Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Roddy 1

George Roddy

Ms. Storer

English 3 Honors American Literature

November 26, 2019

The Detriments of Compensating Student-Athletes

Is it egregious to compensate one person but not another for performing the same tasks?

The California bill, SB 206, should not be implemented on a national scale because if student-

athletes are paid it will create a morale issue for students who are not being compensated and

corrupt the academic mission of the college.

If college athletes are compensated, it will make students who do not receive any profits

feel inferior to those that do. Gregory Melick, a sports analysist who covers the NCAA

extensively, states that “if certain athletes are essentially getting punished for not playing the

‘right’ sport, those ‘wrong’ sports will suffer. They will lose popularity because top athletes who

may be able to play multiple sports will choose the more lucrative ones” (Melik). Student-

athletes from other sports can work just as hard as the individuals getting paid but will not

receive anything because their sport does not receive as much attention. If this becomes the

reality, the athletically gifted participants of less popular sports will leave their sport to pursue

opportunities in those sports that pay athletes. The participants remaining in the less popular

sports will have marginal athletic ability, thus rendering these sports as having trivial

importance. Jonathan R. Cole, an American sociologist, states “those [universities] that are

lodged in the ‘highly selective’ category are admitting too many athletes and potentially denying

admissions to extraordinarily able foreign and minority students, as well as future artists and

writers and political scientists and economists and engineers” (Cole). If this happens, it will
Roddy 2

displace scholars from critical academic fields. This will lead to harmful deterioration of

society’s ability to maintain leadership resources in critical professional fields. This will lower

the morale of the student body because students will feel they have less value than student-

athletes who are compensated. In addition to diminishing the morale of students who are not

being paid, compensating student-athletes defeats the true purpose of a college education.

If student-athletes attain profits, it will disrupt the academic mission of a college

education. Derek Bok, an American lawyer and former president of Harvard, states that “the

most obvious purpose of college education is to help students acquire information and

knowledge by acquainting them with facts, theories, generalizations, principles, and the like”

(Bok). It is evident that the main reason an individual should attend a university is to receive an

education, not to be paid. If one wants to receive compensation for playing a sport, there are

various alternatives, such as playing overseas. One may then question, why would a big-name

athlete not choose to play overseas? A clear answer is that they would not receive as much

attention from scouts if they chose to play overseas. Although this is a valid argument, there are

many players, including LaMelo Ball, who play professionally overseas and are projected to be

high draft picks. Jonathan R. Cole states that if student-athletes are paid, the higher education

system will have “perverted some of its core values—to rigorously teach academic subject

matter, prepare better citizens, and improve their independent thinking and their critical

reasoning skills” (Cole). If universities prioritize gaining or helping student-athletes attain

profits, it will take away from the university’s academic objective. Universities will be more

focused on financial gains from inflated box office ticket sales at events showcasing professional

student-athletes, as oppose to bettering the student-athlete as an individual. At the end of the


Roddy 3

day, the athlete attending the university is a student, meaning that their main purpose is to

receive a higher-level learning that catapults their professional career.

A popular argument for why student-athletes should receive profits is because the

reimbursement of college athletes may lead the athletes to want to stay in college even longer.

This can promote better ways to effectively use taxpayer money towards athletes completing

their degrees. However, according to the NCAA, “if compensated, only 2% of student-athletes,

who are eligible to leave college and play professionally, are willing to return to college to

complete their degree” (NCAA). Ultimately, student-athletes do not want to return to college if

they are given the chance to play professionally. Even if an athlete receives profits in college,

the financial gain will not be nearly as close to the profits they would gain in a professional

league. Another NCAA statistic reveals that “over 80% of student-athletes attain a bachelor’s

degree” (NCAA). Only 20% (92,000) student athletes do not receive a degree. Compared to the

whopping 17 million students nationwide, these mere 92,000 college athletes who do not attain a

degree is insignificant in the eyes of a taxpayer. Overall, taxpayers will not suffer from these

20% of student-athletes who do not receive their bachelor’s degree because they are still

supporting the overwhelming millions of students who are receiving degrees. All in all,

compensating student-athletes will not be the deciding factor for them continuing their college

career, and it will not affect taxpayers.

Student-athletes should not be paid because it will lower the morale of both student-

athletes and the general student body. Those student-athletes participating in uncompensated

low-visibility sports, will see their sport marginalized as athletes pursue sports that attract

compensation. The incentives to attract gifted, but non-academically focused athletes into

universities will deny admission of scholarly gifted students who otherwise would have
Roddy 4

contributed immensely to the excellence of society. Secondly, paying student-athletes will

corrupt the academic mission of higher learning institutions by turning them into venues where

some students pursue the goal of attaining wealth. The evidence clearly supports the notion that

college athletes should not be compensated. Would paying a student-athlete to play a sport make

it justifiable to pay a regular student to study? What would be the criteria for deciding which

sports will have compensated student-athletes? Should all sports, including the less popular

ones, have compensation for the participants? Should financial incentives be limited to the

existing proven system of scholarships that has served higher level education institutions and

society so well for many generations?


Roddy 5

Works Cited

Bok, David. "Our Underachieving Colleges". 2006.

Burnsed, Brian. “Athletics Departments That Make More than They Spend Still a

Minority.” NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA, 18 Sept. 2015,

www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/athletics-departments-make-more-they-

spend-still-minority.

Cole, Jonathan R. “Why Sports and Elite Academics Do Not Mix.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media

Company, 9 Mar. 2017, www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/03/the-case-against-

student-athletes/518739/.

Melick , Gregory. “Opposing Viewpoints: The Problem with Paying College Athletes.” News-

Letter , 25 Oct. 2018, www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2018/10/the-problems-with-paying-

student-athletes.

NCAA. “NCAA Recruiting Facts. NCAA.org. 2018,

www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Recruiting%20Fact%20Sheet%20WEB.pdf.

NCAA. “Student-Athletes.” NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA, 2018,

www.ncaa.org/student-athletes.

S-ar putea să vă placă și