
 There are two types of college students: the average college student, receiving minimal benefits from the university he or she attends, and the student athlete, whom many are put on a pedestal of achievements and showered with benefits from the moment they enter their school. The word “student” comes first in the term for the purpose student athletes are at college to seek degrees first and foremost, not to play sports; that is a privilege. Some argue students should be paid for their time, effort, and funding they bring to the school and NCAA, however many overlooks that student athletes are not held to the same academic accountability as other students. The window for playing sports is limited, from around the ages of 5 to 40, few receive paychecks before age of 22. And only if they go to the professionals in the world of sports do they receive a paycheck where “only one percent makes it” (Ray Lewis). An extremely low percent compared to how many play in college. Standard jobs allow employment to anyone at age 14, contrasted to professional athletes who withstand a great risk of injury through sports. As you earn higher degrees the average paycheck increases tremendously, the longer someone works in life the more money they will make. In sports, only the professional athletes are paid and with one wrong move careers end and multimillion dollar sports deals gone. Paying college athletes for their respected sports would be detrimental to the growth of the athlete and the ethics of the sports. 

Every year student athletes bring in a revenue to the NCAA of around 989 million dollars for their play. The majority of these contributions come from men’s basketball and football many of whom believe these are only students who should be paid for play. This however could never work because of law Title IX. Title IX states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." (Jackson). This means that if selected student athletes were to start being paid, all athletes must be paid, men and women equally. Women sports often do not generate revenue and when they do it is nothing compared to what the football and men’s basketball players generate. No University would pay athletes that do not generate a positive revenue which would cause budget cuts to those sports that didn’t create revenue. And it wouldn’t be fair to pay the football team and girls hockey team the same. One raises tremendous amounts of revenue while the other does not. paying college athletes would lead to massive amounts of budget cuts because of Title IX. This would result in countless lawsuits against the NCAA. Not only would division 1 athletes be paid but division 2 and 3 athletes must be as well, some of which do not receive athletic scholarships from the schools. 

Paying college athletes would result in major budget cuts throughout Universities including programs that do not bring in substantially positive revenue like the football and men’s basketball programs. The programs that would be cut are the arts and music backgrounds many of which do not generate tremendous revenue and are thought to be less important than a math or science (Dave Anderson). Many of these programs are what draw people of different backgrounds and viewpoints. This is what makes colleges some of the most diverse places in the country. However, with the payment of athletes and the cutting of these programs, colleges would become less diverse and hurt our school communities.

Those who feel college athletes should be paid do not understand the importance of these athletic scholarships. “In fact, the 170,000 athletes who play Division I sports are the beneficiaries of the nation's second largest college financial aid program, second only to the GI Bill.” (Val Ackerman). These scholarships they receive are largely paid for by TV contracts and the funding brought in by them so they can graduate college debt free. “67% of all Division I athletes will go on to become college graduates, a slightly higher graduation rate than that of their fellow students who do not play on NCAA sports teams.” (Larry Scott). The main goal of college is to educate their students and better prepare them for the real world. The men and women that are receiving these athletic scholarships are being tailored and prepped for the real world by coming out of college debt free and with a degree in four years. Even if they do not continue their athletic careers to the professional levels they were benefited tremendously by the athletic programs scholarships. These benefits would not come if they were being paid. 

Throughout the recent history of sports, we hear of star athletes using college sports careers as the stepping stone to make it to the professional league. There is a rare occasion of players being so talented they are scouted as little as one year of playing in college, but that is only a small percentage of college athletes, around 1 percent per sport. To many athletes, sports scholarships can help pay the expenses of college tuition for those who cannot afford it, others do not receive any money from the school but are simply playing for the love of the game. Receiving a full scholarship to a university for playing a sport should be enough compensation for athletes. They are eligible to get a degree for free whereas the average student is spending thousands of dollars to get the same degree and graduating with tremendous debt. “Not only do these students get a free education but they get an experience of a life time traveling across the nation for free” (Lou Holtz). These full scholarships include: tuition, books, housing, travel, equipment, personal trainers/tutors and some of the best facilities in the world. All of which add up to around 200,000 over four years. 

