Should college athletes be paid Essay Example for Free

Should college athletes be paid Essay Should College Athletes be Paid? Maybe it was the annual spectacle of March Madness and the fact that UCONN came out of nowhere as an underdog to win their 3rd national NCAA men’s basketball title. Maybe it was the excitement of watching the UCONN football team playing in its first ever BCS Bowl against Oklahoma last year. Whatever he reason, the media and sports critics always ignite a fresh debate over the merits of paying college athletes for their services to the schools. Over the past few months, PBS, ESPN and HBO each aired major specials and documentaries on the relative injustices or justice – deepening our your view of the current college Division 1 (D1) system that allows amateur players to generate billions (that is correct, billions) in revenue each year for their respective schools and the NCAA organization, but prohibits them from receiving a dime of it or any compensation that might be offered from other sources deemed private or public. Coaches can sign multimillion-dollar contracts, endorse products, and rake in lucrative speaking fees. Is this fair? Are we being ethical and righteousness treating young and innocent individuals in this matter? Should we as a society allow these individuals to be taken advantaged in this matter? These are just a few questions many people ask, and the answers are not clear-cut as one might think. To pay or not to pay? The question everyone asks every year since the explosion of D1 College sports over the past couple of decades. The debate over the pros and cons in paying college athletes won’t end until changes are made or someone does something about the current system. My goal throughout this paper will be to present and clarify some of these arguments and why someone could make changes amendable to everyone involved. I will focus my arguments and debate on three major issues. (1) Should we pay students athletes and how much should they be paid? (2) How would they get paid and the challenges in managing this process, can the schools afford it? (3) And finally, what ethical issues, if any, would this pose to our schools and society at large? In conclusion, I will share my opinion and recommendation on what should be done to address this ongoing dispute. My discussion through out this paper will focus on  the â€Å"Primetime† college sports programs in the NCAA; Men’s College Basketball and College Football. As these two sports represent virtually the face of the NCAA and college sports on TV and to the public. While the other college sports are as important to student athletes and schools, they don’t drive the same level of viewing power and revenue numbers for the NCAA and their respective schools. In my opinion college is suppose to be a place you go to earn an education an d determine your future career. Although many college athletes are going to the school that offers them the most money potential at the next level of their carriers, paying the athletes based on their current star power or future potential could have the potential to turn the entire college arena into a bidding war. You would stop seeing athletes go to a place because of tradition or loyalty, but instead to whom would pay them the most money. This in turn would kill the magic of college sports and the purity of the game. Where only a few large schools would have enough capital and buying power to buy the top performing and premier student athletes. If this would to happen, the Butler Bulldogs would have never made it to the NCAA College Basketball finals against UCONN just this past May, as Butler could never compete with the deep pockets of schools like Duke, Syracuse, UCONN, and Georgetown, just to name a few. You may also see free agency enter college sports. Although they would have to sit a year, what would stop players from jumping universities because of money? It would dramatically change the college sport world, as we know it today. Butler again comes to mind, as most of their top athletes would jump ship to another school after they finished 2nd in the 2010 NCCA finals, in the hope of getting more money. In the long run, paying college athletes will make it ok to pay non professional athletes and thus you could then see high schools develop the same principles. If you are paying a player at the college level because they bring in money, then Bloomfield High, New Britain high and other dominant high schools would do the same, and you then re-create the problems I already mentioned. While the arguments above raise good concerns, I do have some major issues with college athletes not getting paid as well. If an ordinary student receives a grant or scholarship based on their intellectual power of monetary limitations, then its perfectly legal for the student to get a job while in college and use that money for whatever they want. Ive seen this happen. One of my friends in college got a $50K  scholarship to