In a recent article called "The Case for Paying College Athletes", Marc Edelman argues that students deserve to be compensated for their labor. He states that 50 colleges get annual revenues of millions and millions of dollars. A few colleges report annuals of up to 100 million dollars. Edelman argues that revenues are passed down to NCAA executives such as athletic directors and head coaches. It is said that these coaches receive about an average of 2 million dollars. Compared to a regular teacher's salary, that is a far more efficient salary. Edelman says that NCAA figures compensating student-athletes would destroy competitive balance, but they aren't taking into consideration of anything else. He argues that college athletes suffer economic efficiency and it is a right for them to be paid, especially if they are volunteering their own hard work labor.
I agree with Marc Edelman's article, "The Case for Paying College Athletes" because I believe that if a student is putting in his hard work and labor for a broadcast that is making millions of dollars, they should at least get compensated. Edelman is correct when he says college athletes suffer an economic efficiency because recent studies have shown that things such as medical expenses or other necessary college expenses aren't covered in the contract. Many people believe that paying college students would decrease their athletic ability but when it actually comes down to it, the argument against paying college athletes comes from plain greed and selfishness.
No comments:
Post a Comment