Believe it or not, soccer has 3.5 billion fans, baseball has 500 million fans, and basketball has 400 million fans. Having said this, you can say sports are one of the most watched things in the world.  Whether it be soccer, baseball, or basketball a sport is usually playing in an average household at least once a day.  This means that people love sports.  They can't get enough of it.  No matter if it is professional or college level the fans live for the thrill of a Hail Mary touchdown pass or grand slam in the bottom of the ninth inning to win the game.  According to a survey, conducted by Harris Interactive, forty-five percent of Americans follow college sports.  Therefore, the college game is just as or even more popular than professional sports leagues such as the NFL, National Football League, or MLB, Major League Baseball.  Being so popular allows the NCAA, National College Athletic Association, to generate a lot of revenue; in 2015 they recorded a total of 720 million dollars generated from college sports and is projected to gradually increase each year.  Generating such a large amount of money brings up the question that people having been asking for years: should college athletes be paid a salary?

For years, college athletes have been fighting the NCAA saying that they deserved to be paid a salary.  The reason why the word salary is placed in this statement is because college athletes are already paid in different forms.  College athletes are being paid more than just a salary because they get a free education including textbooks and tuition.  On top of the textbooks and tuition, they receive an unlimited supply of their schools swag.  Someone who agrees with me is Kieran McCauley.  According to the Daily Local News reporter, college athletes are already paid by being granted scholarships and having the opportunity to receive a free education.  This article is very useful because the Daily Local News reports all the latest news around the country.  Something that relates to what McCauley is saying is, "Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself."  American philosopher John Dewey said this about education to his followers.  Education is the most important thing in the world because you can't get anywhere without a degree in this day in age.  Therefore, Dewey is right in my eyes and it is also very similar to what McCauley is saying because McCauley believes education is the most important thing for college athletes and Dewey is saying that education is life. With that philosophy in mind, college athletes are receiving the best form of payment there is because education is the key to life, but to them it is not enough.  Majority of college athletes who think they deserve more than a free ride for their service to the school want a large amount of money in return.  Some athletes believe they deserve a salary of 100,000 dollars and more.  Although the NCAA and majority of its followers believe that college athletes are already given enough for their time and effort there are some people that believe that they should be paid the salary they want.

College athletes are the biggest supporters for getting paid, but one of the few believers in the idea that the NCAA should pay them.  A good friend of mine, Yohance Thomas, is a member of the University of South Carolina track team.  The USC track team is very competitive, practicing five days out of the week and having a meet almost every Saturday.  With having so much required practice time and meets, Yohance told me he puts in about thirty hours a week toward track and field.  The rest of his time is dedicated toward his studies.  With practicing and studying so often he has very little free time.  Working so frequently makes him believe that he is working a job with the amount of hours he puts in.  Since Yohance puts in the time and effort of a full time employee he believes that he should receive something.  When I asked what he meant by something, he responded by saying, "I think college athletes should receive a stipend, not necessarily a salary."  The reason Yohance believes college athletes deserve this stipend is because they aren't the same as regular students.  "Athletes have more drive than regular students.  We put much more time into training and being better at life than regular students and that can translate into academics, but in the ends it's all up to the individual."  Therefore, Yohance thinks college athletes are not on the same level as non-athletes.  Not being on the same level as regular students means they should be allowed to be treated differently aside from the special treatment that they already receive.  That means receiving something financially in return for their services.  

College athletes are different than normal college students, but I don't think they should be treated differently.  Although I feel this way, one person who has a similar opinion to Yohance is Kareem Abdul Jabar.  On Newt Gingrich and Van Jones's show, CNN Cross Fire, they discussed whether or not college athletes should be paid.  To guest star on their show they had former NBA star Kareem Abdul Jabar and sports analyst for USA Today Christine Brennan.  Kareem is very supportive of the idea of paying college athletes and says, "We need to end the myth of the student athlete.  There is so much money being made.  The people creating the wealth don't get paid."  On top of college athletes generating the revenue and not getting a cut, Kareem also believes they should get paid because if they get hurt the school doesn't pay their medical expenses.  They need to cover it themselves and a lot of the time it can create a huge debt for the athlete who is no longer capable of playing.  The points Yohance and Kareem make are very good, but they say the same facts over and over again.  With that being said, there is not enough information to pay college athletes.  The reason for this is because if the same facts keep coming up which shows that there is little evidence to support it.  After doing some research, I discovered what Kareem says about injuries not being covered is false.  The schools say when the student is still a member of the team the school will pay for any medical procedures.  Having said this, with the little evidence there is to support the payment of college athletes, college athletes should not be paid a salary in my opinion.

