Intro and Methods

Introduction

            As of recently, the topic of whether college athletes should get paid or not has been heavily discussed. On one hand, those in favor of paying the players argue, the money will help support them financially, as well as encourage them to keep playing. Then on the other hand, those who oppose paying college athletes state, they will be financially irresponsible and that they’re given enough through scholarship. Both parties produce strong arguments leading to a very heated, controversial topic.

Many of the college athletes come from urban, low-class that have little to no support. Getting paid would allow college athletes to send money back home to help provide for their families (Lemmons, 2017).  Shabazz Napier stated in 2014, “we do have hungry nights that we don’t have enough money to get food in. Sometimes money is needed.” Napier believes that it shouldn’t be stretched out to hundreds of thousands of dollars to play, but enough to provide for at least three meals a day. There is a gap between what the colleges and universities are paying in scholarships and what the cost of attending college usually means (Glier, 2014). Despite getting scholarships for the schooling itself, players do not have money to provide for their families nor themselves because they don’t have time to get a job. Thus, players are suffering in ways, such as starving, that no one should have to go through just to play a sport.

Paying college athletes encourages a healthier student athlete lifestyle. It would allow them to focus on academics and athletics without having to worry about money issues (Lombardo, para. 4).  Less than 2% of college athletes in the NCAA become professional athletes, while most find a job in their chosen field of study (Lombardo, para.4). If college athletes were to be paid, this would provide an opportunity for them to focus more on their academics in the long run to earn their degree and pursue a career (Lombardo, para. 4). Paying players can lead to a more planned out future. While players getting paid has its benefits, college students aren’t too reliable with money.

Amateur players getting paid can be a risky move. They are still young and don’t necessarily know how to mange their money yet (Lemmons, 2017). (jwillyISU, 2016) says that college athletes use their money to buy “jewelry or spinner rims for your tricked out ride.” College is for people to mature and to learn, but giving college athletes thousands of dollars can lead to them to act out in an immature way (jwillyISU, 2016). Giving a large amount of money to a college athlete is high risk, considering they are still learning how to mature and manage their money. By just having the money, this tells the players that they don't necessarily need to work as hard and lose motivation.

Methods

Participants

The participants used were members of the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity, Sig Ep for short,  at The University of Iowa. This provides a broad variety of opinions for research. Although, since all of the subjects reside at The University of Iowa, the survey is not completely random.

Procedure

In order to retrieve the necessary data, a google forms survey, containing five questions, was sent out to the various members of Sig Ep. These five questions will answer the their opinions on whether or not college athletes should be paid. Each question is multiple choice.

Analysis

After gathering the information, two groups will be created: those who believe college athletes should be paid and those who believe college athletes shouldn't get paid. The gathered information will then be compared to the other opinions of those not residing at The University of Iowa.