Jessica Bradford
Professor Holmes
Comp I M, W 12:30
21 October 2013
Pay for Play
Over the past few years, there has been controversy over compensation for college athletes. Many people will argue that these athletes put most of their time and energy into their sport; they cannot take on part-time jobs. Other people will argue that athletes have already received compensation through scholarships, allowing them to go to universities they could not afford otherwise. College athletes should not receive a salary because there are too many complications, the purpose of college is to learn, and there is not enough revenue to pay all athletes.
Athletes generate substantial revenue for colleges, but the only compensation they receive is an academic scholarship. Legally speaking, only “division I and II institutions are permitted to provide a student-athlete with tuition and fees, room and board, and require course-related books.” ("Athletic Scholarships") This means any student athletes in Division III are not guaranteed any payment at all. Although schools award specific scholarships, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, or the NCAA, determine the amount of money each school is given per sport. Student athletes are usually given transportation, meal plans and the best housing. Additionally, many student athletes are awarded scholarships that cover most, if not all, of their tuition and fees.
Florida State University relies on over “6.9 million dollars” (Dosh) to balance their budget. This is not the only institution that needs student fees to generate revenue. If it were made law that student athletes had to be paid, where would this money come from? Moreover, who gets paid and who does not? These are some of the issues that are come across when arguing to pay student athletes. Presumably, all athletes would receive payment for their time and energy spent training and playing. But not all sports, or even individual athletes, produce the...