Northeastern; no strings attached (except for keeping up the GPA), paid tuition with that money, and then used his talents after schools hours to become an independent contractor whil e still attending school. He made enough money on the side to buy a used car in cash and pay for a couple of spring break vacations and a few other â€Å"luxuries† currently unavailable to college athletes. While college athletes get free room, board, books, tuition and fees covered by the scholarship, they don’t have the luxury or option to earn extra money for additional expenses (car, travel, vacation, nice dinner, etc.) as they spend most if not all of their time practicing or traveling when outside the classroom, limiting the amount of time they have to find any part time job. On the other hand, they are plenty of non-athletic students in college who have an equally difficult time having a normative college experience because the job that they do work is used to cover the enormous expense of room, board, books, tuition and fees. Furthermore, many of those non-athlete students have to take on mounds and mounds of debt to be able to afford the very things the athletes are given. I bet more than a few of them would gladly give up their play money for the chance to finish college without being $100-150k in the hole. That being said, I am convinced that student athletes deserve t he same opportunity regular students have. They should have the opportunity to earn additional money to cover expenses currently covered by their parents, friends family or bank loans. Do I feel that the players should be paid some amount of money to pay for additional expenses? Yes. The amount of money these kids generate is in the Billions and they get nothing (monetary) in return, as if these athletes use college as the tool that it is, then they should at least be getting an education. However, it does not make sense for college players to have no money and barely able to get by, while someone makes a substantial amount of money off their talents. However, the payment should be controlled and limited to a defined amount. More on this a little later. In the past, Maryland’s head basketball coach Gary Williams made a public statement in which he denounced the present system of not paying athletes. His proposal was to give those players in revenue-producing sports a stipend of $200/month. While I agree with Mr. Williams approach and argument, I disagree with the payment amount and structure. In my opinion his argument makes perfect sense and achieves a realist solution. He  points out that college athletics – specifically basketball and football are making a fortune for the NCAA, the schools, the coaches, the staff and filtering down to just about everyone else in the athletic department and sometimes even to other parts of the school. However, not a c ent is being given to those who are actually providing the product on the court and field. You know, the product that we love to watch and talk about during water breaks in the office, the product that creates so much exhilaration every weekend to millions of people across the US and world! Again, I realize the argument is that they are being given free housing and a free scholarship, etc. The problem is that there isn’t another kid at the school that has to have a life based upon $0 extra income to buy what he wants. As I mentioned above, these individuals don’t have the time to work and earn extra money, so they will be tempted to take some extra cash or a trip or a meal at a fancy restaurant from a â€Å"friend† or â€Å"acutance†. Who wouldn’t be? And there lies the problem. The student athletes under the current system will always be faced with the hard decision not to break the rules and laws, which honestly, other students don’t have to deal with. As I pointed out before and Williams makes the same point, regular kids are allowed to receive living expenses and spending money as part of financial aid from family, friends or even strangers. Since athletes cannot, they are clearly being discriminated against. The student athlete might bring thousands if not millions of dollars to the school and more importantly the NCAA in one way or the other, but how much does any other student bring to the school? In addition to the moral argument of making students paid employees of the school while attending school, there’s the cost argument. Can the NCAA and schools really afford it? The answer might surprise and shock you at the same time. The NCAA negotiated an $11 Billion (with a B) deal for the 2011 NCAA tournament. Not the regular season, just the tournament – and that’s just NCAA basketball. Doing some analysis show that, there are 346 Division One schools in basketball. If each one of them has 13 players, that’s 4,498 players. Divide $11 Billion by 4,498 and you get†¦ over $2 million per player! These figures clearly indicate that both the NCAA and schools could afford to pay the students athletes some monetary figure, more on that