Author: Debate_Guru

College Athletes Should be Paid

Image for College athletes should be paid

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