Among many student-athletes today, a controversy arises involving compensation. The question is, should a student athlete get paid for playing a college level sport? Many athletes complain about money and how they do not think they get enough for playing a sport, but they are forgetting that they are being fairly rewarded with a discounted, or free, education. People hear athletes getting anonymous gifts from the alumni and from numerous different sponsors for their athletic ability. In the world of sports, in this case college sports, the primary motive for athletes to play a sport is for money rather than for the love of the game. This incentive started with the professional sports and began to corrupt the college level.
No matter how many people feel that athletes should not be paid for their ability, there are just as many people whom feel they should. In the Sports Press, Ben Sylvan states reasons why people think a student athlete should be compensated. Some of those reasons include; people feel that often times the university uses these athletes as billboards for their school. Also, the universities are "selling" the athletes" names and accomplishments for the schools own recognition. "Athletic corporations are using college athletes to sell their products, therefore the athletes should see some of the money that is earned," says Sylvan. It has even been proven that advertising through student athletes greatly influences younger children. Advertising to America's youth brings in a large number of fans and consumers of products. In addition to attending school and maintaining a certain G.P.A., these college athletes have to attend meetings, go to practice, participate in games, and give themselves strict rules in which they must abide by. All of those things are equivalent to maintaining a full time job, states Sylvan. I feel even if athletes put in the same amount of time for athletics than those who have a job, then that is their choice.
