The issue of providing compensation to college basketball players is high on nationwide agenda. While there are both pros and cons of the argument, the essay discusses the essential prerequisites of reimbursing the effort and talent of college athletes.
One of the most popular annual nationwide sporting events is known as March Madness arranged by the colleges in cooperation with the National College Athletic Association (NCAA). The estimated revenue in 2017 equals to staggering $900 million. Unfortunately, out of this amount the college athletes will get $0 (Lemmons, 2017). This fact alone further heats the much debated issue of paying college basketball athletes. Overall, NCAA basketball players should get paid considering revenue they bring to their shools, let alone the industry.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Should College Basketball Players Get Paid?"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

The first argument in favor of fair compensation is that college athletes grant their effort and talent to generate the large revenue. Otherwise, the whole industry would lose billions of dollars. In other words, owing to college athletes, NCAA concludes TV contracts, spectators purchase tickets, coaches are employed. As a result, the industry benefits from free of charge using college basketball players. The only obvious compensation, however, comes as athlete scholarship embracing room and board, tuition coverage, as well as study materials and necessary supplies plus partial compensation of loans and debt bore by college athletes after graduation. Nonetheless, all these incentives are just not enough to reimburse their efforts. The second argument for compensation is that college athletes spend no less than forty hours per week training, practicing, and crafting and drilling basketball skills. Such an intensive schedule equaling to a full working week leaves almost no room for sufficient academic studies and social interactions. More than that, given such a pressure, college athletes practicing and playing basketball are deprived of paid part-time job options. The third argument complies with the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and basically concerns elementary means so that the players can support themselves and their families. Many of them come from low-income families and often serve as the main breadwinners. Providing fair compensation, players may continue their studies at college for longer periods of time. Given the additional funds, they would be able to combine their studies with supporting their families back home. Consequently, their academic performance will increase, while colleges will enjoy better graduation rates. The continued work with coaches will enhance their performance, raise popularity among the fans, and enable college basketball players to reach new professional heights. Fourth, fair compensation to college athletes will eliminate the instances of corruption and external bribery by grey agents and boosters. As a result, college basketball will get rid of point-shaving and other related scandals.

Overall, college athletes serve as the most vivid role models inspiring the love for sport among younger generations. From this stance, their social contribution is invaluable and indispensable constituent of building a healthy nation. Unfortunately, in most cases the non-compensatory reality diminishes their pursuit to continue their studies at colleges and achieve more in professional basketball. Given the incredible annual amounts these athletes bring to their schools, it is high time NCAA reconsidered the status of college basketball players and put them on paid contracts. At least, such an option should exist to boost competition and enhance academic and sport performance among college athletes. The additional financial incentive should serve as a fair motivation for one’s efforts, time and persistence. At that, the stakeholders should not worry about possible cons, including the lack of financial experience, unfair compensation, diminished sport completion or poorer academic performance. Fair contracts should resolve the issue and make the system fair and beneficiary to all the participants.

  • Lemmons, M. (2017). “College Athletes Getting Paid? Here Are Some Pros And Cons,” Huff Post, Retrieved Oct. 22, 2017 from: