The Instigator
Scorchtheblaze
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Meropenem777
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

Should college athletes be payed like professional athletes?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 2 votes the winner is...
Meropenem777
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/16/2015 Category: Sports
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 771 times Debate No: 81054
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Scorchtheblaze

Con

I've tried to do this debate for the longest amount of time and every single time I've found someone to debate with, something came up and it prevented me from doing any round of the debate.

1st time - Malware virus
2nd time - Computer broke and I could not access another computer

I do not believe that college athletes should be played for playing a sport like professional athletes do since they're only playing for a school team rather than a national team.

I look forward to this debate with someone and I hope that we have a wonderful argument.
Meropenem777

Pro

Hello, I look forward to debating with you. This is my first debate on Debate.org, so I will probably will not be the most eloquent debater, but I have certainly had some experience debating.

On a personal note, I am attending college right now as a freshman, and I was hesitating on whether to do inter-collegiate swim or not. I factored in my decision, how much class time I would miss with my undergraduate classes and homework as well as meet schedules. I was also somewhat concerned with the fact that no credit is given for being on the team, so it is completely optional. I had decided not to do swimming in college, because I could still enjoy the swimming competitively as an intramural sport and as a club sport. At the same time, I could also be flexible with my schedule for classes and homework along with social activities.

Now, if someone were to ask me whether college athletes should be payed like professional athletes, I would have to think about that for a while. Personally, I feel that if you love a sport, then you should not twist that love with greed. Though, if I would be getting paid to do a sport, I certainly would have considered that as a factor for doing swimming as an inter-collegiate sport. I also think that perhaps there is a distinct difference between having a love/passion for a sport in contrast with having it as an occupation. You do not have to do inter-collegiate sports if you have a love for a sport. If you think that way as you are deciding, you are limiting your options. People who do inter-collegiate sports may have either a passion for the sport or have a desire for it as an occupation, or both. The fact remains though, that they are going way beyond what is asked of them in terms of their schedule for how class times, practice times, and meet times tend to conflict.

There are ,as you probably know, 3 divisions for an inter-collegiate sport. Division 1 is usually the division who has most popularity in the ratings, and sometimes division 2 teams compete against division 1 teams. As far as revenue, it is football and basketball who are the prime money producers compared to other inter-collegiate sports. A university such as BYU had made a profit of "$5.5 million" off of inter-collegiate sports (Wikipedia). So, funds can certainly be allocated for creating a salary for the players, or give them an additional benefit of some sort. It should be noted that cash is not the only method of paying someone. The NCAA had already approved a policy that ensured that players receive free and unlimited meals and snacks (Wikipedia).

Of course, the revenue stated previously is not sufficient enough to pay for the amount a professional athlete's salary is usually equivalent to, especially for top players that earn millions of dollars. However, the question states whether college athletes should be paid "like" professional athletes. Meaning that what is being questioned is not how much they are paid, but how they are paid. NBA players for basketball are generally paid based on their stats, popularity, leadership, and loyalty to a team. This same method of payment is possible to implement into inter-collegiate sports. The primary difference would be that it would be a system of lower salary proportions than professional salaries, but is nevertheless, financially capable of being implemented.

I will stop debating for now, and look forward to hearing what you have to say about this matter. Thanks for posting a question about this issue.

Sources utilized: https://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Scorchtheblaze

Con

I would like to think pro for accepting this debate and I look forward to a great debate.

We've seen college athletes go out and perform every singe week for those watching at home and those actually watching in real life and we have all seen them go out and play their sport, so what's so different between them and a professional athlete? College athletes are just like any other athlete, they play a sport, they exercise, and they're known by almost everyone in the country, just like a professional athlete. The one thing that actually separates these two groups is a paycheck worth millions and people will fight and say their son or daughter deserves a paycheck since they do the exact same thing as famous athletes around the country. I am here to show the voters that this is a false statement and that college athletes should not be paid like famous athletes do.

