Analysis: Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

Words: 542
Pages: 3

When we look at college athletics, the amount of money they generate is astronomical. Schools bring in money through, ticket sales, merchandise sales, and food sales (Keolanui). When you have these incomes on a consistent basis throughout the year, the school has the potential to make a large some of money. If they play to their loyalty factor, of fans being loyal to their team based on residency or attendance, then the market increases even more. It is now not only the people who attend events, but people all over the country who are now supporting these teams and the school. By giving some of this money back to different athletes, a school can recruit better players and make money off of the teams success proportionally. This sum is so large, that many universities claim that without revenue from sports, like football, then the school would dwindle because of the funds available for both supporting the university expenses, share holders, and the amount of academic scholarships. This is one of the reasons I feel that division I athletes should be paid. It is not fair, in my mind, that the student should not be compensated for what they are doing for the …show more content…
One example of this can be seen in the NCAA. During the 2011-2012 school year, the NCAA generated a total of 871.6 million dollars in revenue. This money was then distributed among the athletes, with the universities only keeping about 40% of the money (Morgan). This is a model for how the division I athletics could be structured. The NCAA is much smaller than division I athletics, so the money generated would be even more. This is another reason that I feel so strongly about this topic. This is a large sum of money that is going towards outside sources that may not always be used productively within the university. By paying athletics, programs cannot only grow but athletes will be accurately