Why College Athletes Do Not Need Salaries

all about being a team and having school spirit and if the NCAA allowed salaries all school spirit would be gone. College athletes are already compensated enough they don’t need big contracts or salaries. Most of these athletes have scholarships worth more than fifty thousand dollars and receive free equipment. However giving these athletes a monthly stipend could be a good compromise. Most college athletes are already well compensated so there is no real need to pay them. As William Noack of TCA News Service in “Paying College Athletes would Cause More Problems” says “It’s not as though today’s scholarship athlete is not getting something for his or her services rendered.

A year at college today can be worth $50,000 or more. Add to that apparel and a host of other freebies that college athletes receive and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”

Most college athletes have all their tuition paid for plus room and board they’re saving upwards of ,000.

This doesn’t even include all team apparel and equipment they will get for free. Also these prestigious schools have amazing athletic programs that will train these college athletes so they will have a better chance of making it into the pros. Yes these students are heavily compensated that doesn’t mean they don’t need stipends for daily needs. A perfect solution for college athletes is to receive a monthly stipend. Since these athletes are so dedicated to their sport they don’t have time to hold a job to pay for daily expenses.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified

Proficient in: Paying College Athletes

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

So giving them this stipend allows them to go out to dinner or buy new clothes which they otherwise might not be able to do. Larry Scott of the Arizona Republic “Student-Athletes Shouldn’t be Paid says” “Many students now receive stipends for living expenses based on their “full cost of attendance.” This monthly stipend give student athletes so flexibility in their daily lives. From not having to eat in the cafeteria to going out with friend a little pocket money can be good for the students maybe even keep them out of trouble. For example someone my dad went to highschool with played college football in Nebraska and he had no money to buy food or clothes with so when ever he needed money he went and robbed the nearest Seven-Eleven. The college knew about this but didn’t do anything about it because he was one of their best players.

Giving the athletes stipend should hopefully keep them and the school out of trouble. A main opposing claim is that colleges exploit their athletes just to make money. This is not a valid point because most of the money they make goes to giving students financial aid or scholarships. John Steinbecker and Bernadette McGlade of the Detroit Free Press in “Unions, Pay for Players would Harm College Sports” says “The NCAA, which gives 90% of its revenue back to its institutions to benefit student-athletes, also provides special funds for those with financial needs to cover just about anything else not covered by “cost of attendance” stipends, from winter coats and dental visits to transportation in the event of a family tragedy. Athletes now get more time off to study, rest or work, they have access to unlimited meals and their scholarships can be guaranteed for four years regardless of athletic performance or injury.” No college athlete needs a million dollar salary or really one at all however giving them a little money allows the students to enjoy the off season. A stipend plus whatever other forms of compensation the athletes get is plenty. If a stipend wasn’t an option it would be best just to not pay the athletes at all. College athletes having salaries could change the whole dynamic of NCAA sports as a whole it would become self centered and loses many aspects of loyalty to their college.