The Reality of Being a College Athlete
The rights that college athletes have while being a part of the National Collegiate Athletic Association have been a growing debate across America for many years. Controversies over whether college athletes should be paid are on the rise as these athletes are overworked and do not even make a cent for what they do. After looking into this debate and deciding that college athletes deserve to be paid, I came up with an opinion of my own. While researching the controversial topic on college athletes, I discovered interesting articles and journals supporting my formulated opinion. After reading “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?” by Kenneth J. Cooper, I was able to better understand what was going on with college athletes and why they deserve to be paid. Overall, Kenneth J. Cooper did an excellent job of summarizing why college athletes should be paid and gave great examples to strengthen the opinion I formed.
In the article, “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?” Kenneth J. Cooper acknowledges the fact that college athletes are essentially “employees” of the universities and the NCAA. Throughout the article, Cooper uses the viewpoint of two law professors at Michigan State University, Robert and Amy McCormick, who both believe college athletes are overworked. Additionally, these two law experts know that these athletes are employees under common law. In common law there are three areas: the right of others to control a person’s activities, whether that person is compensated and if that person is economically dependent on that compensation. College athletics are a full-time job for a college athlete at any one of the big Division I schools. Robert McCormick stated, “These young men are laboring under very strict and arduous conditions, so they really are laborers in terms of the physical demands on them while they’re also trying to go to school and being required to go to school” (Cooper 12). McCormick believe that most of the time these athletes have more of a demand put onto them then the actual employees of the university. McCormick also believes that coaches have too much control over the lives of the young men playing basketball or football and at any moment can relieve a player of his duties for not performing up to par. With this conflict moving forward, NCAA officials are not in favor of paying the athletes, but are in favor of a stipend being paid to the players.
Published in 2011, the article is fairly up-to-date with the current viewpoint on college athletes being paid for their service. The author is a credible source on the issue as he is an experienced journalist with the topic at hand. In addition to the knowledge of Mr. Cooper, Robert and Amy McCormick give their point of view from the side of the federal law. The McCormicks provide an expert view on the rights and laws of a human being under specific working conditions. For example, Robert McCormick believes that “College athletes meet all three because a coach has much control over what they do, an athletic scholarship amounts to compensation and players depend on those funds for food and shelter as well as schooling” (Cooper 13). Furthermore, each college athlete meets all three common law criterias; therefore they are employees of the universities in which they play for. Cooper does an excellent job of formulating an argument based on experts knowledge on the subject and gives his opinion based on prior experience with the subject matter. Although Cooper is not a college athlete, he still does an adequate job of relating to these athletes and going into the shoes to better understand their feelings. Overall, Kenneth J. Cooper made a logical argument and opinion for paying college athletes for playing in the NCAA.
I agree with many points in the article, “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play?”. Robert McCormick states that college athletes are not at universities for an education, but to perform in football or basketball games. In my opinion this is a very true statement since athletes lead a life of athletics being the most important aspect of college. While some college athletes may care about education more than sports, there are some that do not even finish college and just go straight into professional sports via being drafted. Since these athletes dedicate so much of their college lives to the sport they play, not by choice, but because they have to; they should be paid for their hard work and dedication. McCormick states “The professors say athletes are not primarily engaged in learning, play sports unrelated to their course of study and fall under the supervision of coaches rather than faculty members” (Cooper 13). Also I am in favor of giving athletes stipends to cover the costs of everyday life. Essentially giving the athletes an allowance to teach them how to handle money in real life situations. However, I do not agree with allowing athletes to skip classes or work around things because of games or practices. Each athlete should be required to had a GPA of 3.0 or higher and should be made to take a certain number of classes per semester. Not every college athlete is going to make it big and each athlete needs to have a contingency plan. College athletics are not the most important aspect of each athlete that may be involved. Some want a future outside of sports and know they are way better off in their field of interest than professional sports. In all, I agree with most of the points both Cooper and McCormick make but do not necessarily agree with all of them.
In conclusion, Kenneth J. Cooper’s article on whether college athletes should be paid to play was extremely informative and helped me strengthen my opinion. Holding the knowledge of two law experts, Cooper is able to give the readers valid points and arguments to agree with. Now that I have a little bit more knowledge on the topic, I am more capable of forming an opinion on college athletes being paid to play college sports.