later. Clearly the argument is no longer about money! Or is it? Between 2004 and 2010, fewer than 7 percent of all Division I sports programs  generated positive net revenue, according to NCAA data. Fewer than 12 percent of all Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) schools — 14 out of 120 — did so in fiscal year 2009. For that matter, the NCAA reports that only 50 percent to 60 percent of FBS football and basketball programs make money. In other word s, a significant chunk of top-level FBS programs are losing money. Should those programs be obliged to pay their football and basketball players, even though they aren’t actually producing a net profit. Paying student athletes large sums of money based on their natural ability would destroy the college sports, as we know it today and potential drive schools out of business into bankruptcy. Obviously a large majority of D-1 schools can’t afford to pay students athletes even if it was legal today. So, where’s the money going? As I mentioned before, the NCAA is signing record deals with the networks, shouldn’t that money go back to the schools? Nobody can answer this question with certainty, but one thing is clear, the NCAA could afford to compensate the student athletes, based on their current revenue streams. My recommended solution will address this disparity in D-1 schools and their ability to lash out money to pay student athletes. Indeed, with many coaches and college experts, the biggest problem with paying players isnt a money issue. Its the legal and structural chaos that would result. In an interview with PBSs Frontline that aired a few weeks back, NCAA president Mark Emmert said it would be utterly unacceptable to convert students into employees. Emmert had reason to be adamant. What happens when college athletes become employees? Can they collectively bargain? Can they strike? Do injured players receive workmans comp? Are players at state schools eligible for subsequent retirement benefits? Do only football and mens basketball players receive salaries? Should a star point guard earn more than a third-string center? Should an All-American quarterback earn more than his entire offensive line? Who decides and who controls all of these decisions? The NCAA? The School? Since student athletes are prohibited in gathering any additional money, the NCAA is making efforts to help support the future of college sports by helping to funnel $750 million over 11 years into funds strictly designed to benefit these athletes. This money is ideally going to be used by the NCAA to help fund student-athletes who are looking for clothing, emergency travel, educational and medical expenses, personal needs and also a injury  insurance. Even though this is a very nice touch by the NCAA organization, it however does not address the real issue of allowing college athletes in earning money, which can be used a the discretion of the student-athlete. Until that day comes, the future student-athletes have a lot of hard work, dedication and lessons to be learned from before they are all worthy enough of being able to accept salaries for their individual efforts. It is a fact that since its birth, the NCAA has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry and some experts feel college athletes should begin to benefit financially from the large revenues. The NCAA brought in more than a billion dollars more than what the NBA generated globally in the 2009-10 season, according to the most recent estimate from Forbes. One of the biggest revenue-creating sports a part of the NCAA today is college football that has come a long way since the establishment of the Harvard, Yale and Princeton football association. Recently in the last five years a few football teams have financially stood out amongst their competitors in the NCAA. NCAA players, coaches and officials constantly argue for the paying of student-athletes because for them the primary reason for massive profit earnings is due to the thanks of the hard work of their student-athletes. College athletes are constantly seeing their jersey numbers on the racks of their campus bookstores but instead of seeing any of the profits all they see is their coaches racking in multi-million dollar contracts year after year. In total there are 119 Division I-A football teams competing in the NCAA today and out of those a reported 42 of those team’s coaches received more than $1 million salaries, at least nine receiving more than $2 million. In Basketball, the University of Connecticut last year signed a 5-year contract with coach Jim Calhoun worth approximately $11M – including speaking and media fees. This is one of the biggest reasons why players argue for their own salary incomes due to the financial successes of their own coaches and seeing them living extravagant lifestyles. Meanwhile, would each salaried player on a given team be paid the same amount? If not, who would decide whether the All-American linebacker deserved more money than the