Should University of Alabama football players be paid to play? According to the NCAA or National Collegiate Athletic Association, the answer to that question is no. Over the past decade, this topic has been a hot topic in sports and many controversies have arisen regarding it. Many people think this is unfair because of the amount of work it takes to play college football. From practicing on the field to studying the next opponent in a film session, these athletes put in many hours of work and bring significant revenue to the school they play for. Many college football fans believe that not paying athletes is unfair because of the amount of effort and time it takes to play college football at a high level. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay There are many arguments for why Premier League football players deserve to be paid. But one thing both sides can agree on is that players should be treated fairly, whether you think it's fair to pay them or not. According to Tony Tsoukalas of the Crimson White News, "The University of Alabama earned $40,766,391 in profit during the 2010 season" (Tsoukalas). With profits this high, it's hard to believe that the most important part of the team, the players, don't see a cent. It seems reasonable that people would be in favor of compensating athletes with such income. At many large schools like Alabama, football is the primary sport, Tony goes on to say, "The university's football program reported a profit of $40,766,391 in 2010, while all other sports in The AU combined lost $7,875,289” (Tsoukalas). This statistic shows how important football players are to a large university like Alabama. Another reason why people think these athletes should be paid is the simple fact that playing football takes a lot of time and effort. In any other job, if someone worked as hard as a Crimson Tide player, they would undoubtedly get paid. Players view football as just a job, they have a tight schedule and have to work hard in everything they do. Many players on the University of Alabama football team come from poverty, and football is one of the only options for earning a substantial amount of money and pursuing an education. According to Wayne Flynt, “In the 2000 U.S. Census, for example, Alabama was the seventh poorest state, with 16 percent of its residents living in poverty, compared to the U.S. average of 12 percent. The state also included eight of the nation's 100 poorest counties. » (Flynt). Although scholarships are awarded to many athletes, they do not cover many college-related expenses. By paying athletes, it would ease the burden on families who have to support them financially in college. Such as groceries, gas for their car, and other common household items. It's not hard to see why someone would support paying University of Alabama football players. Their blood sweat and sometimes tears contribute to the program's winning games and that winning tradition translates into money. According to Tommy Deas of timesports.com, "University of Alabama head football coach will earn $6,087,349 in compensation$ for 2010, making him not only the highest-paid coach in college football, but also one of the highest-paid coaches in all of sport” (Deas). While the Crimson Tide coach earns a record salary, the players struggle to live comfortably. The facts are that the players do as much if not more work than the head coach during a football season. So why is it fair that the team's coach makes millions and the players make nothing? Many of those in favor of paying athletes are asking the same question. The arguments for paying football players at the University of Alabama are very strong and completely logical. It's hard for some people to understand why this would be a bad idea. Both sides of this argument have strong arguments and that is why it continues to be debated. While the argument for paying athletes has many positives, there are underlying issues that are not addressed by proponents of paying Alabama football players. One point not addressed is how much players will be paid. This issue has not yet been resolved. How much the players' time is worth and whether everyone's time is equal is another question you need to ask yourself. For example, one of the favorites in the race for the Heisman Trophy, which is an award given to the best college football player in the country, is Trent Richardson. Trent is the Tide's starting running back and perhaps the best running back in the country. Would it be fair to pay him more than a third lineman? I don't think so. In fact, each player on the team must train for the same amount of time. But in the same situation, it would also be unfair to pay him the same amount given that he is a star and brings more revenue to the university than many of the players on the team. So if it is unfair to pay athletes the same amount and also unfair to pay them different amounts, it makes no sense to pay them. I understand and sympathize with the disadvantaged families who must financially support these college players. That said, I believe there has to be a compromise between paying athletes and not paying them. The argument that the players make money for the university and the university then owes a debt to the players is a good one, but it has flaws. In many schools across the country, no sports team, including the football team, makes money throughout the season. This is due to the high cost of operating the team, from uniforms to travel to paying the coaching staff, sports are not cheap in college. Additionally, much of the revenue comes not from players but from television contracts that ensure only certain channels cover certain teams. For example, the University of Alabama has a contract with CBS as well as the entire Southeastern Conference team. This means that no other channel can broadcast SEC games and believe me, this contract is very lucrative for all the universities involved. Every university in the country earns and spends different amounts of money. Some schools have a lot of money and some don't. It's also a problem when it comes to paying college athletes. If a school like Boise Sates is competing with a school like Alabama on money, that's just not fair. It's obvious that a school like Alabama would be able to pay their recruits more money than Boise State. This leads to a disadvantage for schools that don't have a lot of money to recruit. Why would a player go to one school if another.