Pros And Cons Of Being Paid For College Athletes

1792 Words 8 Pages
One of the trending topics in business ethics is the idea that college athletes should be paid for their talents. I find this topic very interesting because sports is always going to be around, from pop warner levels to the professionals. I’ve recently been grateful enough to be a collegiate athlete. It is a hard task to balance being a student and an athlete because you are constantly working on your craft and studying. I would have certainly loved the idea of being paid to do what I loved while studying in the field of my interest. As I become more aware of both sides of the argument I tend to disagree with compensating these athletes. I disagree with it mainly because this draws the student’s attention away from academics and their focus …show more content…
Besides the popular sports like football or basketball, we have to consider the other sports that generate revenue for colleges also for this plan to go through. There’s even a bigger issue at hand besides those mentioned above, what about females? Is it fair to disregard females and pay males only? What I plan to evaluate now is the fairness of the whole scheme of compensating athletes. How will this system ever work for different levels like division two or three schools? Athletes will feel as if they deserve to be paid a fair amount for their abilities just as much as a division one athlete gets paid. On a performance scale or measurement these athletes could have the same skill level but playing in different leagues. So if the other side were to argue that division one athletes deserve to get paid more I would rebut that athletes with many offers sometimes choose a big division two school over a mid-major division one school because of their impact on a team or spot security. For example a mid-major division one school like Appalachian State University compared to a big division one school like N.C. State University would definitely receive less revenues from sports than the bigger school but athletes would be entitled to fair pay and not only that but it goes back to the school’s ability to function. By the school spending more on athletes they will consequently need more …show more content…
First off I will analyze what it means to be a student-athlete. The typical way of describing it is by its technical meaning. That meaning would be a full-time student along as a full-time athlete. Notice what comes first in the phrase, its student because it takes priority over sports and it should very well be that way. By paying athletes it would totally undermine that purpose. I wanted to pay close attention to the classification of these students for their current position but nothing in that says they’re professionals or masters of their craft. In all respects these students are labeled amateurs at their studies and their sports also. College is offering these student-athletes a higher level of education and it even markets athletes in such a way that they get exposure to professional leagues after the collegiate level. These are the intangibles that college has to offer but of course it will always go overlooked or unappreciated. In the process of fulfilling their academic aspirations, going to college itself and receiving a degree boosts their chances of landing a potential position in their desired field. What logical argument can the opposing side say against that? Maybe they would enlighten the people that the education system is so backwards for the very reason that a college basketball or football coach could make way more

Related Documents