All-American wide receiver, or whether Kemba Walker was more valuable than the star power forward, Jeremy Lamb. Would 18-year-olds be negotiating â€Å"contracts† with officials in their athletic department? Would they be hiring agents before high-school graduation? And how would all this affect  those sports programs that depend on football and basketball revenue to stay afloat? To pose an discuss these questions is to realize that paying college athletes merit salaries based on their â€Å"book value† is simply unrealistic and unfeasible. Still, the current NCAA rules are deeply flawed, and many players are indeed being ex ploited. Let’s face it: Big-time college football and basketball basically function as minor-league systems for the NFL and the NBA, respectively, while creating massive profits for everyone except the athletes. Scholarships are financially valuable, sure. But according to many experts, the average scholarship falls about $5,000 short of covering an athlete’s â€Å"essential† college expenses. Closing that gap — My proposed solution would address the majority of these concerns, if not completely eliminate them. Many experts have reach a determination that college sports have already effectively become professionalized. Given the N.C.A.A.’s abandonment of standard honored amateur principles, many experts argued, that there’s not a good enough reason preventing athletes from engaging in the same entrepreneurial activities as their celebrity coaches. Big-time college athletes should be able to endorse products, get paid for speaking engagements and be compensated for the use of their likenesses on licensed products. After all, aren’t non-athlete students allowed to go on a TV show like â€Å"MTV SpringBreak† and receive money for their appearances and efforts? If non-athletes students are a llowed, why can’t students athletes appear on ESPN shows and get paid for it? They should! They should be allowed to also negotiate an actual contract with the N.B.A. as part of a final project in a finance class, and have an agent from the day they decide to. In the past few years, the NCAA has cracked down on players taking illegal benefits from â€Å"agents and boosters†. USC was under two years of probation for the Reggie Bush affair. Cecil Newton openly shopped his son around to SEC schools. And just a few months back, the University of Connecticut was found guilty and punished by the NCAA for violating its rules and laws. Schools, coaches and athletes decide to take these risks and break the rules because they know what’s a stake, millions and millions of dollars. All of these things are clearly against NCAA rules, but how fair are the rules? We all know how much money colleges bring in off of the hard work of these kids, and we all know what its like to be young and poor. Should college football players be paid or at least allowed to accept benefits? After long  hours of research, deliberation and studying both sides of the argument in paying student athletes for their services to the NCAA and respective schools, I came up with the following recommendations. Frist and foremost, student athletes should continue to receive scholarships from their schools with the same benefits as they receive today. I also think that we should not pay large salaries to these athletes based on their personal ability or star potential as it would turn college into even more of a business and less of an academic institution. Furthermore if would open the floodgates for paying athletes very large sums of money. It has been said again and again; more money more pr oblems. However, I also believe that it is unfair for these athletes not to receive anything for the services they provide to their schools which yield millions and millions of dollars in profits, prestige recognition and increase in student enrollments, all very positive for the school’s bottom line. In my opinion, students’ athletes should receive from the NCAA NOT their schools a yearly payment (for all 4 years) equal to the average school annual tuition amount– in other words, take all D1 schools, average out the full tuition across all schools and make that the payment to every school athlete. This money would come from the lucrative contracts the NCAA signs with TV networks, clothing companies, etc. While in some cases this represents more income than what students could need, it would eliminate calculating complex and unfair student payments, and give student athletes additional spending money. It would also avoid any student athlete from choosing one school over the other because of this payment, as it would be the same independent of what school they eventually select. This approach would also eliminate the fact that a majority of D-1 schools have a negative balance sheet and realistically can’t afford to pay any student athlete’s salaries. If not else, it certainly would be a great deterrent for the vast majority of otherwise good players, but not ready to jump to the NFL or NBA early.

