Possible Disadvantages, Answers, with Visuals

Should Regulations Regarding Payment of College Athletes Be Changed?

Introduction

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) regulations are tough when it comes to payment of college athletes. The athletes are not supposed to receive any payment for the sports other than the normal scholarship offered their respective universities, and illegibility criteria for participation are not easy either (ncca.org).. Over and above having better grades to join the university, there are other conditions especially on matters payment. For instance, one is not required to have taken pay, or the promise of the same pay in order to participate in a sport. Also, athletes are not required to have used their athletics skill for pay in any form in that sport (ncca.org).

Thesis statement

“Regulations Regarding Payment of College Athletes needs to be changed”.

Recently, there has been a wide concern over compensation of college athletes beyond their sport scholarships. Failure to pay them is viewed as exploitation of the college athletes on grounds of amateurism. NCAA regulations restrict compensation of college athletes to educational scholarship. As college sports are a major industry, generating lot revenue to colleges, many argue that the athletes need to be paid for their labour. This is not implementable for some of the major hindrances, primarily the tough NCAA regulations. This research looks at the importance of paying collegiate athletes. It discusses the view “Regulations Regarding Payment of College Athletes needs to be changed”.

NCCA is the governing body for athletic programs for many colleges and universities in the United States. It has been in existence since early 1900s. The members of NCAA (universities and colleges) in 1973 adopted a special convention with three divisions of schools; I, II and III (ncca.org). According to NCAA rules, schools under Division I and II can offer scholarships to athletes involved in sports, while schools under Division III may not offer scholarships. This is how the collegiate athletes in the US are supposed to benefit from their sports activities but not monetary rewards. As a result collegiate athletes live in sustained poverty despite generating much revenue with their sports. Challenged over this matter, NCAA argues that sporting by student athletes is a component of their tutelage, for which they are receiving scholarship, rather than a professional employment for which they should receive monetary compensation (ncca.org).

Statement of problems

This decision by NCAA has caused major outcry from those who considers they stand as exploitative (Miller, A., 2012). According to US News.com, college sports generate annual revenue of up to $11 billion from sources such as ticket sales, sponsorship rights, and broadcast rights sale. This revenue goes in to the pockets of a few including coaches and administrators. Also, when these teams emerge national champions, all they do is celebrate the national title while the real beneficiaries of this outcome are their sponsors, broadcasters and NCAA in the long run (npr.org). This paper therefore addresses the problem of collegiate athletes’ lack of compensation by NCCA. Is the NCCA exploiting the athletes? Are the organizers and NCCA justified in referring to college athletes as amateurs? Will a change in NCCA regulations regarding this problem solve it?

I think NCCA is highly and negatively exploiting the student’s athletes. This is because the sporting activity is a major employer of coachers, organizers and administrators among others. Also, much revenue is generated for the colleges and universities. While students receive the benefit in kind, that is in terms scholarship, exploitation is seen where companies especially sport wear for example Nike, Rebook, Flea among others, are taking use them to advertise their products in commercials, while the get nothing for it. Indeed, NCCA forbids this.

Secondly, it’s ironical that some of the universities that formed intra

-collegiate sports competitions, are now at the forefront supporting college athletic amateurism. The same schools do not offer any athletic scholarships.

The question of collegiate amateurism is also key. According to Edelman, M. (2014) it means lack of remuneration for students athletes for their sporting activities. NCAA emphasizes that they should not receive any payment as they are just students and not employees of their respective colleges/ universities so as to receive salary. According to them, the primary role of students being at the institutions is education, not sports; hence they should remain as collegiate amateurs. This idea was adopted by college authorizes at the end of 19th century, as a measure to maintain educational integrity of schools, by technically not compensating the athletes in cash.

Why do the collegiate athletes need to be compensated? One of the reasons is to ensure they are covered for any possible danger. During sporting activities, the athletes are likely to suffer injuries, hence the need for compensation that can pay their life insurances as well, leave alone their medical expenses.

Conclusion

This paper has presented a thesis statement regarding on the need to change rules denying payment to collegiate athletes. The question asked is whether NCCA rules that govern these athletes compensation can help alleviate the problem. The paper has looked at the problems that need to be addressed in order to answer this question. These are: whether NCCA and other organizers are exploiting these athletes, whether collegiate amateurism is justified and what is the need to pay these athletes.

References

Edelman, M. (2014) The Case for Paying College Athletes: Students deserve to be compensated for their labor. US news and World Report