The Concept of College Sports - Research Paper Example

Should College Athletes Be Paid To Play? College sports, generally football and basketball, are about as widely watched on a national level as full-fledged professional teams are. As a result, it is a multimillion dollar enterprise, one that earns colleges a great part of their income, depending on how popular their team is in their respective fields. Of course, the players of these sports are all college students themselves, generally playing on a sports scholarship, or playing as regular students. The sports are a side activity taken up by students to have something to relax from the study tempo at college. Yet again, not all students are interested in playing sports as a side activity. Consequently, apart from their initially decided terms of a sports scholarship, they often get little part in the revenue these sports generate for their school. Critics and coaches are, therefore, now arguing in favor of these players saying that they deserve a share of the revenue, as they for the most part contribute towards generating. The debate is a highly heated one with each side feeling just as strongly of their opinion. The number of college athletes in a particular college can be very significant and all these athletes have a choice of which sport they want to take part at the college level. Some sports may have a high popularity level while others low. Deciding upon paying athletes for playing may compel the college to pay all the athletes for all the different kinds of sports in the college. This may result in heavy payments at the end of the day and it may also reduce the profits earned by the colleges at a massive level. Those who argue in favor of paying athletes generally say that colleges make millions of dollars off these athletes abilities and, therefore, for them to get no money from it is unfair, and, in a sense, exploitation to them (Haden 673). Without these players there would be no generated money, and without this money, many colleges would be unable to function. Colleges gain popularity at the sports arena due to the talented athletes that represent the college in the sports. Earning by the talent of the athletes and not paying those athletes sounds an unfair practice. Accordingly, it seems fair to pay to these players, just as any national sports association would pay its players. But, of course, the counter-argument to this claim is that students should be kept away from the business side of a college, regardless of the link between both elements (Parent 226). College level is the stage where the students explore their talents and capabilities and are assisted by the college faculty in every way possible. College assists the athletes to polish their skills and talents in sports. To monetize students’ college experience takes the matter into muddy, controversial issue and is a side best avoided altogether. The best colleges of any country are always the most profitable ones, but that does not necessarily make their tuition fees any lower or their scholarship rates higher. This is the matter that should be kept entirely unique to the economic factors involved, as education and sports are something that should be focused on a unique basis, with no reference to any external factors, least of all monetary. The element of monetary gains would reflect athletes’ spirit and many may play the sport just to gain money rather than gaining recognition. Students should play as best as they can, with the interest of their own colleges at heart, thereby playing for the spirit of the game rather than the money they are hypothetically being paid for it. Perhaps the reason college sports are so popular is because of the genuine emotions that overwhelm them, a factor that might come under risk once a price tag is placed on it. The money a college makes off the sport is of no concern to the student and should remain as such. Students should just invest in polishing their skills and talent with the sports that are offered at college rather than focusing on the money that will be given for playing the sport. Furthermore, another important question that arises is: “Whether paying athletes for the sports they play is fair to the other students of the said college?” These athletes are essentially students and, hence, should be treated as such. No other students are specifically paid for the co-curricular activities they take part in, and whatever social significance and importance college sports may have taken on, they are ultimately just the co-curricular activities that students choose to participate in. Co-curricular activities are there to groom the students from all aspects of a successful person and the college level sports are just another part of the extra-curricular activity. To pay these athletes for the sports they play would necessitate the authorities to pay their marching band players for the music they play. It would necessitate authorities to pay their cheerleaders, their college mascots and any other student that contributes towards the school’s curricular in any capacity. It is the responsibility of any college to treat each student similarly others, and if these authorities were to start paying one student, it would only be fair to pay all of them. At a small or large scale, any student that takes part in any activity organized by or for their college is contributing towards their college’s reputation and income, and if the trend is to reward that contribution with money rather than the satisfaction drawn from it, then all students should be treated and rewarded equally. Another question to consider is: “If authorities indeed start paying athletes for the sports they play, how much would they pay for each sport?” Would players be paid on a per-game basis? Would the popularity of the sport they play contribute towards the amount of money they are paid? Ultimately, if athletes are paid for the sports they play, debate will rise over which activities are included under the banner of paid sports games, and which are not. Members of the chess club, the debates team and other clubs and societies – all would want payment for the part they take in college activities. Furthermore, once colleges start paying athletes, it will become a competition between different colleges. Those that cannot afford paying much will face the risk of losing students, and those that can afford to pay better will likely get more applicants, whether or not they are genuinely interested in the academics that are offered, or whether they are of a considerable standard. In addition to these, as has been mentioned above, to bring money into the matter is to monetize a number of things that deserve to be considered with reference to their own value, not the value of money, whether that thing is the love for a game played since decades, or an educational experience a college has to offer. The counter-effect of paying these athletes must also be considered – ignoring all other factors, to thrust a child into the role of an adult well before his time is not fair. There is no doubt that money is a welcome addition to anybody’s life, but once you start paying a child for his work, you must start deducting taxes as well, treating him or her like a full working adult (Cooper 12). There is no doubt that college is difficult for all students, and money is always a difficult matter, but to give these students full time jobs is not only fair towards other students who are doing their part without fiscal compensation, but, ultimately, also unfair towards students themselves. Is it, therefore, fair to put these students, ultimately children, in a position where they have to manage and work out finances, all the while balancing their academics and other life with it? Owing to all these factors, it can be concluded that paying college athletes is wrong because it not only monetizes the general concept of it, but also creates differences in students at a level where there should be none and where all should be treated equally. Of course, offering these athletes scholarships based on their abilities and the contribution they provide towards their schools’ sports is not only acceptable but rather encouraged. Students of all backgrounds should have an equal opportunity at a college level experience that they can cherish, and if their own natural ability can help in making that experience easier for them then it by all means should, but as suggested by Sobocinski (257) it should be in a way where they are not paid to play directly, but rather offered help and scholarships based on it, just as any student with an exceptional academic record would be. If college athletes felt exploited they would undoubtedly not play with as much heart and soul as they do, because clear and obvious popularity of sport comes not from the money involved, but from the sheer spirit and determination behind it. There are other ways to reward an athlete than by monetary compensation and the thrill a sport provides is natural testament to that. Works Cited Cooper, Kenneth J. “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?” Diverse: Issues in Higher Education. 28 (2011): 12-13. Print. Haden, Christopher W. “Foul – The Exploitation of the Student-Athlete: Student-Athletes Deserve Compensation for Their Play in the College Athletic Arena.” Journal of Law & Education. 30 (2001): 673. Print. Parent, Christopher M. “Forward Progress - An Analysis of Whether Student-Athletes Should Be Paid.” Virginia Sports and Entertainment Law Journal. 3 (2004): 226. Print. Sobocinski, Eric J. “College Athletes: What is Fair Compensation?” Marq. Sports Law Journal 7 (1996/1997): 257. Print. Read More