The life of a college athlete starts in the last couple years of elementary school or the first year of middle school when they decide they want to go out and join a sports team. You don't hear any complaining from the parents about a paycheck when they're in middle school. Fast forward to high school where that same kid is still playing the same sport that he started when he was in middle school and they're getting sports scholarships for the college that they want to go to. You still hear no arguing from the parents about a paycheck when they're receiving these scholarships. Now lets go to college where that high schooler is now a college athlete with his whole career set in front of him. There's just one problem, what is he receiving for playing a sport in college? He's receiving nothing and now his parents are mad that the school is not giving him anything in return for playing a sport.

College athletes go out and play their sport as hard as they can and then they come back and complain to the university because they aren't getting paid. According to Molly Block of The University Star, college athletes should not be paid because "It would be unfair to the other students if the university paid athletes to play college sports." This shows one reason universities don't want to pay college athletes since it would make the other students feel inferior to the college athletes.

Another thing that affects this debate is the amount of money the athlete rakes in due to the scholarships that he/she earns from high school sports teams. It would cost more money for the university to pay their college athletes thousands upon thousands of dollars to play a sport that they've been playing since high school.

Theres an old saying that goes something like this, "money is the root to all evil." If you were going to pay an eighteen or nineteen year old college athlete thousands of dollars, its going to go that athletes head and they're going to think that they can do anything and they would just be able to buy their way out of it. For example, Aaron Hernandez, former New England Patriot, was sentenced to life in prison without parole. This doesn't sound like it goes along with the topic until you learn that Aaron Hernandez began his crime spree when he was in college since he was being offered a large amount of money from the New England Patriots and thought he could get away with anything.

If you were going to pay college athletes, you would dig yourself a little hole for your university because after a while, that university would run out of money. If you were to pay college athletes, you'd be ruining their life by making them think they can do anything they want and get away with it.

Sources

https://star.txstate.edu......

http://www.delawareonline.com......

http://www.usnews.com......
Meropenem777

Pro

It seems that you have either not read my arguments, or purposefully ignored some of my arguments as for why college athletes should be payed like professional athletes. However, I will assume your input in the last round was merely you creating a main argument, and so I will refute your arguments.

You are correct, one characteristic that separates professional athletes from college athletes is that professional athletes are payed millions of dollars. However, as I stated in my previous arguments, it college athletes can be payed "like" professional athletes. That wording can be interpreted as in what method should be used in terms of assigning a salary for college athletes. As I stated earlier, "NBA players for basketball are generally paid based on their stats, popularity, leadership, and loyalty to a team." If that statement is not enough for you, then I will provide the source of where I gained that information.(http://prntscr.com... ) (Author: Robert Clee).

"The life of a college athlete starts in the last couple years of elementary school or the first year of middle school when they decide they want to go out and join a sports team." You are incorrect, it starts whenever they decide to play in a college sport whether it is inter-collegiate, a college club sport, or an intramural sport in college ( I do not want to seem like a bully, sorry, but that really is important to initially state). You have not made it clear of whether you are talking about any of those three, however, that is not as important as some other mishaps.

Your arguments have not refuted the fact that it is "financially capable" with the type of program I had been talking about in my initial arguments. I stated that "it would be a system of lower salary proportions than professional salaries, but is nevertheless, financially capable of being implemented", it does not matter if it is in the same proportions as a fast food restaurant fry cook's salary, IT IS financially capable of being implemented. Colleges like BYU make a profit of $5.5 million of which the expenses of $35 million are deducted from a revenue of $41 million. The way things are being managed is virtually equivalent to that of a business. Arguably though, these are only applicable to certain college sports that are popular like men's college basketball and football, but the program itself is certainly applicable in paying monetary salaries to even the lowest of wages, as well as perhaps coexisting with the NCAA's policy of "paying" college athletes with free food.

"It would be unfair to the other students if the university paid athletes to play college sports." ? Well, other students who have much more free time have the option of becoming employed in a business or getting an internship for their major in order to gain experience to be hired respectively to the occupations they choose. Inter-collegiate athletes arguably do not have this kind of time since most of them have conflicts with practice, classes, and homework among other college activities.

