laws." Because of this, "university athletic departments can dictate many aspects of a student-athlete's routine and engage these individuals in long hours of practices, something that might not be possible if general labor laws were in force." This also illustrates another reason how the college athletes are dominated, managed, and controlled. The NCAA does not have to pay the college athletes since they consider them to be students even though they treat them as if they are employees. Also, the athletes do not have a voice in NCAA regulations pertaining to them. The NCAA "maximizes its profits by steadily expanding regular season games," but "the players have no voice in these decisions to expand the schedule" (Sanderson and Siegfried). College athletes should be paid because the NCAA uses their power to stretch out as much money possible by using the athletes to their advantage without paying them for their services. However, arguers try to say that this is acceptable because they are students and are not employees and should not expect to get paid, but if this proposition turns out to be true, then the NCAA is treating the athletes as if they are