Division I NCAA athletes possess many things  --  for example, extraordinary athletic abilities, but extra spending money is often something that they lack.  Of course, a good number of these students come from families which can provide them with a bit of money for every day expenses, but there are also many who come from impoverished families that don't have this kind of money.  Yet these students and their families put blood, sweat, and tears into earning a scholarship to play a college sport and maybe one day a professional sport.  Not only do these students lack extra money to spend, but they lack the time to be able to work in order to earn money for themselves.  Yes, the majority of Division I student athletes receive scholarships in order to go to their desired school.  This covers tuition, housing, and meal plans.  Along with all of this student athletes receive apparel, shoes, and gear for their respective sport. However in the past couple of years, student athletes and their families have begun asking to be paid.  Some think that they deserve thousands of dollars while others have more practical requests, asking for just a few hundred every month.  This nation-wide "issue" has been a hot topic in sports debates and under careful consideration by the NCAA in the past couple of years.  Division I student athletes put in a lot of work to do their jobs well, and their sport really is like their job at this time in their lives.  With all the time and other things they sacrifice to play their sport, they do deserve a stipend throughout the year from their school.  With this they would be able to go out to eat, maybe see a movie on the weekends, or buy extra clothing should it be needed.  

Student athletes receiving pay has been a topic of conversation in the sports world for the majority of the 21st century.  It was brought to light and highly conversed by sports analysts only in recent years which has caused the NCAA to take notice.  Many sports analysts have taken an interest in this problem that the NCAA has on its hands.  Among these analysts is Micheal Wilbon, who is a well-known sports journalist and currently hosts two ESPN shows.  At one time he opposed paying college athletes.  He believed it would take away from the amateur aspect of college sports and that being given tuition, books, housing, meal plans, and gear is already enough payment to these athletes.  But, Mr. Wilbon found out just how much of a profit the NCAA makes and that number is staggering.  Between the years 2011 and 2024 the NCAA's television deals with Turner Sports and CBS is worth 10.8 billion dollars (Maxwell).  Yes, billion, with a "B".  The most absurd part of the deal is that these broadcasting rights are only for three weekends of sports each year, the beloved March Madness basketball tournament.  On top of that, ESPN and the BCS recently agreed upon a new four year deal in which ESPN will nonchalantly hand the BCS another 500 million dollars (Maxwell).  Upon discovering this that massive amount of money was being tossed around, Mr. Wilbon reconsidered his stance in the debate and now believes that student athletes should receive a small amount of pay while keeping things relatively amateur still.  However, he believes only a specific group of athletes should be paid stating, "Let me declare up front I wouldn't be the slightest bit interested in distributing the funds equitably or even paying every college athlete. I'm interested in seeing the people who produce the revenue share a teeny, tiny slice of it. That's right, football and men's basketball players get paid; lacrosse, field hockey, softball, baseball, soccer players get nothing" (Micheal Wilbon).  Sports journalists/analysts Tyson Hartnett and Corey Walker have similar opinions and believe that college athletes do indeed deserve a stipend.  In their respective articles they explain that college athletes are like employees to the school in that they come and work in order to go out and perform.  And in these performances they attract crowds who pay for admission, concessions, team apparel which brings their schools a lot of money.  Both authors go on to explain that college coaches, regardless of the sport, get paid at least six figures by the university and then earn bonuses when a record is broken, they make a postseason tournament, or win championships.  NCAA executives make about one million dollars a year and they aren't the people who are making the NCAA the vast majority of its money (Hartnett).  Men's football and basketball programs are responsible for the profits that universities make in athletics.  Analysts and journalists think that it is unreasonable for student athletes, primarily football players, to be punished for receiving a small gift from a booster or fan.  Corey Walker states in his article, "It's time that we realize that these guys are celebrities in their own right ... .. Of course they get special perks that come with all the celebrity and attention."  In his article he elaborates on this statement by supporting it with the example of Terrel Pryor, who was punished for receiving a free tattoo when he was playing football at Ohio State.  Mr. Hartnett and Mr. Walker both declare in their articles that they are opposed to student athletes receiving thousands of dollars a year, but they are in support of them receiving minor stipends throughout the year.  Another reason for the support of receiving a form of payment is that these schools are selling jerseys and gear with the student athletes name and/or number on it, so without the athlete, the merchandise wouldn't sell.  It would only be fair for the particular student athlete to receive a percentage of what gear of theirs is sold.  Tyson Hartnett brings this to light by stating, "The NCAA prevents student-athletes from allowing their likeness to be used for promotional purposes."  These young men are loved by their fans, and the NCAA is prohibiting them from being able to enjoy that to its fullest.  In 2014 Johnny Manziel got suspended half a game for simply signing autographs after a team practice.  It is unfair to the star athletes who have a large fan base and even more unfair to the team because they are now forced to play without their best player.   

Although there are plenty of those who support the paying of student athletes, there are also plenty of people that don't think it would be good to pay them.  The NCAA is one of the primary groups on this side of the argument.  The NCAA is a major organization in charge of all sport at the collegiate level regardless of the division.  It oversees every cent of the 11 billion dollars college athletics makes a year, schedules the events, and deals with the variety of contracts.  As it grew over the course of the 20th century it established rules and policies in order to keep competitions fair and amateur, and they apply punishments that they deem necessary to the schools, coaches, or players if rules are broken.  If the NCAA paid its athletes they would technically be professional.  There are rules and regulations in place to keep collegiate sport amateur events.  Such rules include the probation of star student athletes having contact and being able to negotiate with agents while they are still eligible.  However, the NCAA has no power over agents, so when an athlete negotiates deals and accepts gifts, both they and the school get in trouble.  Agents have been involved in pursuing up-and-coming college athletes for decades and this issue is nothing new, for the NCAA has chosen to ignore it and not get involved.  They would rather continue punishing the schools and athletes.  Although, they continue to stand against paying college athletes and keeping competition purely amateur despite the amount of money the NCAA brings in.  

