The Instigator
greenwalde481
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AshleysTrueLove
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

College Athletes Should be Paid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
AshleysTrueLove
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/30/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,963 times Debate No: 22445
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

greenwalde481

Pro

While colleges and the executives that run their sports programs continue to rake in millions of dollars of revenue, the ones who re truly working for that revenue are the ones getting snubbed. Athletes work so hard for their schools while only a handful of people are benefiting financially. Athletes can't get jobs because their schedules are filled up from their sports. They are also continuously under scrutiny from taking benefits because of their ability. When did it become wrong to take advantage of your skills and popularity to gain an edge? Everyone else in the world does it, so why is it so wrong for college athletes?
AshleysTrueLove

Con

Resolution:College Athletes Should be Paid
First lets be clear BOP is on the Pro to prove that College athletes should be paid. The pro has offered no definitions at the start of this debate. I will make a makeshift definition of the resolution which I will not contend is any better than Pro's unless Pro contends my definition. I take the resolution to mean that while in College that athletes that participate should be paid for their performance.
First Contention: The Fine Line
"There is a fine line between remaining an amateur and becoming a professional in the eyes of the NCAA. Turning pro does not guarantee endorsements and royalties; it simply means that an athlete will be paid to play for his organization. Payment for actual gameplay is the fundamental difference between professional and amateur status, so, college athletes should not receive anything more than scholarships."Dan Cassavaugh
The fact is that the reason that people in college don't get paid is simply because they are not professionals. For example, it is well within ones rights to join the local hockey team however there is no particular reason to assume the local team should pay you. The fact is that when one gets paid it implies two things that are not true(ALL OF THE TIME) in the college players case but are in the professional players case: that the reason they are playing is making it a job, and two that they providing a essential service for the general public.
JOE CROWLEY: Well, the NCAA is based fundamentally on the principle of amateurism, which Mr. Branch feels is a principle, sadly, out of date, and indeed no principle at all and perhaps a hoax, because it isn't what it was 100 years ago.And that is true. The world has turned upside-down a couple of times since then and many other changes. And no concept, I think, in its pure state can last that long. Nevertheless, we believe, the NCAA believes, higher educational institutions believe, that paying a student a grant in aid, a scholarship, is not a violation of that amateurism principle.So if we paid athletes to play for us, clearly, they wouldn't be, could not be, amateurs. And we will stay as long, at least as it is possible, by adhering to the principle of amateurism, no pay for playing.

I will be using a single contention for this case. I will refute my opponents case next round. I AM NOT CONCEDING HIS POINTS I SIMPLY WAITING FOR A RESPONSE BEFORE I REFUTE HIM.
Debate Round No. 1
greenwalde481

Pro

All I'm saying is that athletes are the ones who are doing all the work for their school and getting nothing in return except for playing the games they love. It's one thing for non-revenue sports, but some sports like football, hockey, soccer, and sometimes baseball have thousands of people coming to their games with extravagant amounts of money being spent on tickets at all of them. They are on TV, in advertisements for their schools and conferences, and are used as marketing tools for people to watch big games. Often student athletes are walking billboards for colleges and sponsors, yet they are compensated noting for their efforts except for the small percentage of them that receive athletic scholarships.
AshleysTrueLove

Con

I completely understand my opponents case, however I am sorry pro but you have provided no evidence that somehow if they were paid it wouldn't violate the principle of amatuarism. The problem with my opponents case is it is revolved around a notion of expecting something in return for work done but only takes monatary compensation as the only form of payment. The athletes are paid, the form of which is not always monatary. You can take money away but it is incredibly difficult to take knowledge away. Also my oppenent is in concession that they are paid even if it not be by the schools, therefore not violating the principle of amatuerism. My case is in clearly a refutation in of itself of my opponents case. The reason why athletes shouldn't be paid is because the reason they play has to be in accordance with the principle of amatuarism. Another problem is that my opponents case fails for the same reason pure conquestialism fails it undermines the intergrity of the person and in this case the game.
Debate Round No. 2
greenwalde481

Pro

greenwalde481 forfeited this round.
AshleysTrueLove

Con

I am so very sad to say my opponent has forfeited the round therefore please consider this in the conduct voting thank you and Vote Con :).
Debate Round No. 3
greenwalde481

Pro

I'm not saying that monetary compensation does not violate the terms of amateurism. However amateurism, in this sense, is taken to an extreme. The NCAA regulations regarding cases such as some Ohio State players exchanging autographed memorabilia for compensation brought upon severe consequences for those players. Not only did they nearly lose their eligibility to play for a while, but they were publicly embarrassed all over the news. They're allowed to be ridiculed like professionals but they can't sell an autograph. I'm sure sporting merchandise stores throughout Ohio have and still are cleaning up selling the same things that these kids were almost kicked out of school for selling. So tell me what the difference is? Times are changing and the way the media and the public holds some of these collegiate athletes to a higher social standard does not match up with the restrictions put on them. They're put on billboards and used on TV advertisements, they do interviews and talk to reporters, they are role models in their community and are looked up to by kids throughout the country, yet they're not allowed to benefit at all from all the good they do. 98% of student athletes do not end up going pro in their given sport. After its over for college it's over for good.
AshleysTrueLove

Con

I have a severe problem with my opponents argument besides the fact it misdefines amatuer principle. The resolution clearly states the athletes should be paid and my opponent seems to suggest in his first argument he is refering to the colleges themselves paying the athletes than you suggest that anyone or someone rather should pay them for something. Like I said they are currently being compensated in education and it is not nessarsary for them to compensated finicailly.I think changing intepration of the resolution should be grounds for disqualification. My opponent has fail to meet his BOP and asks questions of me. I answered the question in my argument so I would apprtiate if my opponent references my case. Is 98 percent an actual statistic or was that an estimate?
Debate Round No. 4
greenwalde481

Pro

It is an exact statistic, and I don't see you making any arguements besides "they get paid in education" and saying I should be disqualified; take it easy. You're right, there's a reason they call them student athletes and not the other way around but what's the difference from any other student getting extra compensation from their school? There are countless jobs for students where the college pays their salary. Athletes are providing a service to their school where the school benefits financially so therefore they should be paid, end of story. Athletics for most of these students is a full time job and they are already put at a disadvantage from everyone else by giving up their time for their school. You can say they get paid in scholarships and education all you want but the fact is only a small percentage of student athletes receive athletic scholarships. Colleges are exploiting their athletic programs for financial gains and in the end, the ones benefiting aren't the ones doing all the work.
AshleysTrueLove

Con

AshleysTrueLove forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
greenwalde481AshleysTrueLoveTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: CON is the only only that made a compelling case, and it seems as though pro dropped it. -__-