Author: Debate_Guru

College Athletes Should be Paid

Image for College athletes should be paid

PRO (4 arguments)



1) “Did you know that out of the 120 FBS (formerly named Division 1) schools, only twelve

broke even or made a profit last year?

2) “Did you know that over 81% of all athletic programs lose money?”

1. College athletes sacrifice their lives for the colleges.

College athletes put their bodies at risk to make money for their schools. They literally allow themselves to get hurt to help their school survive. Take for example, a college football player. They get injuries all the time, sometimes ruining their whole entire lives. But, they don’t get paid even a penny!

A study sample by Science Daily consisted of 573 male and female collegiate athletes from an NCAA Division I institution participating in 16 team sports. Participants reported 1,317 injuries during a three-year period. A total of 319 male athletes sustained 705 injuries, and 254 female athletes sustained 612 injuries. Estimates vary as to the number of young athletes who die from sudden cardiac arrest, but it could be as many as one in 28,000, according to the British Journal of Sports For the 26-year period from the fall of 1982 through the spring of 2008 there have been 22 fatalities, 63 disability injuries, and 126 serious injuries for a total of 211. During this same 26-year period of time there have been a total of 106 indirect injuries and all but twelve resulted in death.

2. The time spent for practicing, games, etc. takes away the time for a job and a way to earn money, so the athletes have no other ways to make money, whereas other students have time to get jobs. (THEY ARE ALSO NOT ALLOWED TO AS PER SOME REGULATIONS.)

College athletes spend all day in classrooms. Right after they must spend hours training. These athletes spend their free time practicing their sport. Instead, they could be studying for their exams but they decide to spend their time by practicing. Many athletes don’t have time to have a job so they don’t have money to buy food and pay for books. Other students have the opportunity to have jobs and work after school to get extra spending money. However, the athletes spend time after school playing in games and practicing. Millions of dollars are brought in from the games, and none of it is given to the athletes, who actually play in the games.

College football players spend an average of 43.3 hours on their sport — playing games, practicing, training and in the training room. Division I baseball players said they spent a little more than 42 hours on their sport. In men's basketball, it was slightly more than 39 hours on their sport. Women’s basketball players said that they spent more than 37.5 hours per week on their game.

HORRIBLE LIVING OF ATHLETES: The report also found that the room-and-board provisions in a full scholarship leave 85% of players living on campus and 86% of players living off campus living below the federal poverty line. - DAILY FINANCE

The University of Florida had the highest combined football and basketball revenues while its players' scholarships left them living $2,250 below the federal poverty line and a $3,190 scholarship shortfall. - DAILY FINANCE - While this happens, the colleges, as well as the staff, make millions

3. If coaches are paid for their efforts, then the athletes should be, too; they are the ones who are actually playing the sport.

Coaches are paid by the colleges, so why shouldn’t athletes. The athletes are the ones who are actually playing the sports. It just makes sense that they should be paid just like the coaches. In addition, if actual athletes get paid by their teams, then why shouldn’t college athletes get paid.


According to the New York Times, the combined 2011 salaries of the highest-paid college football coaches is $53.4 million, and this is only from the top college football coaches; no other sports or the lower college football coaches are accounted for in this statistics. The combined salaries of all college athletes amount to $0. Nick Saban, a college football coach had a 2012 salary of $5.32 million.

4. College sports limit their chances for being drafted in the future if the athletes are injured.

If the athletes are injured during their college years, this will limit their chances of becoming professional athletes. We need to make sure that they are paid so that they feel like they are compensated for their efforts. If an athlete gets seriously injured during a game, the athlete’s whole entire life will be changed. For example, they won’t be able to pursue a career in the sports they excel in therefore turning their life completely upside. These students put their whole entire lives at risk and at least need to be paid for the risks they make.