You may be asking, how are all these expenses paid for? The answer would be through the funding contributed by the university’s endowments and the NCAA brought in from all college sports. Unfortunately, the cost of a single student athlete is much greater than many regular students combined. “In 2015, Auburn University debuted their newest addition, an almost 11,000 square feet, high-definition screen in the stadium. The glow from this screen can be seen up to 30 miles away, and it came to the university at a cost of $13.9 million.” (Dave Anderson). These beautiful facilities are refurbished in hopes to increase money brought into the athletics program. Better facilities equal better talent coming to play for the school. In turn, more money brought into the program. However, these big expenses are sometimes wrongly executed. Auburn purchased the jumbo Tron, the next year they found a 17-million-dollar deficit in their budget (Dave Anderson). This would leave no room to pay any student athletes backing up paying student athletes would be an unviable option.

If student athletes were to start making salaries, this would mean the cancelation of scholarships and all other entitlements provided to student athletes. The argument of a student athletes’ salary being taxed also arises.  This would result in the athletes being worse off than they would be if they were to receive scholarships. 

“Suppose we pay a student athlete $100,000 salary. A future Heisman Trophy winner might command more, but $100,000 is not bad for an 18-year-old high school recruit. Since it’s a salary, not a scholarship, it is subject to federal and state income taxes. Tuition and college expenses would not be deductible because the income level surpasses the IRS eligibility limit. So, a student-athlete paid a salary would owe $23,800 in federal income tax and $6,700 in state taxes, a total of $30,500. In cities that levy an employee payroll tax, the salaried student’s taxes go up about $2,400 per year. Income taxes then are $32,900. And, as an employee, the player would have to pay at least $2,000 in other taxes, such as Social Security, for a total of $34,900. This leaves the college player with $65,100. Since college bills come to $65,000, the player has $100 left.” (John R Thelin). 

Kieran McCauley states in her article “College athletes shouldn’t be paid” in the daily local, she emphasizes, “The key in my statement is they shouldn’t be paid, I didn’t say they shouldn’t be compensated”(Kieran McCauley). These athletes are being compensated for by being given amazing opportunities for at no expense and since 2014, “the NCAA is allowing schools to give cash stipends to cover the cost of things like late-night snacks, student fees, laundry money and movies. Often these stipends can amount to upwards of 5,000 dollars.” (Chris Isdore). On top of their scholarships these students are now able to receive cash to be spent on whatever they please. This is enough compensation for their participation in athletics. Athletes who cannot get jobs because of the time consumption of college sports benefit from these stipends. College students often survive on much less than 5,000 dollars a semester without having all their meals, books and housing paid for. The regular student though must pay for schooling by themselves and if they want to earn money while in college they must acquire a part time job to help pay for their expenses. These stipends are a fair trade off since there is not enough time in a day to balance sports school and a job. It does however further prove that these athletes do not need to be paid since they are receiving thousands of dollars of cash every semester without having to pay for school. 

“We live in a corporate world today were overpaid professional athletes expect prima Dona treatment but there is still something so unifying about sports in its purest form, where athletes rise above themselves and touch greatness and in doing so remind us all that we also have greatness inside of us” (Marvin McFadden). By paying these amateur college athletes we would be losing the wholesomeness of college sports. “Amateur competition is a bedrock principle of college athletics and the NCAA. Maintaining amateurism is crucial to preserving an academic environment in which acquiring a quality education is the first priority” (Amateurism). Once amateur college athletes begin to be paid there becomes no difference between them and the professionals they look up too. If only 1 percent of these college athletes are good enough to go to the pros and make money, why should the other 3 percent of college athletes be paid. The reality is that the athletes that are bringing in the millions of dollars for the NCAA are very few that will eventually make it to the pros and make millions. There is no reason to pay the people that weren’t good enough to make it to the pros in the first place. Now, student athletes select colleges based on what team will optimize their chances of improvement for a better life after sports because most of their careers end after college and do not expect any money from athletics.  

In the 1970s, college basketball was involved with one of its worst incidences of cheating occurred at Boston College. The players at Boston college were paid to shave points so betters could win big and the players were given part of the winnings (Purdum). If college athletes were to be paid, money would exchange hands so quickly and between so many people, that this could never be regulated. Instead cases like the Boston College team of 1978-1979 would be happening everywhere and the integrity of the game would soon be lost.  