The Partys Denial Of A Persons Natural Rights :: essays research papers

The novel 1984 touches on many disturbing aspects about the denial of a person's natural rights. In today's society people are granted certain rights which the government or anyone else can not take away. These rights are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In the novel 1984 the government which the people of Oceania live under has taken away all of the rights of people, including natural rights. The right to life has been taken away in the sense that a persons life is the party. A person is born for the party, works for the party, and dies for the party. Liberty is taken away by not allowing the privacy of thought or action. To coin the phrase "Big Brother is watching you". The right of a person pursuing happiness is unquestionably taken away because all forms of pleasure (games, sex, laughter) are illegal. The government promotes hate and unhappiness. The life of a person living in Oceania is strictly controlled. A person does not choose what they do for a living, or who they associate with. The party is the center of everybody's life. The only reason anyone marries or has children is so that the children can live for the party. The children grow up learning how to defy and betray everyone for the party. Children will tell on anybody, even their parents if they see them acting in a unorthodox or peculiar way. When Winston was in the Ministry of Love he discovers that a co-worker of his, a man by the name of Parsons, who had been turned in for thoughtcrime by his own daughter. This is a quite disturbing incident because Parsons was proud of his child and happy that he had been sent to the Ministry of love before he had committed any other thoughtcrime. He is a prime example of a person whose entire life was for the party and for Big Brother. Even though Winston and Julia were enemies of the party their lives were still spent doing work for the party. They would still participate in the two minute hates and would still do their jobs, which both helped the party brainwash more and more people. No one ever outwardly betrayed the party. Liberty can be defined as exemption from control of another, freedom from external restraint, and the power of choice. All of these definitions defy the very basis of the party.

Equity Analyst Project – Individual

Equity Analyst Project – Individual Scott Hatten MBA 737-F1WW (W13) Professor Lauren Thomas March 2, 2013 This paper will assess my ability to maximize my personal return on investment with an allocation of $1,000,000. The overall goal of this exercise is to obtain the highest return possible within the next 12 months. I am limited to the following asset classes for allocation of all investments: * U. S. Equities * U. S. Treasury Bonds * Cash This paper will be my prospectus on the justification of the allocation and potential earnings in each class. U. S. Equities| U. S. 30-Year Treasury Bonds| Cash| Proposed Allocation| 70%| 25%| 5%| $ Amount| $700,000| $250,000| $50,000| Forecast +/- (12 Months)| 13%| 3. 0%| 0%| ROI| $791,000| $257,500| $50,000| Estimated (ROI) for $1,000,000 as of December 31, 2013 = $1,098,500. 00 U. S. Equities As the United States economy continues to grow in areas but struggle in others, the decision to place the largest allocation of funds into this c ategory is made without hesitation. 013 is the 1st year after a presidential election and the second term for our current president. Typically in situations like this there is less hype about a new leader in office and more emphasize placed on making strategic decisions and outcomes. Even though were are currently looking at the possibility of thousands of government based worked to be subjected to mandatory pay reductions through a sequester plan, the United States business machines is moving at a strong pace.Since 2008 business and industry leaders have worked to understand the changing dynamics of both the US and International economic challenges and have positioned their organizations to adapt more quickly to those conditions (Investors, 2013). As consumer spending and consumer confidence continue to increase, U. S. Equities should continue on steady growth plan which is indicated in the strong S&P Indices (currently at 1518. 20), NASDAQ (currently at 3169. 74), and the DOW (cur rently at 14089. 66).These indicators provide direct indication that investor and business confidence levels are extremely high and favorable for positive returns. U. S. 30 Year Treasury Bonds Although this investment class can be considered the most conservative of the three, the low yield of government bonds in the past 10 years does not lend a comparative metric against many other investment opportunities (Jacobs, 2012). The fixed rate of these instruments allows for a guaranteed return, but should only be utilized at a point in an investing cycle when risk is higher than potential income growth.The 25% allocation that is invested in this class is positioned to provide a long term guaranteed investment, with the possible that these lower rates will not rise significantly in the next few years. Cash The lowest of investment allocation classes is cash. The cost to leave any instrument in this category is expensive and provides very little ROI. The funds kept in this allocation are specific for future investment opportunities where transition of funds from other classes could have a significant impact or cost to the overall 12 month plan (Mangla, 2012).Summary Looking back over the past ten years and most especially the past three years for investment returns and economic possibilities, there seems to be more growth in the past 24 months than what we have seen in over a decade. The rapidly changing international economic climate and the current government struggles with tax based polices and the continued climbing US deficit will make 2103 a year where investors must maintain a long term focus while being selective in short term growth opportunities.References Jacobs, D. L. (2012). Are Bonds The Next Facebook–Negatively Speaking?. Forbes. Com, 6. Investor's Business, D. (2013, February 19). U. S. asset demand picks up. Investor’s Business Daily. p. A02. Mangla, I. (2012). Yes, You Can Dump Your Bank. Money, 27-28. Ross, S. , Westerfield, R. , Jaf fe, J. , and Jordan, B. (2011-). Corporate finance: Core principles ; applications. (3rd ed. ).

