Some players are responsible for bringing millions of dollars to their particular school, but they will never see any money of their labors.
Is it fair? Do you think college athletes should be paid to play?
07-25-2009 at 05:55 PM
It is a fact that NCAA major sports are million, even billion dollar industries and the players are directly responsible for this income. Although four or five years of free school is great, the fact is one or two games played by those few players who are on full scholarship will cover that cost no problem. With all the time and work they put in, shouldn't they receive something?
The reality is that college sports programs, namely the "big name" programs such as football and basketball programs at marquee schools, are businesses that stand to make a large amount of money for their respective schools.
Every year it seems like the topic of paying college athletes comes up. Some people think that college athletes should get something extra for their hard work and others think that they are getting an education and that's all they should get.
College athletes have to go to class, they have to study, and they have to go to practices, sometimes multiple times a day for a couple of hours. In addition to that some of them have to hit the weight room. They have to travel all over the country to play other teams too and I haven't even gotten to their actual games yet. When exactly are they going to have time for a job? Why should they have to get another job when they already do one for the college they play for?
Everyone makes money off the NCAA tourney: schools, coaches, networks, conferences. Everyone except the players.