College athletics has become a fast increasing industry in America. The athletes play for educational institutes, get quality education and bring revenues for the college. While they do good job for the college image and ranking, they are paid well by the educational institutes they are enrolled in and they play for. There are people that believe that for they bring multi-billion dollars to educational sector each year, athletes should be paid more (Skoning, 2013) while others believe that college athletes are already paid enough. The advocates of either point need to see the deeper implications to understand what will be the impact of changing payment regulations on the American educational institutes.
It is debated since some time if the regulations regarding payment of college athletes should be changed or not. The point of concern is that how will any potential change in regulations, probably paying more to the athletes than present, affect the collegiate institution in the United States?
Changing the payment of college athletes is not easy and simple since it involves complex procedures and getting approvals from several different authorities. However, to bring an effective change in regulations, the two primary alterations can be to shift the principle point of higher learning from education to generating capital, and also to develop an unfair disadvantage based on financial means in terms of quality of collegiate athletic competition. While the student wants to get quality education as well as to pay for the college, the college needs to pay twice for the student. The college pays him his educational dues and the share in revenue he earned for the college. The college as well as the athlete should be fairly compensated yet there should be an unfair disadvantage that the athlete should get single privilege. He should either be offered quality higher education or paid enough in cash. Thus it will be easier for the college to manage its budget.
The college students that play at commercial events for the educational institutes are the golden egg laying bird for school. They are an asset that is acquired after long sessions of attracting talent. However, the athletes are often paid less thus they need to work harder. This shifts their concentration form getting education plus paying to making money only. Many nonprofit organizations are concerned about this trend thus require a full analysis and investigation of the issue. They suggest that there must be competition between the college players and they should be offered unfair disadvantage. Thus, paying higher to more competent and lesser to less competent players.
Shifting the concern from offering quality education to athletes to earning money will offer concentration and focus to the athlete on sports. He will have less pressure to perform high in education and more on performing well in sports. The student will thus be required only to pass in college but excel in what he is good at i.e. sports. Thus there are chances that this unipolar life of an athlete will be much more effective. The students that play for colleges find it hard often to choose difficult subject and thus lenient regulations of selection of subjects might make things easier for him. Selecting not very high quality educational facilities will be an economical choice since college will have to bear fewer burdens. Thus without changing regulations regarding payment of collegiate athletes the problem can be solved.
Shifting the focus to commercial and professional sports will be quite advantageous for the college and athlete. The colleges feel that they pay more than what they receive in return. Thus earning overall more might compensate the college too. Yet there is a chance that college will still feel not compensated enough. For that, the investigation on college earning via sports can be measured. However, there might be moral implications of doing so because commercializing the sports far beyond current level may sacrifice the basic quality education need of the student.
Regulating college athletics can be done by either the state departments involved in regulating education or the private bodies. One such body is NCAA or National Collegiate Athletic Association. This organization is nonprofit venture including above 1200 organizations and bodies working on athletic programs in colleges and universities of the United States and Canada. The body focuses on paying the athletes fairly even if they get nothing as school scholarships.
Commercial Sponsors might ruin the essence of education
NCCA believes that an athlete cannot have eternal sports life. He has to retire one day and when he does, it should be ensured that the athlete has quality education that will serve him rest of his life. The NCAA eligibility requires commitment to academic achievement and adherence to member-created rules. The student is eligible as long as he is able to display higher educational and athletic skills (NCAA Eligibility, 2013). Thus to NCAA it is more vital that the student should graduate at any cost.
When the college athlete is paid more, he is encouraged to focus more on the athletics ignoring the education. What should be, says NCAA that the student should have a balanced focus on both. He should work hard on his athletics for current professional gains but should also ensure that he is earning his future after retirement. The athlete should be allowed to live a normal live that is balanced between current and future life and professional and educational career.
Directing Commercial Revenues
While it is recommended not to increase the athletes’ payments, which is the answer to the question of the paper; it is also a matter to be investigated how the revenues from commercial athletics are being used. NCAA believes that a right investigation on the issue will reveal that the athlete earns much more for the college than he is paid. It is to be noted that this investigation is not meant for telling that the athlete should be paid more for the revenue he earns for the college. Rather, the investigation is to be carried out from the prospect that the college should bear the entire burden on the training and grooming of the athlete since he is the talent and asset of the college. The college should ensure that right amount is invested on the student athlete so that he can serve better and have highest possible display of educational and athletic performance.
Impact of not altering the athlete payments
Athletics is institutionalized in America. Every athlete is thus a responsibility of state and the institution he plays for. Every Athlete is required to get admission in college and colleges also have a quota or reserved seats for the athletes. The American institutes are far more organized for sports than any others. The issue of altering or not the payments of athletes is thus much more sensitive for American educational institutions than anyone else. Changing the payment of athletes in one state would mean changing payments all over the country. There are state and private organizations that work in several states to ensure the quality of athletics as well-being of the athlete.
American educational institutes are already paying enough to athletes in the form of cash, training and sponsorships. There is already so much done that the college athletes are quite commercial and make up one of most profitable and glamorous industries. The colleges will benefit form not altering the payments to the athletes since the athletes will adhere to the set performance standards and will learn to live in the budgets of college. The colleges will thus keep investing the extra revenue on college development and training facilities.
The most evident advantage of not changing the payment system will be on the athlete himself. He will be able to live a disciplined life. Increase in payments of athletes…