# data[].attributes.body
C. 2 months ago
R. It does agree with the claim
A. M.D Dem Podcasts
A. No
P.  inform

# data[].attributes.body
C. N/A
R.  agrees
A. http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/images/print-edition/20140816_USC504.png
A.  no
P.   persuade

# data[].attributes.body
C. October 2, 2017
R. no
A. https://professorramos.net/2018/03/07/should-college-athletes-be-paid/
A. none
P. inform

# data[].attributes.body
C. 10/7/2017
R. both
A. https://www.storyboardthat.com/storyboards/jaked6/should-college-athletes-get-paid
A. no
P. inform

# data[].attributes.body
C. N/A
R. agrees
A. https://www.roanoke.com/opinion/commentary/kruckemeyer-and-steelman-are-big-time-college-athletes-getting-a/article_91deefe3-5569-5ce6-92a2-f0b067fbbbf7.html
A. no
P. in form

# data[].attributes.body
C. N/A
R. yes
A. Justin Reyes
A. none
P. persuade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Imagine working for countless hours, six days a week, then putting on multiple performances just so someone else can be paid billions. That is the life of a college athlete. College athletes do not get any recognition or benefits that they deserve for the revenue they bring to their university and the surrounding community. For some college athletes, things such as tuition, gear, recovery items, and other necessities needed to perform are not free or cheap. Many college athletes pay money out of their own pockets to be able to perform at the level they need to, but who gets all the financial benefits? The NCAA and the university itself.

According to USA Today, the NCAA had a revenue of $1.1 Billion from 2017 NCAA college sporting events. How much of this money went to the college athletes who are the ones physically and mentally performing generating this money? Zero. However, in a legal way, college athletes who are playing at Division 1 or Division 2 schools are being paid with full scholarship tuition. It is fair to say that, paid tuition is equivalent to being a paid athlete. This leaves out Division 3 college athletes who put in just as much hard work and time to be able to perform at a high level and generate money for the NCAA and their university, but do not receive full rides. At Division 3 colleges, the only scholarship that is allowed is academic, not athletic. I interviewed Walker McDonald, a current college athlete at Greenville University, and asked him the question of, should college athletes get paid for playing for their university? Walker said, "I believe college athletes should be paid based on how much money they get from scholarships...athletes should at least make enough money to cover their tuition if the scholarship doesn't."

Media by NCAA Money Revenue.

Media by All NCAA College Sports.

College athletes have to sign contracts by the NCAA stating that they will not receive any money from anyone while they are playing for the university. I do not dismiss the fact that playing for a university is a privilege and not a right, college athletes have many experiences and memories that are priceless in life. However, times are hard for many students, and college athletes have a bit more expenses when it comes to necessities, they need to be able to perform at high levels. I was able to interview Josias Parker, an alumna of the men's basketball team at Greenville University. I asked him if college athletes should get paid for their time playing for their university. Josias replied by saying, "I definitely think college athletes should get paid, because universities make a lot of money from sports, sports bringing a majority of income, especially for small schools like Greenville University. Athletes should get paid especially because college is a tough time with money, so paying money to athletes will give college athletes more relief and will try to help them and aid them with whatever they need, like necessities they need to perform well."

There is a good compromise with those who disagree with the idea of college athletes getting paid, instead of a set salary like professionals. The very least college athletes could receive is donations from fans or other organizations. College athletes are told to treat their sport as a job and be professional about every aspect of the game. However, like waiters and waitresses get tips for doing a good job, why can't athletes be rewarded the same way?

Even without pay, the very least college athletes could receive is a guarantee that their scholarship will not be taken away if they are hurt playing. If we are going the route that an athlete's pay is their scholarship, then it shouldn't be able to be taken away when they are no longer "useful" for the university. Athletes like Kyle Hardrick who lost his basketball scholarship at Oklahoma University after he tore his meniscus in his knee are examples that universities only care about the ability of the player to perform. If universities only care about the usefulness of the athlete, then there should be guaranteed tuition or pay allowing the athlete to finish college even after being injured and unable to play. Student college athletes should get paid, especially after seeing the details of what they go through to perform at the high caliber level they compete at.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Imagine working for countless hours, six days a week, then putting on multiple performances just so someone else can be paid billions. That is the life of a college athlete. College athletes do not get any recognition or benefits that they deserve for the revenue they bring to their university and the surrounding community.

