Paying athletes to play would create a huge gap in college sports because of the ability to pay more at the bigger schools. The title XI would make it so that all college players have to be paid equally. That would create a problem that they cannot pay all students athletes. That would call for some college sports to be cut and that is taking away opportunities for people. The first thing that these student athletes should be worrying about is there academics and with all the extra money they would get for playing would break their concentration and create more nationally know problems in the college sports world.
Additionally, if athletes were paid then this would establish an “employee-employer relationship” (Worsnop Par. 41). This would result in colleges being “liable for workers’ compensation and all the other liabilities that go into an employee-employer relationship” (Worsnop Par. 41). The cost of this would be extremely detrimental to colleges if they were able to afford it at all.
But should companies like Nike have to give student athletes a piece of their jersey sales? Absolutely. The NCAA throws the word amateurism around far too often. There is a fine line between remaining an amateur and becoming a professional in the eyes of the NCAA. Turning pro does not guarantee endorsements and royalties; it simply means that an athlete will be paid to play for his organization.
He's alla time picking scraps with big guys. Kind of like he's mad at 'em because he ain't a big guy." Another example of Curley's controlling ways is how he's constantly concerned about his wife and her whereabouts, but takes this worry too far just like any other situation he's in. Curley is clearly humiliated by the constant absence of his wife and feels the need to brag
It will discuss how it was unfair to students that were entering college for sports gave minorities an unfair advantage to all, not just non-minorities. This paper will provide examples how the affirmative-action was not working to help everyone obtain a higher education. Many elite universities in the United States have delved into the issue of affirmative-action and the role affirmative action plays during the admission stage. Many universities automatically give minorities, African Americans and Hispanics, up to 230 points on a 1600 point SAT scale. Those entering for sports reasons obtain 200 admission points.
In other words, the contemporary pressure for money influences many lower-income students to enter college with inadequate funds, which ultimately forces them to drop out of college. Meanwhile, many universities struggle with a sufficient response to this alarming collegiate quandary. While Leonhardt fails to accurately represent certain points, his argument is certainly effective at explaining the relationship between education and socioeconomic class that contributes to the alarming rate of college dropouts. In his writing, "The College Dropout Boom," Leonhardt informs his readers that the probability for lower-income students to drop out of college is
The NCAA and its opponents for paying college athletes are of the opinion that paying student will bring in corruption, exploitation and disarray to collegian sports, while other are of the mindset that the price of a college education is enough. According to the College Board, average total costs for 2009-2010 were $35,636 at private universities and $15,213 for in-state students at state colleges (College Cost$ Gone Wild, 2010). While the NCAA and opponents for paying student-athletes is firm in their beliefs, they have little ethical or moral ground to stand. It is true that in today's economy, a college education is very expensive and unachievable for some, but when compared to the dollars the athletes generate annually there is no comparison. Speaking with the Assistant Dean of Student Affairs at the University of Rhode Island, Earl N. Smith III, the questioned was posed, "should collegian athletes be paid for their services while representing their universities?"
While many people in the United States look for higher education after high school, financial barriers are in the way for a lot of these students due to rising college tuition costs. Although these high prices are seen as a negative by most, arguments have been made that they may actually be a good thing. Some say the higher price tag forces (potential) students to not take their education for granted. The opposing side responds with statements saying a lot of people aren’t given a chance and these prices are to far out of their reach. The bottom line is that the high and rising cost of college isn’t a good thing and reduces the amount of qualified workers.
The thrill of the Final Four or the Bowl Championship Series show college sports at their best. Most High School athletes can only dream of taking their sport to the college level. But what happens when a player is everything that a professional athlete possesses. The media puts pressure on the athlete to go pro, but high school athletes shouldn’t be able to pursue a career professionally with out any college experience because of their inexperience’s and need for a college education. High school athletes are too young and inexperienced too handle all the pressure that comes with professional sports.