The Instigator
youngmsc2014
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
patrickbennett
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should College Athletes Be Paid?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,063 times Debate No: 40380
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

youngmsc2014

Con

College athletes should not be paid to go to or perform in college. If they receive money to attend and perform at a college or university then they will have successfully removed their amateur status meaning that they are at a professional level. Because they will be categorized as professionals they would not be allowed to perform at the collegiate level meaning that not only should college athletes not be paid, but they physically cannot be paid. In fact, in a sense college athletes are being paid to play sports in college. They are paid with a college education. They are putting in hours of work and preparation for their respective sport and in return they are receiving a full scholarship. If they received anything above and beyond this scholarship then they would be removing their amateur status. It is not fair for them to make money for playing sports in college while on scholarship and in general college athletes should not be paid. Clearly this rule of not being allowed to make money off of your athletic ability in college has been put in place for a reason and is working effectively.
patrickbennett

Pro

I believe that college athletes should not have a designated salary like a professional, but they should be able to collect money for items such as jerseys and autographs. They are bringing in so much money for the school because of their athletic ability and the school is paying them to be there with education which is fine, but there should not be a rule not allowing them to sell themselves. With the fame they receive while playing they have a chance to make a profit, but the NCAA does not allow it because it takes away there amateur status. If the players could sell themselves with items such as jerseys and autographs then they might stay in college longer instead of going to the pros and therefore change the landscape of college sports.
Debate Round No. 1
youngmsc2014

Con

I disagree. I don't think college athletes should be able to make money off of merchandise becasue once again that is making money for playing a college sport. While they do bring in an excess of money for their respective university or college, most of that is from merchandise. If you allow athletes to collect money from selling merchandise such as a jersey or memorabilia then the school will not receive as much money from their athletic programs which would result in higher tuition costs and less college students enrolling in school. By allowing athletes to collect that money they are not only removing their amateur status but also directly hurting the university and the country ultimately because less student may not be able to attend college with the higher tuition costs. Also, the athletes can make money in the professional leagues so if they can wait a year or two of not making money, like the rest of the students, then they will get their opportunity to sell themselves. They are first and foremost students, so they should be attending school as a primary reason to go to college. With that said, if they wanted to make money then they should go professional as soon as possible. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as it keeps people interested in college sports because they want to see who the new best athlete is. If athletes could sell their own merchandise, schools would suffer, society would suffer, and the college atmosphere would decline. College athletes should in no way make money or risk the downfall of major establishments.
patrickbennett

Pro

If college players were able to get paid then they would stay in the sport longer. So instead of getting one year out of them the college would get four years, and even with the amount of money the player would receive from sales, the amount the school gets to keep would be a lot more than just a one and done year with the athletes and all of the profits going to the school. Also if the student athlete's primary job is education then the addition of finance would help them grow in their education. They would learn how to manage their money that they made while in a safe environment instead of all of a sudden getting multi-million dollar contracts and being sent out into the world. so now instead of hearing about the Allen Iversons of the world who spend one year unpaid in college and then go out to the real world make millions, and then lose it, you would now have well educated college students with degrees who know how to manage their money. With their money well managed they can give back to the community which would therefore improve society. College athletes should be paid because it would increase school money, create a more educated society, help them manage their money, and help the community.
Debate Round No. 2
youngmsc2014

Con

False. The money a college athlete would make by selling merchandise over four years is nothing compared to what they would make in their first three years of playing professional ball. With that said it is in the best intrest of the student athlete who wants to make money to go strait to the professional level because that's where they would make the most money. Also, colleges would make more money with a one and done because people would have to buy new shirts every year as the player whose shirt they used to have no longer plays at the university. So if the player wanted to make a cut of the schools money from merchandise it would be in the best intrest of the university to let him or her go pro. Its just another reason that college athletes should not be paid because they would be taking away money from their university. If they want money they should enter a draft and go professional this way they make more money, the university makes more money, and they aren't breaking any rules. Your analogy to Allen Iverson is accurate but not always true. Ever heard of someone who wins the lottery and blows it all? Well those people, not all but most, had some sort of income no matter how small and they lost all of their money. Therefore, just because he/she has no experience with a lot of money does not mean that they would lose it all because those who won the lottery and lost it all knew how to deal with money. In fact, the majority of all athletes don't lose their money and look, they didn't make money in college. The statistics are in my favor. It is very rare to come across a student athlete who loses all of their money immediately after turning pro. College athletes should not be paid because if they want to make money they should turn pro, it will benefit them, the university, and society financially, all while staying within the rules.
patrickbennett

