Lake 1

Troy Lake
Caruso
UWRT 1103
19 November 2015
Should College Athletes be paid?
The Debate on whether or not collegiate athletes should be paid is
continuing to spiral out of control and does not look to come to an end
anytime soon. One side believes that athletes deserve to be paid salaries as
many of them are practicing for over 40 hours a week. The other side
believes that student athletes are already given enough money through
scholarships and that it is a privilege for these athletes to represent their
school through athletics. Over the past couple years, laws and regulations
have arisen limiting schools on what they can give athletes, if anything at all,
but there is no evidence set in stone that says whether they should or should
not be paid.
The Main focus of the conversation or debate starts with the question
should collegiate athletes be paid and almost always ends with the
argument on whether or not college athletics resemble a job. In todays
world, division one football players are practicing anywhere from 30 to 40
hours a week. In a recent interview, Thomas Oldham stated that During the
season I would say we practice 8 hours a week, but that does not include the

Lake 2

30 minutes a day dedicated to meetings for our positions, or the hour we

spend at 6 in the morning four days a week. A major case that surfaced last
year was the destruction of Northwesterns football program. Northwestern,
one of the best football programs in the country, has their athletes practicing
as much as anyone to remain competitive. In 2014, most of the players
formed a union and requested more scholarship funds and benefits from the
school. Debaters who side with the student athletes commonly use this
incident as a reference for why student athletes should be paid. Between the
years 2003 and 2012, the Northwestern program generated a revenue of
approximately 235 million dollars (Congressional Digest). As ticket prices and
merchandise sales rise, athletes are wondering why they do not get a share
of the profit, arguing that without them, revenue would be non-existent.
Athletes of all sports are beginning to feel as though they are working as
slaves to bring in countless amounts of money that they will not benefit
from. As the rules stand now, the NCAA only allows schools to give athletes
money that will cover tuition, room and board, and living expenses but
nothing more. The article Scholarship Student Athletes are Employees
makes a good point in that if scholarships are compensation for the money
athletes bring in, then why is the best player or star athlete receiving the
same scholarship or funds equivalent to the players who never see the field.
With practice hours amounting to a full time job, they struggle to find time to
complete homework and perform their best academically. In the recent
article conducted by Troy Lake, all three collegiate athletes who were

Lake 3

interviewed claimed that there is just not enough time for a job. The New
York Times Editorial Board also points out that if collegiate athletes dont
follow team rules and procedures or fail a drug test, they can lose their
scholarship and sometimes be cut from the team. These rules and penalties
closely resemble a professional work contract. Scholars argue that if these
athletes are being treated and handled as employees, why they are not
getting paid. To sum up this branch of the argument, athlete and observers
are becoming upset that they are the reason big division one schools bring in
millions of dollars a year and are given nothing in return. The fact that many
student athletes are basically working full time jobs and are not
compensated for the revenue they produce for the university is fueling the
debate for the supporters of the student athletes.
As I read further into the continuing discussion, both sides have agreed
on common ground. You may believe that student athletes should or should
not be paid, but most people agree that what they are currently receiving
enough. All three athletes that participated in the recent Bleacher Report
interview agree that they are all receiving something, but that something
isnt always enough. The average college student takes the same amount of
credit hours as a student athlete but has almost double the amount of time
to work on and complete assignments. Although these student athletes are
receiving scholarship money that regular student dont have access to,
athletes do not have the time to work while they are in school. This may not
be a problem for most student athletes, but some are paying for their own

Lake 4

education. With todays cost of attendance (COA), student athletes are going
to be receiving more money. COA is the calculated difference between the
traditional scholarship (room, board, books, tuition) and other living
expenses (clothing, laundry, insurance, even a one-time computer expense)
(Dennis Dodd). This means that starting this year, the average student
athlete will receive anywhere from $2000-$5000 per year. Each school is
allowed to come up with its own COA numbers based on how they interpret
NCAA and federal guidelines (Dennis Dodd). This extra aid given to athletes
beginning this year can possibly cover all living costs, eliminating the need
for a salary. If money like this is available to collegiate athletes, the heated
argument between the NCAA and student athletes may cool off.
As I began to analyze and really dig into the scholarly sources, I
realized that they were no more helpful than the non-scholarly sources.
When it comes to research, almost 99 percent of the time, scholarly sources
are always the best way to find truthful and quality information. This is
because these sources are written by experts in a field and their writings are
thoroughly edited by their colleagues or other experts. When it comes to the
debate on whether or not collegiate athletes should be paid, I discovered
that scholarly sources did not get the job done when it came to determining
which side is right. No matter how many sources I read through, each one
kept presenting the same reasons why or why not todays athletes deserve
to be paid. In order to find the information I needed, I decided that I needed
to get primary sources. The way I decided to complete this task was to

Lake 5

interview several athletes that are directly affected by the issue. I

interviewed one football player, a soccer player and a baseball player to
make sure I had a variety of athletes. I asked each athlete eight questions
that were related to the life of student athletes and whether or not they
should receive more benefits. As expected I got mixed results. Two of the
athletes believed that student athletes do not need to be paid, while only
one thought that they should. They all agreed that student athletes dont
have close to the amount of time that regular students have to complete
homework and study. Also, their immense amount of practice hours per week
doesnt allow them to work a job, which can turn into a problem when a
student athlete is paying for their own education. The average opinion of the
three athletes I interviewed was that yes, athletes have much less time than
the average student to complete daily takes, but with the time strain comes
several benefits also. They felt as though they would be happy with more
benefits from their institutions but they dont necessarily need them.
I decided to turn these interviews into themy product. I figured that the
best way to make the interviews into a product was to put them inside an
article. The article I created was specifically a sports article that first
introduced the topic at hand, which is whether or not student athletes should
be paid. After the introduction, I listed the questions and the responses from
each athlete. This article is intended to be read by anyone who follows sports
or someone that is interested in the debate. The product will help anyone

Lake 6

better understand the topic, because in this case the student athletes were
interviewed and were able to tell us how they felt about the issue.
Not only did I think my product was well suited for my research and
findings, but it gave me more information and helped me understand the
topic more than any of the scholarly sources. When it comes to the
discussion on whether or not athletes should be paid, most of the time it is
composed of experts arguing back and forth, going nowhere. Interviewing
the athletes that actually face the several challenges of being a student
athlete, gave me good perspective of what its like and what they feel they
need.

Lake 7

Sources Sited:
Dodd, Dennis. "Players about to Get Paid as Money Changes Game in College
Athletics." CBSSports.com. N.p., 27 Feb. 2015. Web. 05 Oct. 2015.
"Playing College Football Is a Job." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Mar. 2014.
Web. 30 Sept. 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/opinion/playing-college-football-isa-job.html?_r=0

Guarino, Mark. "NCAA and college sports: it is time to pay athletes to play?"
Christian Science Monitor 18 May 2014. Infotrac Newsstand. Web. 18 Nov.
2015.
"Earn to learn: paying student athletes." UWIRE Text 7 Nov. 2014: 1. Infotrac
Newsstand. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.
"It's time for colleges to start paying their 'student athletes'." UWIRE Text 19
Mar. 2015: 1. Infotrac Newsstand. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.