The Road to Equity: Evaluating the Case for Paying Student Athletes

Globally, there have been conversations and debates on whether to pay college athletes. In recent times, generating revenues with these athletes has intensified, drawing the attention of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Arguments debate that these athletes from colleges are just students and they should not be paid for their participation in athletics which is an extracurricular activity. However, some critics claim that paying athletes in colleges would not help college sports and such an action would logistically create a nightmare issue, thus tarnishing the culture in college sports culture. On the contrary, those who support the idea, argue that these students deserve compensation for their tireless work and participation in sporting activities.

Furthermore, the involvement of students in sports generates income for their universities and colleges (Meyer 247). However, logistical complications about paying the student-athletes are not problems of the participants but ignorance of the NCAA. The conversations on this issue are really complex and generally have various drawbacks and pros.

Firstly, paying the student-athletes makes them healthier. Such initiative eliminates the students’ urge to seek outside employment to support their needs. Often, when students engage themselves in competitions, their scholarships provide board coverage, accommodation as well as tuition. Also, the students who fail to secure scholarships generate revenue for the NCCA as their images are used for advertisement without compensation plans (Zema 204). When students in sports are paid, they focus more on athletics and academics thus deflecting their urge to seek outside employment to up-keep themselves. Secondly, the athletes’ families get relief when there is compensation of athletes at colleges. As per the current payment rules, families are expected to provide direct support for their students who are involved in athletics. These families have the responsibilities to maintain their students in college. Further, students are restricted from autographing their items to generate revenue, and few benefits from the loans given to students. Once the college students are paid in sports, their families get relief on fees payment and this allows investment in other projects.

Thirdly, Paying of athletes at colleges ensures proper compensation in case such athletes injure themselves and face permanent disability. Often, athletes are injured in sports and this may terminate their scholarships, thus jeopardizing their potential to participate more in sports. According to the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, college athletes dedicate their lives, prospects of their future careers, and their health physically in competitions. They put everything in their lives on the line of competitors with their success and sacrifices, reaping many incomes to their colleges. He argued that these athletes ought to be paid for up-keeps and as a way to enable them to seek medication when they risk their bodies as they play (Cave 57). Further, Newsom referred to the idea of not paying athletes and blocking them from earning dollars as a bankrupt model.

Again, research indicates strong evidence that the athlete’s sports career is associated with injuries that may potentially lead to adverse outcomes in their health lives. Notably, research carried out by Zachary Kerr showed that some athletes at the Study Center of Retired Athletes at the University of North Carolina had chronic injuries while many others sustained severe injuries. This information and sports being one of the most significant revenue-earning sectors, evoked the horrific history in America where slave labor was unpaid. As a result, it was advocated that college athletes should be paid to cater for their medical expenses when they sustain injuries in sports. Arguably, paying athletes would ensure continuity in sports or education as they will manage to compensate for the life-long consequences on their bodies.

Nonetheless, the provision of another incentive is brought about by having the athletes in colleges compensated. Ideally, many of the college students who participate in sports never attain professionalism in athletes. However, much of professionalism is realized with fields of study chosen among the student who practices athletics. Compensating these athletes will motivate the students to have many involvements in athletics. The offered stipend will enable them to manage their costs which are not covered in their scholarships (Kilburg 22). Saving will also be encouraged, and the students who fail to advance professionally in games may despair in sports and invest in other involvements.

On the drawbacks side, when athletes in colleges are compensated, the line between amateur sports and professionalism in sports will be eliminated. Based on the reports by the NCCA, the idea of paying athletes at colleges can destroy the separation of sports professionalism from amateurism. Also, paying the students who take part in athletics can weaken the links between the played college sports and the offered education. When athletes in colleges are paid, those who fail to advance in sportsmanship are likely to lack other opportunities to venture in. In addition, payments make college athletes to concentrate more in athleticism than in education. The paid athletes have a chance to shift personal priorities from education to sportsmanship. They would aim to participate more in maintaining their positions to generate more income and bring success to their teams rather than focusing in academics or balancing the two. Ideally, athletes would forgo the programs that would not pay them and center their interest in programs that would allow them to earn as they learn.

Also, paying athletes in colleges creates among the students as they are able to meet from different places. As paid employees who are classified, these athletes will have union rights in different states thus causing conflicts with the college administrations. In these related disputes, minor students may be involved incorporating their parents in the chaos. However, new levels in administration may be interested in such negotiations of contract, spending much time and resources (Edelman 1137). Furthermore, compensating the athletes can be a burden to the taxpayers. In reality, sports generate revenues used in the payment of the athletes in colleges and this may further push taxpayers for more monetary support, especially with the public institutions. As for private institutions, tuition rates would be increased to meet the payments of the athletes’ stipends. Notably, some students may be discouraged by these burdens from pursuing their academic goals, thus unskilled labor production.

In conclusion, he NCAA has shown minor concerns as per as the paying of athletes in colleges is concerned. However, there have been efforts in recent years to support the athletes’ deliverance and this has had a dramatic growth. Meanwhile, sports and athletics in colleges will remain one of the highest revenue-earning activities, and the passion of some athletes to thrive in this industry will remain. However, some athletes will grow enthusiastically and professionally in sports whether compensated or not to actualize their dreams in pain!