Pro

College athletes need to be paid. Last year the NCAA made over 870 Billion dollars, but they did not need to pay any of the players. I understand that some people's opinion would be "Well they are getting an education so that's their payment", but what happens if they get injured? once they get injured they lose their scholarship and now need to pay for their education on their own. Even you need to agree that a large amount of the NCAA athletes are not the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree and will not be able to get an academic scholarship. But here is a good idea!!!! the athletes can just get jobs! that way they can get money and have some sort of income right? False. The NCAA restricts its athletes from having a job because they do not want them cashing out with any benefits for being a player. But why don't they go to the pro's and be an athlete there? I'm sure for players such as Jabari Parker. But hey i mean some players are getting paid aren't they? Just look at the Michigan Fab Five. They got one of the best recruiting classes ever and went to the championship twice, sounds almost like cheating huh... Well that's because it was. Players on the Michigan team were getting cash benefits from boosters. So if you want to build a super team just pay them and then nobody will know! you will attract all the star athletes and your team will be unstoppable. How about the NCAA pays the athletes so then the game will not be tainted with super teams formed because of player's interest in financial benefits.
Debate Round No. 3
youngmsc2014

Con

College athletes should not be paid let alone "need" to be paid. Does every student in college "need" to be paid? No. The reason that the NCAA did not need to pay the players is becasue they are a business and have expenses and other ways to spend their money. They have employees, advertising, and other expenses that the money goes towards. Also the NCAA is a non-profit so they are in business to regulate collegiate sports not to make money. The money they make gets poured into scholarships, future year's business, and a cushion so they don't collapse. If they get injured then they should have to pay the school to go to college. Why wouldn't they? If a student is on scholarship and they do not maintain high grades than they are stripped of their scholarship and have to pay the school. In both scenarios the students are stripped of their scholarships for not performing. One is physically they can't perform, and one is they aren't performing, either way they aren't doing what the college is paying them to do. Not everyone who attends college is awarded an academic scholarship, so those athletes who aren't the brightest bulbs need to put in the hard work academically to achieve a scholarship. If they put the same amount of effort into school as they do sports then maybe they will get a scholarship espically since they will have so much time because they can't play their sport. IF THEY SUFFERED A CAREER ENDING INJURY AND WERE STRIPPED OF THEIR SCHOLARSHIP THEN GUESS WHAT, THEY WOULDN'T BE A COLLEGE ATHLETE ANYMORE AND WOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE TEAM FOR HEALTHIER STUDENTS. With that said, the NCAA cannot restrict a normal college student from going out and getting a job because that is out of their jurisdiciton. SO TRUE. They should go out and get a job like every other college student to off set some of the cost they will be taking on as a STUDENT. If you pay the athletes money to come to your school it will be revealed to the public sooner or later and will come back to bite you in the you know where so no school is going to do that. They would lose money, scholarships, and a chance at a championship. Just look at John Calipari. He has coached many teams to the Final Four and guess what, he technically has only coached two teams to the Final Four becasue he cheated and they found out. If the NCAA paid the athletes then collegiate sports would be corrupt and the players would have all of the leverage. Look at the NBA lockout, the NHL lockout, or the NFL lockout. All of which resulted from paid players rebelling against the head of their leagues looking for more money. This would happen only on a scale 105 times larger. The total number of athletes in the four major sports is roughly 4000. The total number of student athletes playing a college sport reaches roughly 420000. If you had to pay each an every one of them you would either be in debt or eventually be in debt when they come knocking on your door demanding more money. If the NCAA paid the players they would be in debt, super teams would still form because they are getting their money so they can go wherever they want, and the players would lose sight of why they are even in college, to get an education not make money. They are in college to make money in the future not now, or at least it is not a priority. The NCAA has these rules for a reason, its fair, realistic, and it works. College athletes should not be paid or at least not for the reasons you mentioned above.
patrickbennett

Pro

Paying college athletes would completely change the landscape of the game. Look at the absolutely, wonderful, amazing, untouchable 2013 recruiting class of Kentucky for basketball. They received 5 out of the top 9 recruits. Since there is no money involved they were all able to go to the same school and that school didn't need to worry about costs or anything to have an amazing recruiting class. Now lets see what happens if there is money involved... Do you think that the top recruits will all go to the same place..? of course not, no school would be able to afford them. if one school cant afford all of the superstars then that allows for more teams to grab hold of individual superstars. Now i can understand the issue of a salary for a collegiate athlete, but they should get money for their individual achievements. Lets use the greatest quarterback to walk the face of the earth as an example, Johnny Football. He won the Heisman last year, the school was awarded money, all he got from his stellar, unrivaled, unmatched, amazing performance was a trophy and a hug from his mom. He should be entitled to that money just as if a student won a cash prize for academics. Not only do colleges make money off the game itself, but off the players individually and the players do not see a dime of it. College athletes should be payed for their hard work, and to keep the landscape of the game fair.
Debate Round No. 4
youngmsc2014

Con

youngmsc2014 forfeited this round.
patrickbennett

Pro

patrickbennett forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.