Concussions at all levels of football are a tremendous problem as of 2011, with a growing number of retired professional football players suffering from dementia after repeated concussions during their playing days. Among college football players, 34 percent have had one concussion and 30 percent have had two or more concussions. As the University of Pittsburgh Department of Neurological Surgery reports, if you have a second concussion, even a minor one, soon after the first concussion, you might die. A total of 26 deaths, most occurring since 2000, are attributed to "second impact syndrome." The neurological effects of concussions in college athletes also can result in learning disabilities and severe memory impairments. There is a lower, but significant, incidence of concussions in soccer as well.

CON (3 arguments)



1) According to the Livestrong Foundation, there are about 12,500 injuries per year for college athletes.

1. If money is used to pay the athletes, then the money can't be spent on education, like books, or other more important programs for college.

Schools need money to fund other more important school events and if they have to pay their athletes then they won’t have enough money to fund extracurricular programs. Athletics are not the college’s main priority and if they are forced to pay their athletes than it will take money away from other beneficial programs. The scholarships that these athletes are given provide enough money for the tuition, room, and board. The money brought in from the games does not need to be used to pay the athletes because the athletes have enough money to eat food and get an education. The money brought in from the sports should be spent on the educational programs, which is why we have colleges in the first place.

2. College athlete programs already don't make profits; paying the athletes would therefore be more detrimental

These colleges don’t have enough money in the first place to pay for these college athletes, so it is completely crazy to demand they get paid. Most of the sports that colleges participate in actually lose money for the school. If we begin to pay college athletes, the school will just get farther and farther in the red.


Many people are not aware that most athletic departments actually lose money year after year trying to fund programs. Out of the 120 FBS (formerly named Division 1) schools, only twelve broke even or made a profit last year. According to the NCAA's own figures, the average FBS athletic program ran a $9.44 million operating deficit in the latest year. Considering this fact, there’s no way that the schools can pay the athletes anyways.

120 programs that comprise the Football Bowl Subdivision, just 14 are profitable. That means some 88 percent of the top football programs lose money for their universities -- and that doesn't even include the reams of cash the schools are spending on the so-called nonrevenue sports.

The benefits coming along from being a college athlete is 32% and scholarship/aid is 25%. This accounts for over 50 percent of the cost. Therefore, we do not need to pay the athletes more.


Student-athletes earn free tuition, which over the course of four years can exceed $200,000. They are also provided with housing, textbooks, food and academic tutoring. When they travel to road games, they are given per diems for meals. They also get coaching, training, game experience

and media exposure they "earn" in their respective crafts.


Basically, these athletes costs of school and food requirements are all covered by the scholarships, and now that the NCAA created a rule allowing athletes to be paid 2,000 dollars above their scholarship, the advantage is even bigger for these athletes.

3. If college athletes should be paid, why shouldn't other students who help their college be paid?

How is it fair to pay college athletes and not pay straight-A students, who excel in grades just like the athletes excel in sports? How is it fair to pay the athletes but not the musicians, who also are talented and contribute to the school? If college athletes were paid, we would have to pay more than just the athletes. It is unfair to only pay athletes and not debate members, musicians, and others who participate in extracurricular activities for the schools. We cannot just pay athletes and not pay other students who help improve their colleges too. If we are going to pay athletes then we must pay everyone else who helps their college, which, frankly, is impossible because there is no school with enough money to pay all the students who contribute to the school.


What people forget about college athletes is that they are student athletes. The word student comes first before athlete. In college, they are students just like everyone else. No one gets paid to get that A+ or to get that pat on the back for doing well on a test or on an activity at school. In college, you are supposed to learn how to grow up and how to manage your life. You are also supposed to get a job in order to support yourself and learn what it takes to earn a living in this country. If colleges pay their athletes, it defeats the purpose of any of this because you are hurting the players’ integrity. Cecilia Thoxtin, a freshmen at Brown, stated that “it would be completely unfair if students who get straight-A’s don’t get paid while students who are athletes do. This is singling out a group of students which is completely not right.”


The Washington Post