# data[].attributes.body
C. 2014
R. This article agrees with my claim.
A. American University Law Review vol. 6 Issue 6 Article 4 by M. Tyler Brown
A. there were no errors
P.  to inform

# data[].attributes.body
C. N/A
R. both
A. C.U.N.Y.
A.
P. persuade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Should College Athletes Get Paid

What do you consider a professional? According to dictionary.com the definition of a professional is "following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain:"Collegiate athletes that are on the level of Division 1 are unpaid professionals with the burden of having to go to school. Coming from a sports background my opinion on the topic is very biased as I believe that college athletes should get paid and I'm going to use statistics as well as information from people that know more about the subject than I do to justify my position.

The difference between a professional and a collegiate athlete is that one gets paid and the other is not allowed to accept payment in exchange for play, as well as not accepting endorsements from brands such as Nike or Adidas. We always see collegiate athletes on TV wearing the same gear that is provided to them by the school; the exception to the rule is when a college athlete pays for the gear they wish to display. For example, Duke University has a basketball program endorsed by Nike, and athletes who wish to wear gear of a different brand are required to buy these items on their own.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) controls all of college sports and from their standpoint they believe that college athletes are students first and athletes second which is true. However, these college athletes solely aspire to be professionals in their respective athletic fields, similar to students who are accepted into specific programs of a university aspiring only to become professionals in their respective fields. In 2006, the NBA issued a rule stating the college athletes who wish to enter the NBA draft must be at least 19 years of age during the calendar year, meaning they must attend a minimum of 1 year of schooling. This led to the term "one and done athletes", who look to stay in school for the minimum 1 year before declaring entry to the NBA Draft. The lack of pay is the source of the frustration of these athletes, as they wish to begin earning money to match their hard work and dedication. In the years prior to 2006, basketball players like LeBron James (in 2003) and Kobe Bryant (in 1996), who were both supreme athletes at the time, had no intention of going to university because they believed no reward for their talent was unjustified. During their time, they were able to jump straight into the NBA from high school.

Other former college athletes have come out to describe the hardships that they would face during their time in college. Athletes face the hardships of lack of money as well as lack of time to get a job to pay for things they need such as food. In "It's Time to Pay the Tab for America's College Athletes" Kareem Abdul Jabar states that "Here we are nearly 50 years later and the arguments for and against haven't changed. Portland Trailblazer Shabazz Napier described his experience as a college point guard in 2014 that was eerily, and sadly, so close to mine: "We do have hungry nights that we don't have enough money to get food in. ... Sometimes, there's hungry nights where I'm not able to eat, but I still gotta play up to my capabilities." The only thing that has significantly changed is that the NCAA, television broadcasters, and the colleges and universities are making a lot more money."

This is one of many instances in which former college athletes and current professionals have spoken out about the NCAA inability to help their players out former UCLA point guard and current Los Angeles Lakers guard Lonzo Ball said in an interview that "Everybody knows everybody's getting paid," Ball said. "That's just how it is. Everybody's getting paid anyway, you might as well make it legal. That's how I feel."

In my personal opinion college athletes should be getting paid, in today's world a Division One athlete is worth around $170,000 and they don't see any of that money, the NCAA uses their image, they televise them to the world, they host events in which they promote the big games such as March Madness.

One of my good personal friends plays soccer for a Division One school Binghamton University. In a quote from him on Thursday October 18 th, 2018 at 4:10 pm he stated that "As a student athlete I believe that if attending a division one program which requires a tremendous amount of time and commitment, athletes should be getting paid. It might not look that hard on the outside but it's extremely difficult to manage time between school and sports, especially during the season of the sport because the teams constantly travel. It's a big commitment as mentioned before, and athletes should definitely receive some type of income."

For a college athlete to waste so much of their time trying to become a professional athlete seems insane especially when it's not guaranteed. According to businessinsider.com the statistical chance of becoming a professional is less than 2 percent (except baseball) make it from college to professional athletes as of 2012. Putting in all that work whilst not getting paid seems outrageous especially when the odds are stacked against you. As a college athlete you must spend all your time either training for the sport you are in or studying because in order to compete in collegiate sports you require a minimum of a 2.3 GPA. Between games preparations and practices, gym sessions, and studying, college athletes are left with no time to find a remedial job that offers a minimum wage to pay for accessories not provided by their universities. The NCAA's strict rules on scholarships eliminate the chance of athletes getting jobs, because most of their time most be spent recovering from workouts, as without proper recovery time they risk getting hurt and losing their scholarship.