Comparing Death In the two poems - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 786 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2017/09/20 Category Literature Essay Type Argumentative essay Tags: Death Essay Did you like this example? Comparing Death In the two poems â€Å"Death, Be Not Proud,† by John Donne and â€Å"Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night,† by Dylan Thomas both deal with the issue of death, yet in different ways. The theme of each one of these poems is the subject of death. Each author chooses to tackle this difficult topic head on, but they do so in different styles. Like day and night the mood in each poem is in total contrast to each other. Although the tone is totally different in each poem, the theme of death is accepted in each as well. In the first poem, â€Å"Death, Be Not Proud,† Donne describes death as a lowly figure that deserves no respect at all. That no one is afraid of death, but welcomes it as it brings us a satisfying state of everlasting sleep. It is just one aspect of life and something that everyone must experience. Donne even goes so far as to say that there are things other than death that make us sleep just as well, if not better, as stated i n the line â€Å"And poppy, or charms can make us sleep as well. † In the end we will actually defeat death itself when we pass over into eternal life and there will be no more death, â€Å"And death shall be no more: Death, thou shalt die! † He feels sorry for death because it will be what is ultimately dead and not us. The overall theme of this poem is to embrace death and not be afraid of it. In the second poem, â€Å"Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night,† Thomas displays a completely opposite viewpoint to describe death. He describes death as something that should be feared and fought against. He prays his father to hold on to the bitter end and do not give into his death. That indeed death is something that we need to be afraid of. It is a rallying cry against death, that to give up is the coward’s way. The idea of impending death gives us new insight into life, so fight through this death so that you can live your life with renewed strength. Thomas illustrated this point in the following line, â€Å"Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight. † The overall theme of this poem is that death is something to fear, that we should fight against it at all cost. That you should not just give up easily. Although the overall themes of each poem are different, the subject is the same in both. Each author uses imagery and metaphors to bring the concept of death to life. In â€Å"Death, Be Not Proud,† Donne directly addresses death as if it were a person and not a thing. He personifies death so that he can discredit it. He makes us see death in terms of person in order for us to be able to relate to it. In, â€Å"Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night,† Thomas also personifies death, but for a different reason. His point is that death is to be feared and that we can relate to this better by seeing death as a person and the fear that it creates. In conclusion, the two poems described here, â€Å"Death, Be Not Proud,† by John Donne and â€Å"Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night,† by Dylan Thomas are both poems that deal with the subject of death though in complete different ways. This shows how two authors can take an idea that everyone knows about, such as death, and describe it in two completely different ways, yet each in a way that they demonstrate death and describes it in terms of a person. With Donne saying not to be afraid of death and that it has no control over us. In fact it should be afraid of us because in the end it is death that dies as we enter over into eternal life. While Thomas takes the opposite approach and states that we are to indeed fear death and fight it to the end with every bit of strength that we have. These two poems present and interesting study in the contrast and comparison of two similar, yet different works of poetry. By studying the ways that the two authors approach each individual work of art, we can gain valuable insight i nto the mindset of each man. It is interesting to see how each author views and deals with the concept of death and how their individual courses of life guided them to their own views that appear in their poems. Works Cited Donne, John. â€Å"Death, Be Not Proud. † Thomas, Dylan. â€Å"Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night. † Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Comparing Death In the two poems" essay for you Create order