There are also others that argue that the NCAA doesn't do enough for its student athletes; such as, schools don't teach their athletes well enough because they're only there to play sports.  Too many student athletes leave college without a degree, and some go in expecting to play only to get benched and lose their scholarships.  All these unfortunate things that can happen is a result of one thing.  Money.  Student athletes leave school early to go to the pros to, well, get paid.  Which while taking that risk they don't receive the proper college education or a degree.  However, I say they may not receive the proper education and degree, but those who do stay all four or five years it takes to graduate, still do not receive a beneficial college education.  Dexter Manely, a former Defensive End with the Washington Redskins, played his college football at Oklahoma State University.  He achieved his collegiate goal of getting noticed by NFL scouts and making to the pros, which for him was very, very good because unfortunately he showed up to OSU functionally illiterate, and he left that way as well.  Manely isn't the only high school athlete who went to college solely due to the fact that he was a star in his respective sport.  It is unfortunate, that the NCAA and the schools would allow a student to come into their school with very poor academic performances and then let them leave that way.  John Campbell, the President of Oklahoma State University admitted, "There would be those who would argue that Dexter Manley got exactly what he wanted out of OSU. He was able to develop his athletic skills and ability, he was noticed by the pros, he got a pro contract. So maybe we did him a favor by letting him go through the program."  President Campbell is clearly implying that the academics didn't matter much for Dexter Manely because he knew he was on pace to play professionally.  This may be true for not only himself but other athletes who attended college solely to develop their skills in order to play professional sport.  "The NCAA could not care less about academics.  If a player on the Texas Longhorns football team had a 4.0 GPA, but struggled to perform, he would not have his scholarship renewed." (Walker). In this statement in Corey Walker's article he is addressing the issue of the NCAA taking precedence of athletics over grades.  If such a player were to lose his scholarship there goes his opportunity to get a good education and a degree right out the door.  His potential to land a substantial job after college slims.  A student's life can be made or broken all because the NCAA doesn't put emphasis on the importance of good grades.  This is an unfortunate fact because not every college athlete is good enough to go pro.  Only 44 percent of black scholarship athletes and 22 percent of white scholarship athletes will make it to the big leagues in their respective sport (Barbash).  So when a student athlete performs poorly in the classroom and isn't the star athlete, then they are thrown into a bad situation after college.  They are called student athletes with "student" coming first for a reason, but in recent years it has turned into "athletes" and "celebrities".  Now that the star athletes are basically celebrities, they are asking to be paid for their contribution to making the school money.  

This is a real issue across the country at all Division I universities, and it is one that is being asked to be resolved by families of athletes, fans, and the schools.  Sports analysts, journalists, and coaches have written and spoke about a variety of solutions for paying student athletes properly for their contributions to making their schools profitable.  Some suggest that just men's basketball and football players get paid because they are the two sports that bring in any profit.  Therefore, they should receive a small monthly stipend in order for them to be able to use on anything they want or want to do.  Some offer the idea of being able to sign autographs and sell signed gear.  Along with that the athletes should be able to receive gifts or money from a booster and not be punished.  Another suggestion to solve this issue is to pay the athletes a percentage of money from the profit that the school makes on selling gear and jerseys with the athletes name and/or number on it.  Then there is a few who believe that student athletes should be paid the equivalent of a minor league baseball player because in football and basketball, college is basically the minor leagues.  A minor league baseball player can earn anywhere from $11,000 to $25,000 however.  Many analysts and journalists believe that that amount of money is absurd and is an unrealistic amount to spread around to every Division I football and basketball player in the nation.  Whatever the solution is, it will be agreed upon by a whole committee in the NCAA, so that all parties come out happy.  

College sports are amateur competitions between athletes who are working towards becoming professionals in their sport.  It has been that way as long as the NCAA and college sports have been around.  However, in this day and age that we live in, money and wealth rules the world and influences decisions that people make.  As of recent years there have been scandals involving students receiving gifts and payment for their performances from boosters and agents.  This has created a nation-wide debate on whether or not college athletes should be allowed to receive these gifts and payments.  Many believe that there should be new rules in place allowing for student athletes to be able to receive money one way or another, for they aren't allotted time to get a job to earn money.  Maybe if college athletes were to get paid a stipend and not get in trouble for receiving gifts that may serve as an incentive to do well in school.  Grades may be boosted by student athletes and some may stay longer to not only develop their trade, but to also get a degree knowing they're getting paid a bit while doing it.  Although it may not be considered as amateur as it used to be, the quality of NCAA sports and the average GPA of student athletes may increase.  Less potential professional athletes will end up unemployed if they don't make it big time.  More student athletes will have degrees and the opportunity to get quality jobs after college.  Less immature kids will come out of college early to go pro because they see the dollar signs just to end up as a "bust".  All in all, if student athletes received a form of payment I, and others, believe it would be beneficial for not only the student but the economy.  