There is no reason that college athletes need money.  Students aren't supposed to make a lot of money off college because students are attending school to make more money after.  This is definitely the case for me which shows that college is an education, not a job or career.  Additionally, athletes are getting to go to school for free most of the time.  As tuition skyrockets, athletes can be assured of graduating debt free and this is more than enough of a payment for their service.  Although some people such as Yohance and Kareem believe that college athletes should be paid, there is some indication the majority of the people think they should not be paid.  A poll conducted on Facebook reveals that seventy-one percent believe college athletes should not receive financial compensation.

Something that makes the majority of people believe college athletes should not be paid a salary is because getting to go to college for free is enough of a payment already.  In my opinion this is more than enough because I pay a ridiculous amount of money to go to college and barely get any compensation for it because I can't dribble a basketball or catch a ball as good as other people.  In McCauley's article he talks about why athletes shouldn't be paid, but should be compensated.  I do agree with the athletes being compensated, but receiving a salary is ridiculous.  What really bothers me is that McCauley claims that athletes are already compensated in many different ways.  One of the main claims he has is that they get to go to college for free.  "Essentially they receive a free education and in return they represent the school in a certain sport. College athletes don't have to worry about student loans, paying for textbooks, the cost of on-campus living, and meal plans."  Having said this, why would they want more?  Although college athletes are not being paid a salary in reality they are being paid much more.  All of these things athletes receive for free at college the majority of students struggle to pay for.  Another good point McCauley makes is when he says, "According to Institute For College Access & Success, in the state of Pennsylvania seventy-one percent of students leave a public four-year institution or private non-profit four-year institution in debt. The average debt is $32,528. That is an enormous burden for kids who may, or may not have a job awaiting them upon graduation."  Having said this, regular college students such as myself are struggling to make it, while athletes are living the life not worrying about having to pay off a ridiculous amount of loans.  To McCauley, free college tuition is a big reason why college athletes shouldn't be paid.

Kevin Hansen agrees with McCauley.  Hansen is a writer for the Michigan Point of View, he also believes that education is the most important thing athletes should be worrying about and I agree. If an athlete were to get injured they would have nothing to fall back on it.  When Hansen mentions, "Further, paid college athletes are more likely to fall into academic apathy. Why should an athlete care about school when he or she is getting paid to shoot a basketball? Writing paychecks for athletes implies that they are at college to perform on the playing field and prepare for the pros - not to learn in the classroom. This message is a disservice to the athlete, who must be encouraged to persevere in academics despite the time demands of a sport ... " it concerns me because they don't care.  What Hansen is saying is college education should be the main focus of college athletes.  College athletes should cherish their education more and not worry about being paid a salary.  Yohance agrees with Hansen in this case.  When interviewing Yohance I brought up the topic of why do you come to school.  Without hesitation he said, "I come to school to learn.  That is my number one priority."  Having said this, Yohance proves Hansen's statement on education to be correct.  

On top of not paying college athletes because they already receive free college tuition, Hansen also believes they should not be paid because it would cause a financial strain on colleges.  This is very true because I attend all of these events and the universities have to spend a lot of money to make it so these events happen.  They don't just get set up by themselves.  With that being said, colleges don't make a lot of money on athletics.  Hansen discovered a very interesting poll that proves his point.  "An NCAA survey reports that, without this institutional support, only 35 percent of Division I-A athletic programs and fewer than 10 percent of I-AA programs were profitable in 2001. According to the same NCAA survey, the average 2001 financial positions for I-A and I-AA athletic programs, minus institutional support, were losses of $600,000 and $3.4 million, respectively."  This survey shows that the majority of colleges aren't even making enough money to come close to having the ability to pay college athletes.  Paying college athletes would leave them even more in debt.  Hansen uses this survey to say this, "Athlete salaries would cause greater financial strain for the many major colleges whose athletic programs lose money. To turn a profit, most major athletic programs require the input of money from the school itself ... Many athletic departments already spend millions on scholarships, which are appropriate remuneration for student athletes. The payment of athletes will needlessly draw more institutional funds away from appropriate areas of spending."  In my opinion all of this evidence shows paying athletes will only leave the universities more in debt and take away from spending in areas that need it.  The money that colleges make off of college sports aren't going directly into their pockets, it is going directly back to the athletes.  They are putting it back into the sporting events and helping keep the education services that they receive up to date.

