The Instigator
Bcoleman04
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

Should college athletes get 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 2 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/3/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,176 times Debate No: 41509
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Bcoleman04

Con

College athletes are already getting paid with their education. They get $20,000-$50,000 per year just for their education alone. They also get gear, meal plans, facilities, travel, and so much more along with it. That is more than the average American makes yearly. So why give them any more money? Many say that cannot go get a job, but their sport is not all year long. There are many seasons where athletes can still go get a job, if they would like. If athletes get paid and are already on a scholarship...Why not pay academic scholarships then? They work hard as well and must keep up with their grades. Also, athletes have an easier chance of going pro, and have no debt to pay off when they leave college. There is no purpose to pay them, when they already get so much already payed for. It was also their choice to play a sport, and they signed up for that commitment. The sport should be an add-on with the free education, not a technical job.
Ore_Ele

Pro

Please note that in the comments section that my opponent stated that they will be arguing for the status quo (this was a stipulation of taking the debate and so it part of the debate). As such I will be arguing against the status quo, I will not be arguing for only students getting paid by schools (if that at all), but rather that they should be allowed to be compensated for their athletic performances from alternative sources.

Let me start by arguing why it is wrong to continue with the current path of students not being allowed to be compensated for their work. I will follow that with an outlined plan of a better option that will allow them to be compensated, generate revenue for the schools, and have limitations to help prevent the money and success from going to kids' heads and corrupting them.



=== Issues with current system ===

The current system states that students cannot be paid at all for work, nor their image as a result of their work. This means that their coaches nor school cannot pay them at all with any assets, even with food [1]. This also means that they are not allowed to sell their own autographs, while others are allowed to do so all the time (there are entire stores that do nothing but sell autographs of players [2], this store alone has over 27,000 college items). Technically, the rules state that no player can give their autographs to anyone that they know will profit off of it, but the NCAA only enforces this against family and friends [3]. It cares not if you spend 4 hours signing stuff for a single individual that will hawk them on ebay, so long as you make no money.

Players can be awarded scholarships from schools to pay for their schooling and board, but this does not cover food or other general living expenses. As Arian Foster said, reflecting back on his years in Tennessee [1]...

"There were plenty of times where throughout the month I didn't have enough for food," Foster said in the 90-minute documentary. "Our stadium had like 107,000 seats; 107,000 people buying a ticket to come watch us play. It's tough just like knowing that, being aware of that. We had just won and I had a good game, 100 yards or whatever You go outside and there's hundreds of kids waiting for you. You're signing autographs, taking pictures, whatever. Then I walk back, and reality sets in. I go to my dorm room, open my fridge, and there's nothing in my fridge. Hold up, man. What just happened? Why don't I have anything to show for what I just did? There was a point where we had no food, no money, so I called my coach and I said, 'Coach, we don't have no food. We don't have no money. We're hungry. Either you give us some food, or I'm gonna go do something stupid.' He came down and he brought like 50 tacos for like four or five of us. Which is an NCAA violation."

With the time it takes for schooling and practice, getting a job to add on to all of that is not a practical solution (until we discover a way to never need to sleep). But, whatever way you look at it, such a system is not just. From a rights/free-market/capitalist point of view, an adult (of which the vast majority of players are 18 or older and so adults) should be able to negotiate any pay for their labor. From a liberal/labor/socialist point of view, no one should be getting rich of the labor of someone else.

=== A better alternative ===

One very large market is the selling of autographs, imagines, and likeness of a player. At the moment players cannot be compensated for this at all, while others are allowed to make bank off them. Players would be allowed to sell their autographs to anyone at any price. The restrictions would be that whatever they sell, half goes to them, half goes to the school's athletic program up until the player makes $50,000 a year ( with the fiscal year based on school year, rather than calendar year). If they continue to sell above that, half still goes to the school, and the players half will instead go into a trust fund that the student gets once they graduate. The $50,000 a year is an arbitrary number that is free to adjust based on the economy and inflation.

One concern with players getting paid is that many fear that the fame already has a very corrupting influence and adding money in with that is only going to make it worse (as we see with so many child movie, TV, and music stars). However, putting a humble limit on the amount that they can put in their pocket right away will allow them to feed themselves and have a decent life style without being so much that have any real corrupting influence. It also allows money to be put away for future use. which is something that athletes (and everyone in general) has a hard time doing [4].

I will end with this and let my opponent present his argument.

Thank you,

[1] http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com...
[2] http://www.sportsmemorabilia.com...
[3] http://sports.yahoo.com...
[4] http://www.munknee.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Bcoleman04

Con

Bcoleman04 forfeited this round.
Ore_Ele

Pro

Well, bump this to the final round.
Debate Round No. 2
Bcoleman04

Con

Bcoleman04 forfeited this round.
Ore_Ele

Pro

/end debate
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Bcoleman04 3 years ago
Bcoleman04
Its fine. I re-submitted it.
Posted by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
Sorry, I wasn't able to get back on in time after you answered the question but before the debate reset. If you want to re-submit the debate, I'll take the challenge.
Posted by Bcoleman04 3 years ago
Bcoleman04
Yes. Status Quo. Sorry for not clarifying that.
Posted by noprisu 3 years ago
noprisu
Exactly my question Ore. I would accept if he was.
Posted by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
Will you be arguing for the status quo then? Which includes that they cannot get compensation from their autographs (which would be between them and 3rd parties, not their schools).
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Bcoleman04Ore_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con started a debate and did not argue anything and as such loses the debate. Also I found Pros arguments interesting and rational that people should get paid, especially when others are making large money of off them. The sources Pro used get the sources points. Conduct points go to Pro who did not forfeit. Spelling and Grammar is tied as Con has decent grammar while the debate was on.
Vote Placed by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
Bcoleman04Ore_EleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: no rebuttals!