Hellobee Boards

I don’t think we should pay college athletes. The priority is supposed to be on school/education (though obviously I know it’s too often not); sports are the extracurricular. I also think many college athletes already receive lots of perks; they don’t need straight up cash on top of it.

I think its against NCAA rules to be paid, I personally believe if you're paid you should be considered a professional athlete. I think if they're to be paid it should be paid in tuition, room and board.

I don't think we should pay them. My DH is very for it, given the amount of hours and commitment that college athletes give to their school, and how much some schools make off of their football or basketball programs. But you would have to pay all college athletes, not just the ones in high revenue generating sports. The cost of that would just be passed on to students, rather than coming out of those sports, and I don't think that is fair.

BUT, I do think college athletes should be allowed to profit off of themselves. Right now they are prohibited (and harshly penalized) for doing things like selling their signature. Whereas the school can sell a jersey with their name on it and keep all of the profits. I think that is very wrong.

I do not think College Athletes should be paid. It's similar to the various clubs and organizations on campus - students are going to college to find their career, and these extracurriculars are stepping stones to make yourself stand out.

I don't think they should be paid. That being said, some colleges make a LOT of money on their sports teams. Ticket sales, merchandise, concessions... etc. I would hope the athletes that play in the games are at least receiving scholarships in return. But I don't think they should actually get paid in cash.

Well maybe they should get paid, they'd have to pay taxes on it and it could be a lesson in money management.

I think a large part of the problem is that truly talented athletes feel that they can skip college and go straight pro. They see dollar signs and that's it. They don't see that they could potentially become injured and their career is over with no back up plan.

Heck no.

I was a college athlete, and considered my college education more than adequate and generous.

@sunny: Your point on free training in their sport (and exposure to professional scouts) is spot on.

I don't know how I feel but I read this recently after hearing one of the advocates for this website on the radio:

http://www.ncpanow.org/about/the-free-ride-should-we-complain

I don't think there's an easy answer to this question, but I do think it's messed up how much money universities make from their athletic programs while the "talent" is supposed to be satisfied with having the cost of education covered. I also have some thoughts as to how race and power play into this issue, but I don't even know if I want to go into that on here! Some things are better left unsaid

ETA: There's something about the phrase "free ride" that doesn't sit well with me. Make no mistake - athletes are making serious money for the universities they represent. So yeah, okay, I guess they get a free education. But compare that to what the universities make off of them and it becomes a little more complicated.

Nope. Sports programs are already such a money suck for most universities (contrary to popular belief, for the most part having a big sports program COSTS the school money) I don't think they should be spending MORE money on it.

I am not sure. I feel like maybe a way for them to compromise is to maybe make it eligible for some sort of work study program so the required hours for some sports get paid like $10-$12 an hour. I don't know where the lines would be drawn and that would be a whole extra kettle if fish. At the same time some of these athletes are required to spend massive amounts of time with their team which doesn't leave much time for a part time job. So even if you have a free ride you might still need money for books and other things what do you do? I had scholarships for most of my tuition but room and board and other incidentals cost a lot and I had to when through school and will had student loans. I simply couldn't have committed to daily practices that lasted hours because I couldn't afford to spend my time that way.

I feel like if the athletes don't like the way they are treated, then perhaps they shouldn't be playing for their particular university. Don't like the heat? Get out the kitchen. No one is FORCING them to play. It's totally an option!

@Mae: That's the kicker. (Not the only one, but...) the colleges and universities that do make a profit are actually few and far between. There's no good way to standardize it because the vast majority of schools would end up losing their athletic programs altogether.

@mrbee: I agree with this. It seems like a lot of college athletes don't even care about the education part and are just going through with it to get their shot at playing professionally. That seems like a waste for the athlete and the school. The school could be spending that scholarship money on a student who WANTS to be there, and the athlete could focus solely on their sport. I guess basketball does have the D league, but it doesn't seem to be the first choice for a lot of NBA prospects over going to college.

Nope. I think a scholarship should be the motivating factor.

@MamaMoose: but don't basketball players need to attend college for at least a year? Not sure about other sports...

I agree that they should be able to profit off themselves (signatures, jerseys, etc). They're not allowed to accept ANYTHING--there was a crazy story about a player being given some money by a coach to buy food or something and he was kicked off the team.

@mrbee: totally agree with this!

I think this article sums it up nicely: http://grantland.com/features/northwestern-ncaa-college-athletics-union/

And yes. I think its pretty corrupt what big name NCAA schools are doing.
An example from the article: "Players are not allowed to profit from their own images, but are required to sign away the rights to their names and likenesses to Northwestern and the Big Ten"

And, again, from the article and a very important point: "Amateurism is about people with power controlling people with talent. It contorts to fit any number of agendas. If the slavery metaphor makes you uncomfortable, ask yourself whether you would like to spend the next few years working 50-hour weeks for room and board and the chance to sit in on some French classes while your boss made millions off your efforts. If not, you are against amateurism. It’s that simple."