¶ … pay college athletes, and whether or not they are being exploited for their work on the field, remains a hot topic of contention in both scholarly and mainstream media. Both mainstream media and scholarly literature address a wide range of topics related to the issue of student-athlete compensation, albeit with the scholarly literature focusing more on financial data and legal analyses too technical for publication in popular magazines. In "Exploitation in College Sports," for example, Van Rheenen (2013) discusses the ways it may be possible to measure exploitation quantitatively using a calculation based on surplus value and marginal revenue product. Van Rheenen (2013) also includes the issue of race in college sports, discussing the graduation rate disparity and other "cultural divisions of opportunity," p. 550). In the Time magazine cover story on the same topic, Gregory (2013) avoids the issue of race but spends considerable time arguing in favor of compensating student-athletes. Gregory (2013) and Van Rheenen (2013) analyze the topic contemporaneously, making these two articles worthy points of comparison between the two types of literature on the subject. In spite of their stylistic differences, both Gregory (2013) and Van Rheenen (2013) conclude that student-athletes are being exploited, and that the system of college sports should be restructured accordingly. Exploitation has both "philosophical and psychological implications," as Van Rheenen (2013) points out (p. 550). The definition of exploitation is, according to Van Rheenen (2013), "primarily a moral construct understood as an unfair exchange between two parties," (p. 550). In the case of student-athletes, the unfair exchanges is the fact that the students have a financial value to the school, but receive nothing beyond the basic tuition, room, and board offered.
The issue of exploitation is central to the ...
Likewise, Gregory focuses on the issue of exploitation but does not offer as erudite a definition as Ven Rheenen's. Instead, Gregory (2013) uses anecdotal evidence and rhetorical questions to raise the ethical and moral problems. "Why shouldn't a player worth so much to his school, to his town and to the college-football brand be able to sign his name for money, just as any other celebrity has a right to do?" (1). Gregory (2013) also quotes a Stanford economist Roger Noll, who noted "the rising dollar value of the exploitation of athletes," which is "obscene" and "out of control," (p. 2). Whereas Van Rheenen (2013) avoids hyperbole and informal language like "obscene" and "out of control," Gregory (2013) uses such rhetorical devices to appeal to the mainstream readership of Time.
Instead of using anecdotes and emotionally…
Exploitation has both "philosophical and psychological implications," as Van Rheenen (2013) points out (p. 550). The definition of exploitation is, according to Van Rheenen (2013), "primarily a moral construct understood as an unfair exchange between two parties," (p. 550). In the case of student-athletes, the unfair exchanges is the fact that the students have a financial value to the school, but receive nothing beyond the basic tuition, room, and board offered.
However, the United States is not a socialist society. Individuals get paid for the work they do and some jobs simply pay more than others. A lawyer is always going to make more than a manager at McDonalds even though both likely work equally as hard for their families. Working hard does not always equal increased pay. College football and basketball are simply the most revenue-generating sports sponsored by the
College athletes' payment issue drags the development of the game within the association (NCAA). The debate of whether college athletes should obtain payment for their services needs to rest by extensive solution. The perfect way to solve the issue at hand involves additional payment for the services of the college athletes. This would supplement the scholarships and accommodation fees university and college athletes enjoy currently. There are several reasons why
College Athlete Pay The question of payment for college athletes may seem trivial at first glance, when one considers the variety of other, seemingly more pressing issues facing universities today, but upon closer examination it becomes clear that the question of whether or not college athletes should be payed for playing actually cuts to the heart of budget crises plaguing so many American universities. For example, according to Forbes magazine, in
College Athletes Be Paid? Athletics at college level comprise of an array of competitive sports and games that are largely non-professional. These sporting pursuits demand a lot of physical skill and involvement. There should also be requisite systems necessary to prepare the athletes for higher-level competition and excellent performance. In the U.S., for example, there are over 400,000 students who participate in college sports competitions every year. The National Collegiate
Paying them to play sports in college would devalue their education and encourage them to continue on a path that will never be profitable in the long-term (Hill, 2007). Conclusion As can be seen, there are two sides to the story. There are good reasons to avoid paying athletes, but there are also good reasons why paying them could be helpful and beneficial. Whichever is decided, it is clear that there
College athletics has become a fast increasing industry in America. The athletes play for educational institutes, get quality education and bring revenues for the college. While they do good job for the college image and ranking, they are paid well by the educational institutes they are enrolled in and they play for. There are people that believe that for they bring multi-billion dollars to educational sector each year, athletes should