There is a split debate between whether college athletes should be paid or if they are getting paid through their scholarships, in David J. Berri's article "Paying NCAA Athletes" he says that " So it seems clear that college athletes are frequently exploited by the NCAA. It also seems clear that the obvious solution is for the NCAA to abide by the same rules we see in labor markets in non-sports industries. Specifically, it is illegal-outside of sports-for firms to collude to limit the compensation of employees." They feel exploited having a "nonprofit" organization make so much revenue off your face and your name. it seems unjustifiable because the the NCAA is worth over 1 Billion dollars with all their broadcasting contracts where most of their sports are televised. Constant advertising these big events such as the bowl games in college football or march madness in college basketball these two sporting events make the NCAA a very wealthy company.

In Tim Parker's article "How Much Does the NCAA Make off March Madness" he states that the NCAA makes so much money off this event that it's unbelievable they call themselves a nonprofit organization. "Basically, March Madness is the NCAA's bread and butter. College athletics' governing body will earn somewhere around $900 million in revenue from the tournament, representing about 90% of its annual revenue. On the surface that seems like cause for outrage, especially in light of how much the players earn: nothing.One of the most lucrative contracts connected with the tournament is the one for the broadcast rights. In 2010 the NCAA signed a 14-year, $10.8 billion contract with CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting, paid over the 14-year term. The deal was extended in April 2016 for a combined total rights fee of $8.8 billion that will keep the tournament on the networks until 2032."

Maddie Weiss and Nathan Noble talk about the exploitation of the athletes and how they are being treated unfairly "It's unfair that the NCAA and some big colleges make millions of dollars because of talented athletes, but those athletes don't get any of that money. They work hard and make sacrifices. Players on top college football teams devote 43 hours per week to practice and games, according to an NCAA survey. That's more hours than most Americans work each week. Although the NCAA says college athletes are mainly students, the athletes often have to miss classes for games. Players on teams that do well in basketball's March Madness tournament could miss two weeks of classes."

Thus far I've spoken about the positives of college athletes getting paid, as well as the positives of athletes getting paid there are also many negatives. Young adults making an exorbitant amount of money won't know how to manage it. Their lack of education may lead to impulsive spending at such a young age and may leave them in a financial instable position in the years to come. With the prominence of so much new technology and gear readily available to the public at the mere touch of a finger, these young athletes will likely spend their money inappropriately.

Many argue that because they are considered "student-athletes" their job isn't as an athlete but as a student. That, for me personally, is the biggest debate that they can make. Which although true the amount of time spent on the field of the sport outweighs the student part of college athletics. Many times, thee "student first athletes" are required to miss class for weeks at a time due to traveling and game times. Any free time these athletes get goes directly to working out. Their summers are seemingly non-existent as they must cut their holidays short to report back to school for pre-season training weeks before the scholastic year begins.

For the first time in over 10 years there has been a poll coming out of Seton Hall that says 40 percent of people agree that college athletes are being exploited for their talents and their marketability with all the advertising they do from commercials. They are used as cash cows and the players see none of the money. A lot of the time these big schools bring inner city athletes into these college campuses where they see these extravagant stadiums and locker rooms and gyms, and a full staff and they take advantage of them because the students are the reason that they are willing to afford all this stuff and then some.

A question iv asked myself for years is, "why don't athletes go overseas to play professionally for a year until they are eligible to get drafted? There are many upsides to going to play overseas for a year; the athletes are competing against similar-or-higher level athletes for a salary and they are competing against others who have undergone a similar pathway to professionalism, and who could possibly offer tips and how to succeed in this field. These athletes they are competing against have experience in this field and can certainly offer advice to the younger athletes that can improve them. In an article written by Jeffrey Dorfman on Forbes.com he states that "If a basketball player didn't feel that qualified as "pay," his only choice was to play in a pro league overseas for at least a year while waiting to be eligible for the NBA. A few basketball players did take the overseas route, but most seemed to believe college was more valuable, implying they place a very high value on the coaching, networking, and exposure they gain from playing in top college programs.

However, a new option is about to be made available. The G League is the minor league for the NBA, providing basketball players not quite good enough to play in the NBA with a place to develop their skills in hopes of advancing to the ultimate stage. The NBA just announced that starting with the 2019-2020 season, the G League will offer top 18-year old basketball players "select" contracts of $125,000 for a year in the G League."

People are becoming aware of the corruption going on in the NCAA and are instead forming programs like the NBA G-League and the JBA to pay young athletes to play the game of basketball instead of attending college. When these young adults would rather go to a different country to play professional sports there's a problem because they are willing to give up their education for money. Young athletes should be allowed to get paid while gaining an education as if they were taking part of a school internship working towards their future goals, the NCAA should be responsible for paying these athletes as they would not only do an ethically and morally good deed but would also gain a big following of supporters.

