College Football Financial Dynamics | Should Student Athletes Be Paid?

One of the hottest debate topics for the better part of the past decade has been whether or not college students should be paid for participating in college football. At the heart of this conversation are proponents who indicate that college students work hard to hone their craft and make tons of money for their institutions, and paying them is only fair. 

On the other hand, there are those who believe that paying college football athletes destroys the amateurish appeal of college athletics. In this article, we take a balanced look at both sides of the debate and examine the arguments for and against remunerating college students. 

Why Shouldn’t College Students Be Paid 

Most of the arguments presented against paying college football athletes are anchored on the challenges and implications that are likely to arise in the case of a paid athlete system. Here are some notable reasons given to explain why college students shouldn’t be remunerated:

• College Footballers Already Have Scholarships 

Existing scholarship arrangements are one of the most frequently used arguments by those opposed to paying college football players for their hard work. The argument is that some college footballers already get scholarships as a result of their athlete status, some of which go to cover college tuition and related academic expenses. Those who support this view believe that scholarships are already intended to compensate students for their hard work. That said, students may still need money for other expenses, including getting assignments from platforms like EssayUSA. 

• Financial Strain on Schools 

Some people argue against paying college football players based on the assumption that such a policy would put an unnecessary strain on the schools’ resources. According to recent data, some schools spend more on college football than they get in terms of revenue. Paying athletes would mean that such colleges would have to restructure their budgets and reprioritize their expenditures. 

• It Destroys Amateurism 

One of the main attractions of college football is the amateurism with which the game is played. In having laws against paying college athletes, the NCAA sought to enhance the spirit of amateurism within the sport. The assumption is that people would be less thrilled to watch college football if they felt athletes were being paid to do the work. Remember, the core of college football is athletes playing for the love of the game and the honor of their teams. 

Why Should College Athletes Get Paid?

There are many reasons why college students need to be paid for the training and work that goes into producing the skills they display. Here are some important ones:

• College Athletes Make Colleges a Lot

Evidence shows that college football generates billions in revenue for colleges, sponsors, and networks. Huge sums can be made from publicity and advertisement, most of which historically don’t benefit those whose images, likeliness, and names are featured therein. For instance, evidence shows that last year, the NCAA Division 1 made over 16 billion and only about 20% made its way back to student-athletes as scholarships and medical treatment. Since college students bring in money, it only makes sense that they benefit from a part of the money they work hard to generate. Based on the current system, it can be argued that college football exploits student-athletes 

• College Football Is Demanding 

The truth is that participating in college football is often so demanding that students don’t have room for other engagements like getting a part-time job. Of course, the cost of attending college is rising, and it often makes sense for students to make things easier by getting part-time gigs. However, those participating in college football have so much work to do that creating room for work can be challenging. There are training sessions to attend, gyms to be part of, and drills to rehearse. Paying these athletes makes sense as it allows them to afford living costs like rent, food, and textbooks. 

• Helps With Transparency 

Some argue that paying college students for their work increases transparency about the money generated. Since college football teams have budgets, there is already some degree of understanding of where the money comes from and how much is available. However, spending details tend to be murky, and most football players remain in the dark. Paying athletes is a way to ensure that the money generated is invested back into the sport. 

• Attracts Better Talent

Paying athletes a decent amount would make college football attractive to the most talented individuals. The sport is already highly competitive and adding the element of remuneration will only raise the bar higher. Many promising athletes choose not to pursue college sports because there is nothing worth looking forward to. Paying athletes would offer an incredible incentive to attract a higher caliber of sportsmen and women. 

• Grows College Brand Reputations 

There is no denying that colleges with renowned football teams attract considerable revenue and are in demand during admission seasons. College football brings in more than just revenue. They attract applications from top students, which makes these athletes revered brand ambassadors. Colleges that have well-performing teams are popular and in high demand. Remember, colleges with a more competitive applicant pool can increase tuition and accommodation fees in line with the rising demand. 

College football is an expensive investment and those at the heart of the sport should be given priority. While some of the arguments against paying college footballers seem valid, these sportspeople invest heavily in their skills and fitness. Remunerating them for their hard work is only fair given the kind of revenue they generate. The hours they put in are crazy and not getting compensated for the dedication seems unfair.