Case Study: Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

If colleges were to pay athletes there would be no fair way to distribute the money. Athletes perform their sport at different levels of ability and for various lengths of time. In addition, not every player is able to compete in a game. Problems would arise about the athlete not playing which would not allow for him/her to receive the money they deserve. The first issue about this problem is that some people believe that athletes should be paid based on an open market system. This idea of an open market system would allow for supply and demand to come into play. In addition, a school would be able to pay their scouted athlete based on the money that comes in because of their ability. However, The payment would vary depending on the market along with the deals that each athlete has with the school. The second issue is about the colleges because not every college can afford the players they want to recruit. In 2013 the NCAA had an investigation on the economic stability of Division 1 sport programs. This study showed that out of 288 Division 1 schools only 23 were running their programs in a profitable way. This means that only those 23 schools had the money to pay a college athlete. In our society, any business not profiting from anything is likely not hiring, and there is no idea
Student athletes already receive benefits for playing college sports including an education, housing, meals, transportation, and other essentials. This gives them a bonus compared to traditional students of the college. If student athletes start getting paid, there would be no fair way to pay them and it would ruin the college sports industry. Student-athletes should do what previous players have done, which is to play their sport for the love of the game. For those reasons, Student athletes should remain