In conclusion athletes in college are being underappreciated and exploited for the purpose of the NCAA making billions of dollars a year. These young men and women spend their whole lifetime training for their sport and its quite wrong for them to be unfairly used for their talents. The least the athletes deserve is some compensation for them to live their daily lives while not having to worry about finances

Works Cited

Parker, Tim. "What Does the NCAA Really Net from March Madness?" Investopedia, Investopedia, 21 Oct. 2018, www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/031516/how-much-does-ncaa-make-march-madness.asp.

Dorfman, Jeffrey. "The NBA G League Is About to Show What College Athletes Are Really Earning." Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 22 Oct. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/10/22/the-nba-g-league-is-about-to-show-what-college-athletes-are-really-earning/#5daa85fa612c

Weiss, Maddie, and Nathan Noble. "Should College Athletes Be Paid?" Scholastic News/Weekly Reader Edition 5/6, 26 Mar. 2018, p. 7. General OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com.ccnyproxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/apps/doc/A533408705/ITOF?u=cuny_ccny&sid=ITOF&xid=8a7edf77. Accessed 23 Oct. 2018.)

Abdul-Jabbar, Kareem. "It's Time to Pay the Tab for America's College Athletes" The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 9 Jan. 2018

Boone, Kyle. "Lakers' Lonzo Ball: Let's Pay College Players since 'Everybody's Getting Paid Anyway'." CBSSports.com, 23 Feb. 2018,

Student from the University of Binghampton

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should College Athletes Get Paid What do you consider a professional? According to dictionary.com the definition of a professional is "following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain:"Collegiate athletes that are on the level of Division 1 are unpaid professionals with the burden of having to go to school.

# data[].attributes.body
C.  N/A
R. agrees
A. Andrew Smalley
A. none
P. persuade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
College athletes earn billions of dollars annually for their schools, television networks, apparel companies and the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

Should those student-athletes get a share of that revenue, in addition to the scholarships which pay for their education?

That question is poised to have more lasting impact on college sports than a buzzer-beating basket in the Final Four, or an electrifying touchdown in the national championship football game.

A California law tests the theory of college amateurism and is being closely watched by both state and national lawmakers. The bill, SB 206, also known as the Fair Pay to Play Act, passed unanimously and was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom (D) on Monday.

Each year, more than 460,000 college students compete in collegiate athletics, says the NCAA. College athletics, fueled by lucrative TV contracts for sports such as football and basketball, have become a major revenue source for many athletic programs and schools.

California's bill, set to go into effect in 2023, will allow college athletes to hire an agent and be paid for the use of their name, likeness and image. Under the legislation, individual schools and the NCAA would not be able to ban students from earning this compensation.

In recent years, legislators both at the state and federal level have debated whether student-athletes should receive additional pay for playing a sport while in college. The NCAA has long sought to prevent compensation for athletes to preserve the amateurism of college athletics.

In 2019, four states introduced legislation to compensate college athletes or allow college athletes collective bargaining powers.

The NCAA responded to the bill's passage with a letter to Newsom arguing that the legislation would remove the distinction between college and professional athletics and would "negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes." The letter also says the bill would mean college athletes from California will be unable to compete in NCAA competitions and tournaments.

The bill was opposed by the California State University system over concerns that the legislation would not allow student-athletes to compete in NCAA events and might remove their scholarship eligibility. Private colleges such as Stanford and the University of Southern California have also opposed the bill.

The NCAA has said it will consider challenging the bill in court and that the legislation violates the Commerce Clause and would be ruled unconstitutional.

While California is the only state to pass student-athlete pay legislation, other states have introduced similar legislation. Washington HB 1084, would have allowed students to be represented by agents and receive compensation for their image and name. That bill did not pass in the 2019 session. Lawmakers in South Carolina announced plans to introduce legislation similar to California's bill in January 2020.

Other states are also considering different approaches to compensation for student-athletes. In 2019, Maryland legislators introduced, but did not pass, HB 548 which would have required the state to create a collective bargaining process for college athletes. Additionally, a bill has been pre-filed for 2020 in Tennessee that would create a grant fund to compensate student-athletes after they graduate.

At the federal level, North Carolina Congressman Mark Walker (R) introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act which would enact provisions similar to the California bill across the country.

Given the divided public polling on whether student-athletes should be paid and the amount of revenue at stake for both colleges and athletes, this issue is likely to remain a pressing concern for schools and states.
Andrew Smalley is a research analyst in NCSL's Education Program. Email Andrew.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
College athletes earn billions of dollars annually for their schools, television networks, apparel companies and the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Should those student-athletes get a share of that revenue, in addition to the scholarships which pay for their education?