Some college athletes arguably may have received scholarships, but not all of them are that fortunate. It would not cost the university "thousands upon thousands of dollars to play a sport" with the program that I mentioned in this round and in the last round. Though, why should they be paid any amount for playing inter-collegiate sports? Because of the reasons I listed earlier concerning their schedules as they have much more limited opportunities compared to their peers.

Regarding the person Aaron Hernandez you mentioned, that is irrelevant to this argument because we do not know his motives for his crime. (quote on quote)"Money is the root to all evil"? I am only debating my argument in terms of fairness for the athletes and not whether that is true or not. In my opinion though, your reference to an attack on money is pointless, irrelevant, and naive. Currency is valuable for helping our economy progress, because otherwise, if we did not have currency, then we would arguably still be living in the stone age.

Sources utilized:

http://www.streetdirectory.com...

https://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Scorchtheblaze

Con

Scorchtheblaze forfeited this round.
Meropenem777

Pro

My opponent private messaged me saying he will purposefully forfeit this round and likely the next round as well. No hard feelings mate, though if you want to make a come back in the next round, that is still an option.
Debate Round No. 3
Scorchtheblaze

Con

I shall hereby forfeit this round and hand the round over to Pro.
Meropenem777

Pro

Alright, then there is nothing more to say really. Except for saying good match/debate, and nothing less than that.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Meropenem777 1 year ago
Meropenem777
MY POINTS WERE NOT EVEN REBUTTED (Sorry, just saying) =/
Posted by Meropenem777 1 year ago
Meropenem777
"There were times where it seemed a bit that pro was agruing in favor of con..." ,These are called counter arguments, you learn something new every day =D (jk)
Posted by Meropenem777 1 year ago
Meropenem777
@TK57
I kind of don't think you understood what I was saying. I clarified the main points not simply in the 1st round, but the 2nd round as well.
Posted by Meropenem777 1 year ago
Meropenem777
Wow, lol, was not expecting that vote at all. Based on the comments, it does not look like scorch was expecting that either since he "forfeited" -_- ...
Posted by Scorchtheblaze 1 year ago
Scorchtheblaze
Well you gotta think, these athletes receive scholarships from universities which helps them pay off some things for college and they always have that chance of enrolling themselves in a draft of some sort and getting payed millions upon millions of dollars to play that same sport that they grew up loving.
Posted by sansvoix 1 year ago
sansvoix
I'm halfway between the two - College Athletes should be paid, but enough that they can get by playing the sport and have savings in case their career doesn't work out, just like European youth academies for association football.
Posted by Scorchtheblaze 1 year ago
Scorchtheblaze
It's open challenge, anyone can accept
Posted by John_Royals 1 year ago
John_Royals
Can I challenge this?
Posted by ZacGraphics 1 year ago
ZacGraphics
I disagree too. College Football players should play out of the love for the sport, not for the money like some NFL players.

Good luck to both Pro and Con.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Valladarex 1 year ago
Valladarex
ScorchtheblazeMeropenem777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: First off, Con forfeited the debate, so points to go pro. Secondly, the arguments from pro were far more convincing than cons. Con's argument that college students would feel inferior to athletes in their skill is unsubstantiated and isn't convincing. His other argument that college athletes would be more prone to doing violent activity is unrealistic, and his sketchy anecdotal evidence doesn't help his case. Pro's case that college athletes could be "paid based on their stats, popularity, leadership, and loyalty to a team" is a much more convincing argument than any of con's. Pro gets the full points for his convincing arguments, good sources, and on the account that con forfeited.
Vote Placed by TK57 1 year ago
TK57
ScorchtheblazeMeropenem777Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: There were times where it seemed a bit that pro was agruing in favor of con. Also, some of pros agruments were a bit confusing. Nevertheless, both sides were great and it was a pleasure to read.