Argumentative Essay
College Athletes: Should they be paid for play?
Andriana Shanklin
Dr. Mary Rose Kasraie
Research and Writing: ENG 215
October 19, 2011
Should college athletes be paid to play?
The issue of whether or not college athletes should be paid for play has been a heated debate across the nation for years. Most would say that college athletes are already paid to play by the scholorships that they are given such as free tuition, meals, books, room and board. However, some would say that college athletes are being taken advantage of by the coaches, universities they attend and the NCAA because of the career ending injuries, lack of being able to support themselves off of campus and the lack of a complete education. There are many pros and cons to this heated debate and as we have seen in various reports and statements from the NCAA on why college athletes should or shouldn’t be paid to play. According to the NCAA student athletes are supposed to be students first and players second. The arugment is that because the players are supposed to be preparing for a future as a professional in something other than sports. The NCAA reports that many athletes receive grants and aides more than $100,000 in their careers. Another argument that the NCAA has is that the only sport that actually yield revenues are large Division 1 programs and the other programs actually cost more to run. Lastly the NCAA state that almost all NCAA championships lose money. So let’s look at paying for pay from this prospective, yes student athletes don’t have to pay for tuition, books, room/board, meals are all paid for but what about clothing, entertainment and basic necessities are not. In addition an athletes schedule is fulled up with practice (no less than 12 hours a week), academic commitments and games when does a student athlete have time to work to take care of the rest of his needs. Additionally, when student athletes get professional athlete injuries while in school who
Andriana Shanklin
Dr. Mary Rose Kasraie
Research and Writing: ENG 215
October 19, 2011
Should college athletes be paid to play?
The issue of whether or not college athletes should be paid for play has been a heated debate across the nation for years. Most would say that college athletes are already paid to play by the scholorships that they are given such as free tuition, meals, books, room and board. However, some would say that college athletes are being taken advantage of by the coaches, universities they attend and the NCAA because of the career ending injuries, lack of being able to support themselves off of campus and the lack of a complete education. There are many pros and cons to this heated debate and as we have seen in various reports and statements from the NCAA on why college athletes should or shouldn’t be paid to play. According to the NCAA student athletes are supposed to be students first and players second. The arugment is that because the players are supposed to be preparing for a future as a professional in something other than sports. The NCAA reports that many athletes receive grants and aides more than $100,000 in their careers. Another argument that the NCAA has is that the only sport that actually yield revenues are large Division 1 programs and the other programs actually cost more to run. Lastly the NCAA state that almost all NCAA championships lose money. So let’s look at paying for pay from this prospective, yes student athletes don’t have to pay for tuition, books, room/board, meals are all paid for but what about clothing, entertainment and basic necessities are not. In addition an athletes schedule is fulled up with practice (no less than 12 hours a week), academic commitments and games when does a student athlete have time to work to take care of the rest of his needs. Additionally, when student athletes get professional athlete injuries while in school who