Christine Brennan, a sports columnist for USA Today, completely agrees with Hansen.  Brennan was on CNN Cross Fire talking with Abdul-Jabar about whether or not college athletes should be paid.  She is against them being paid because it will put more colleges in debt.  Once again this is a major factor for non-student athletes such as myself because it will raise our tuition.  Not only does she agree with me but she also believes this because "23,228 division one schools in 2012 actually made money.  Football is bringing in a lot of money, but the schools are also spending a lot of money."  With all of this information that Brennan states I am able to see that colleges may make a large amount of money, but in retrospect they are then having to spend that money on scholarships and other infrastructure.  This leads to the schools not making a lot of money because they have to spend a lot of money to keep every single athletic program.  Having said this, this means that they are investing the money back into sports so the athletes are getting the money that they are asking for, but in a different form.  Another point she makes is the idea of having to pay every single athlete.  Although not every college sport brings a large profit, you would have to pay every single athlete.  I agree with this because it wouldn't be equal if you didn't pay everyone.  Brennan is also a firm believer that you would have to do this because "there is something known as Title 9.  This mandates proportional equal treatment under the law, no discrimination, when you are given federal funds.  If you didn't do this, colleges would be sued."  This is very important because it now brings law into the equation.  Many colleges shy away from the issue today not only because they already lose money on athletics, but because they don't want to deal with the legal measures of paying athletes.  

One thing that comes into mind when having the idea of paying college athletes is are they mature enough? Something that potentially pops up from paying college athletes is them not being mature enough to handle the money.  Just like Brennan said, paying college athletes is opening a door to legal issues.  Not only with the pay itself, but with how they act with the money.  According to NPR.org there has been scientific research that shows humans brains don't fully develop and mature until the age of 25.  This information makes me believe if college athletes were to get paid, they wouldn't use the money responsibly because they aren't fully developed.  Someone who has solid evidence for this is a blog writer who is an avid named Davis Malone.  Malone says in his article, "Shouts From the Stands: Why the NCAA Shouldn't Pay Athletes", "In 2009, Sports Illustrated published an article about professional athletes and their spending problems. Their findings are astonishing and ultimately led to ESPN creating a documentary a few years later for their 30 for 30 documentary series titled "Broke". Sports Illustrated concluded that within two years of retirement, 78% of former NFL players are broke or under financial distress. As for the NBA, within five years of retirement their former players were broke 60% of the time (Torre)."  To me, this statement shows that grown men or women who make money playing sports can't even handle the fortune.  They spend their money in ridiculous ways and end up suffering because of it.  Although there is no specific evidence for how college students spend their money the professional athletes give a good glimpse of what might happened if you were to pay college athletes. 

Malone also believes that college athletes should not be paid because they are choosing to play no one is forcing them to.  I agree completely with this statement.  College athletes know what they are getting themselves into when they sign up to play college sports.  With that being said they shouldn't demand a salary if they know they already know they aren't going to be paid.  No one is forcing them to play; it is done out of their own will.  Malone greatly supports this standpoint because he says in his blog, "When an athlete signs the line on National Letter of Intent (NLI) to play a sport at a NCAA sponsored college they know what they are signing up for. If they have a problem with it they don't have to sign a NLI. It is very clear to an athlete that they previously should not have and should not going forward receive any type of gift or money for their athletic performance if they want to be eligible to compete in NCAA events."  He believes they just shouldn't go to college if they want money because their main goal should be academics.  Bill Maxwell, a writer for the Tampa Bay Times, wrote an article about how he once supported college athletes being paid, but now he doesn't in any way, shape, or form.  Maxwell says one of the reasons why he changed his mind is because, "Most notably, in a friend-of-the-court brief, the American Council on Education, comprised of 1,800 college presidents, was unequivocal in its opposition: Student-athletes participate for their own benefit; they do not render services for compensation. They are not employees and therefore not subject to the National Labor Relations Act."  This is a very interesting piece of information he uses in his article and gives evidence that college athletes shouldn't be paid to play because they voluntarily do it.  To me this is very important because they are giving up themselves knowingly.  It's not like they are getting scammed into playing for no cost.  Since college athletes voluntarily play, aren't responsible with money, colleges are left in even more debt than before, and they already receive so many scholarships and extras that "generic" students get it is very clear college athletes should not be paid.

One of the most convincing arguments that proves college athletes should not be paid is because they aren't mature enough.  NCAA executive Oliver Luck proved all of the sources that say they are not mature enough to be true because he said, "Coaches are adults" according to sbnation.com.  This is just like what Malone said about professional athletes spending their money ridiculously.   Having said this, it counteracts what Kareem and Yohance are saying because they think they need the money for certain things such as food or medical expenses.  It's good to think that they would use the money for these things, but they would end up spending it on luxury items, because that's what past data shows.  On top of being mature enough it is proven from all the other countless sources.  Another major reason that continues to pop up when researching whether or not they should be paid is because the scholarships they get.  Lou Holtz, former University of South Carolina coach, believes that the academics should be there main focus.  "If you pay them other sports lose scholarships and the rest of the money goes back to the university.  You should go to college and get an education."  Holtz made this statement in an interview with fox news and he made the supporter of paying college athletes look like a fool.  This is like what McCauley says and I completely agree with them both.  Receiving free tuition is enough of a payment for anyone.  In my opinion, Yohance and Kareem forget college athletes get to go to school for free when trying to get athletes to have a salary.  With that being said there is more evidence against college athletes being paid, and it should stay that way.