 Possibly greediness from star athletes would arise demanding more money and in hopes to keep their most valuable players, many schools would succumb to compromising by cutting other programs to increase their salaries. If the school didn’t comply with their demands on salary this could result in a player lock out which has been seen multiple times over the past few years in professional sports. The only way the student’s athletes would gain this power would be if they started receiving an income for their participation in athletics. 

Colleges run similarly to businesses, the main goal is to maintain funding through education. Unless laws are clearly broken, it is very difficult to find a college guilty of wrongly receiving funds, and how they receive them. Colleges however do want to do right by their students and better prepare them for the rest of their lives, hence why they give out scholarships. No one is making kids go to school to make money for colleges and universities. “It is an agreement that is set up between the school and students to pay them in ways that is fair in relation to the money the schools make from their participation, aka scholarships. It is like taking an unpaid internship to prepare for a better job later in life. It’s a tradeoff” (Scoop Jackson). On the other hand, they are receiving around 65,000-dollar scholarship so it isn’t necessarily unpaid like an internship. When student athletes sign their letter of intent they are agreeing to accept a scholarship in return help bringing in money for the university program through their performance. This is just like a contract with any company for a job; agreeing to do something in return for compensation. The payment in this scenario is the full scholarship. “A full athletic scholarship (a “grant-in-aid”) at an NCAA Division I university is about $65,000 if you enroll at a college with high tuition. This includes such private colleges as Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, University of Southern California, Syracuse, and Vanderbilt.” (John R Thelin). 65,000 dollars is more than enough money for these athletes. Most people have to pay for these colleges themselves and don’t receive any additional benefits from their tuition. These athletes should not be expecting more money when they are getting everything they need for free. It is unfair and unethical. 

There are however many good arguments brought up with the benefits of paying these student athletes. One major benefit coming from paying these student athletes would be the life lessons learned from receiving a pay check. “These student athletes if they were to be paid would receive many life skills such as, time management, now that they are the ones paying for college and being paid to play they would have to learn to better manage their school and training for their sport.” (CNN). Time management is a critical lesson to learn in life. With the mastery of time management people can optimize every single day and successfully accomplish whatever they need without being stressed. Businesses love hiring people that are organized and with such a little percentage of athletes going pro this is will be very helpful getting these athletes jobs. However, since these student athletes are being paid to play a sport they are less likely to be focused on academics and more focused on the training for the sports where they know their income is coming from. 

By paying these college athletes they would learn money management and how to pay taxes and bills. This in thought would be beneficial, but would be detrimental to a student athlete. Most college athletes are between the ages of 18 and 22 and have no skills as how to manage a real pay check which would in turn result in them losing a lot of their earnings. This would result in student athletes coming out of college in debt, whereas if they were to strictly receive scholarships, they would have no debts when they graduate. Broke is a documentary that exploits the irresponsibility of young collegiate athletes with their finances. The film not only exposes the dangers of having young wealth, but also how easy it is to go broke as an athlete. Matt Leinart was one of the 12 interviewees in Broke of the athletes who irresponsibly blew all his money until bankruptcy. The film clearly identifies how dangerous young professionals can be with their money therefore, why should teenage kids who are still in college be trusted with big contracts as well? They should not be and once again adds to the reasons why collegiate athletes should not be paid.

 College athletes that end up playing professionally often have agents who will help them at every turn with their finances because the agent wants the athlete to financially succeed so they succeed. As seen in the documentary Broke, even with these agents every year hundreds of athletes are going bankrupt (Broke). In college they do not have these agents, resulting in the student athlete taking on the responsibilities of their financial earnings. Many people believe that because so many of the basketball and football games are televised, players deserve to be paid because that is how professionals are properly compensated. College is an experience to learn, whether a student wants to be an accountant or a professional athlete, they are not a professional while still in school. Paying these student athletes is not beneficial to them or fair to their peers.

College sports are still amateur sports no matter how you look at it. With only around three percent of people enrolled in college playing sports, less are likely to make it to the professional leagues. It would seem ridiculous to give this few percentages even more than they have been privileged enough to receive. This would be unfair to the average student who must work and study without any free assistance from the school unlike the personal tutors assigned to all student athletes. It is important that no matter what roll a student plays in their school community whether benefiting the university academically or through sports, that they are treated equally and compensated fairly for their achievements so they are properly prepared for the real world.
