A big question that comes up every year right around the beginning of the NCAA championship is whether or not NCAA players should be paid for their performance in games. Most Division I players go into schools on a full-ride, meaning that they get full tuition and room and board. At top notch universities such as Duke and North Carolina that alone can save the players as much as $50,000 a year. In addition, many qualify for Pell Grants, which are given regardless of whether or not they have to use it towards school. Based on this, NCAA players get paid enough.
Those who think players should get paid argue that so much money is being made off their performance on the court: $50 for a player’s jersey, in addition to all the shirts, hats, basketballs, towels, and other apparel found in the stores all over campus. Many complain that not giving the players their share of product licensing is harming them and robbing them of money that should be theirs. The college is already giving them enough money them for the education they receive(which they may or may not use), living expenses, food, books, and a couple extra thousand for travel expenses and random objects to clutter their dorm rooms. What else does a busy and pre-occupied college student need?
In an article by Johnette Howard on ESPN.com, Chris Plonsky at the University of Texas said, "Athletes will never, ever be treated as employees of universities. I can promise you that." The argument is that players are still students, and by paying them, they essentially become employees.. This will create animosity and jealousy around campus, hurting everyone involved. What happens to the amazing actors who sell out school plays, should they get paid too? There are other talents that should get money too if paying NCAA athletes a salary in addition to scholarships is accepted.
Those who think players should get paid argue that so much money is being made off their performance on the court: $50 for a player’s jersey, in addition to all the shirts, hats, basketballs, towels, and other apparel found in the stores all over campus. Many complain that not giving the players their share of product licensing is harming them and robbing them of money that should be theirs. The college is already giving them enough money them for the education they receive(which they may or may not use), living expenses, food, books, and a couple extra thousand for travel expenses and random objects to clutter their dorm rooms. What else does a busy and pre-occupied college student need?
In an article by Johnette Howard on ESPN.com, Chris Plonsky at the University of Texas said, "Athletes will never, ever be treated as employees of universities. I can promise you that." The argument is that players are still students, and by paying them, they essentially become employees.. This will create animosity and jealousy around campus, hurting everyone involved. What happens to the amazing actors who sell out school plays, should they get paid too? There are other talents that should get money too if paying NCAA athletes a salary in addition to scholarships is accepted.
No comments:
Post a Comment