How will money change college athletes’ passion for the sport they play? With colleges now starting to pay athletes based on their endorsements and public image, there are possible good outcomes; however, the negatives outweigh the positives.
According to Katie McInerey, a writer for The Boston Globe, some of the ways college athletes would be getting paid are through sponsored social media posts, training lessons, and autographs.. Secondary sports, such as gymnastics and track, would suffer from this sponsorship because out of 1,100 colleges governed by the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association), only 25 schools had a positive net revenue, which means they are making more money than they are paying to do business. In the article, “Should College Athletes Be Paid” by Mark J. Drozdowski, he said, “A likely scenario would involve universities cutting minor sports to pay athletes competing in the marquee sports. So while a few athletes would benefit financially, a greater number of students would see their athletic opportunities disappear.”
Furthermore, wealthier universities would benefit more than other schools. “Universities best positioned to pay athletes top dollar would win bidding wars and recruiting battles against institutions with limited budgets,” said Drowdowski. Games wouldn’t be as competitive to some teams and would be unfair to some colleges due to them winning, bidding and recruiting wars to have higher budgets.
Money would also take away from the love of the game. Drowdowski said, “College students should participate in sports for the love of the game, not for financial gain, following the long-forgotten credo held dear by Olympic athletes.” A lot of players would go for the money and wouldn’t appreciate the game like they did before they got paid to play. College wouldn’t just be about competing to see who is the best: it would be just athletes trying to make money.
Although paying college athletes poses some issues, there are some good things that money will do for college athletes. They are getting compensated for giving their school valuable exposure. This can help schools in the future get more skilled players. Other good things include athletes getting paid for the risk of potential injury could possibly damage them for life depending on the injury. In an article from Fox Sports, a player named Stanley Doughty was a defensive tackle who went to South Carolina. He played for the Gamecocks when he suffered a career ending injury in college. Doughty damaged his spine in one of the plays he was involved in. He still suffers from chest and deltoid pain when he tilts his head back. This shows that college athletes are always putting themselves at risk while playing and earning a salary can help pay medical bills.
Lastly, the system that we already had up was working and producing a lot of outstanding talent. There have been so many good players who went from college to the NBA. For example, Trae Young is a really talented basketball player who went to the University of Oklahoma, without getting paid. This shows how back when college athletes weren’t getting paid, they were still well-off. This is why I believe that College athletes shouldn’t get paid for playing their sport because it ruins the passion many players had before college’s starting paying athletes to play.