Team sports like soccer or basketball, as well as individual sports are extremely popular worldwide. Famous sportsmen and sportswomen have statuses similar to Hollywood celebrities, and their wages are high. However, no matter how well they play, all of them have once been amateurs; in this perspective, high school or college athletes are not much different from professionals (if not to mention their skills). At the same time, the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) prohibits college athletes to be monetarily compensated for their effort, which is definitely unfair. College athletes should be paid their due for a number of reasons.
The NCAA should pay student athletes because it can actually do it. According to polls among economists, there are no financial factors that prevent the NCAA from paying their athletes. In particular, Rodney Fort, a sports economist and professor of sports management at the University of Michigan, believes that the NCAA already possesses enough money to do so. Moreover, arguments that additional labor costs would hurt sports programs at schools are groundless, says David Berri, a professor of economics at Southern Utah University. “They’re nonprofits, and their incentive is to spend every cent that comes in,” he says (Huffingtonpost.com).
Speaking of skills, by the way, the fact that an athlete is a college student does not automatically mean he or she is an amateur (unlike the NCAA officially claims). For example, a typical 1st division college football player trains approximately 43.3 hours per week; for contrast, a typical American work week is only 40 hours. Besides, college athletes also need to dedicate time to studying; along with this, NCAA tournament rules require college students to skip classes in favor of nationally televised games that bring in revenue (Forbes). No need to say that the revenue goes to the NCAA. Considering this, is it not obvious that college athletes should receive at least some...