The age I am trying to attract for my audience is people 18-24 years old and college athlete alumni, gender both male and female, economic status of any kind that relate or are into the issue.
I have to use what and how they get paid, why they should not in the first place, and why they are blessed enough to play the sport in college.
Bring self interest, both sides of beliefs towards my conflict, and a open mind to the issue.
The evidence will require facts and data on revenue and profit the NCAA makes and what they do with all the extra money they have since they are a non profit organization. I also should point out what people pf the high office say and what former players have stated on this situation.
I need enough evidence to get my argument across to where people will be moving to my side of my claim. If I can put into my peers eyes that money does not have to be the paper itself and put into something important like free education they should be satisfied.
I have mixed evidence when I can because I have athletes perspective on it because they went through school not getting paid. Also I have a coaches view on it.
I have selected the best pieces possible to help my claim and I can easily develop more than 3 reasons in my piece.
Thesis: If schools are saying its student first then athlete why are we now giving them money as a sport, like it is a job to them rather than the opportunity to play the sport longer than most even do. The NCAA needs to take a stand and file an appeal.
Evidence: My sources.
The age I am trying to attract for my audience is people 18-24 years old and college athlete alumni, gender both male and female, economic status of any kind that relate or are into the issue.
I must argue why students should not get paid compare these athletes to regular students and how they work full time just as these athletes do, but something they enjoy.
Free education, housing, food, tutoring, clothes, play the sport you love, books, etc.
In this magazine article I read it explains in two different standpoints on if college athletes should get paid or not. The one for paying these student athletes say the two words are flipped and they should be called “Athlete student”. They begin to explain that the NCAA is a multi billion dollar business and without these student athletes they would not be where they be at today. The one against is saying that if they begin to compensate these students most of the athletic programs would shut down because they will not be able to afford it. It is also arguing the fact many would not have went to college if it wasn’t for the athletic scholarships they received. Lastly, the fact that these students do not have to face a mountain of debt.
This is a helpful source because it has both views of the argument to get a better sense for both sides. Comparing this source to the other ones I have it is one of the more reliable ones because it had a lot of statistical facts and very sincere arguments. The source is objective because it is open to hear both sides account and take recognition, and fairness towards both ends. The goal of this source is to open my mind to the yes side of getting student athletes paid so I won’t be biased on the topic because I want to know more about this, and dig deeper.
This source was very helpful to me in many ways. It has kept me in a more open mindset of this conflict rather than being biased towards not paying college athletes. Made analyze the stats and facts more deeply to get a great understanding why they are putting it out there and for what specific purpose. It helps me shape my argument by the fact that student athletes want tog et paid, but by the end of their 4 years they can make $100,000 all put into school and have everything they need. It has not changed on what I think on the topic, it had only make me side way more with not paying them at all. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A172961159/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=66b2ec9e
In this audio she explains the immaturity and wrongful usefulness of student athletes and should get paid under the National Labor Relations Act. Arguing that with all the plane rides, hotels, coaches getting paid in millions, etc is ridiculous because the ones that are getting all of this are not the ones playing the actual sport. She believes as everybody else gets their benefits and rewards within the school because of the athletic programs the players are rewarded with unpaid labor. Ton conclude she wants people to stand up for the college athletes today are facing awful injustice.
It was a useful source, but not the best source. She began to relate this situation to the National Labor Relations Act which is fine, right to have an opinion but I wanted the evidence within that act to compare it to student athletes playing sports. Comparing this source to my others it is not the best one and not the most reliable because it was all based on her own opinion rather than research. This source is very biased as it strongly is on the case for getting these college athletes paid.
This source was somewhat helpful just because I can receive more insight and perspective on peoples’ argument on getting college athletes paid. It keeps shaping my argument better for me in my opinion because she was speaking just on her behalf and no real evidence in the piece at all to back her up. I can use this source in my research project to show people do not really know what would happen if athletes got paid where the money would come from. It has not changed at all on what I feel on the topic and still hold on strong towards athletes not getting paid in college. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A279613787/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=0c9cb5a7
In this magazine article it talks about how like the source I had before is either for or against it. In the argument for getting these students paid talks about how the NCAA racks up to around $6 billion in profit , and the extra profit they have they give it to the school or coaches and leave the players hanging. Even if the athletes want to have a part time job they can’t because the busy schedule of their sport and education. The argument against it is more money more problems. As of the now these college students get enough benefits as it is and will make over $100,000 in the four years in education. They are labeled as students and by paying them you will have them veer off into sports and not care about academics which could lead to a ton of violations and conflicts within the NCAA. The issue of this topic is that people are worried about putting more money in sports rather than putting more into academics.
This was a useful source because brings more light to the conflict itself, where will the money be coming from and what to sacrifice for it to happen? Comparing this source to the other sources I have now is very useful and will most likely go back and read this magazine article no doubt. This is a very reliable source as it creates more understanding and focus on what would happen if athletes did start getting paid and just also present day on how it goes for these college students not getting compensated. The source is objective and it experiments on both ends on their strong based opinions, but with factual information to backup their claims.
This source was helpful got me more intact to keeping my mind open to different scenarios if or it still doesn’t happen for student athletes to get paid. My argument for student athletes not getting paid graciously improve because so far all the ones on my side have the most factual, statistical, and proven information as in the side fighting for it are either opinionated or finding ways to get them paid. I can use this source for great evidence and display it in my research project. This source made me feel better for my argument gave me courage to proudly side on not having college athletes paid. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A373896858/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=95592ec6
This audio is about the NCAA letting players get compensation over their image and likeness. They believe the main reason of doing so is that other people like fans will not be able to use their name for their self profit. As they kept discussing they said if the college athletes get paid they will not be typical students anymore. As for paying them their first priority they will not put in first anymore.
This is a useful source because this is a specific action that actually just been passed in the court system that players will get paid off their own image and likeness. Comparing this to my other sources it is the sole one to use because this article is especially the most recent and critical in the argument on if college athletes should get paid or not. This is a reliable source because I can use this to bring the current news to this conflict. This source is biased because this person is mad at the NCAA and the fans because we are calling these college athletes amateurs.
This source is very helpful because it digs in deeper towards my conflict and to observe how far it has gone since this conflict has begun. My argument has changed a little supporting the fact that they are on a video game with their number and name and people will buy this game because of these players image and likeness. I can use this source to configure my piece in my research to show this will be the only move can make to give these athletes some sort of money for playing the sport they play. The source has made me shift a little, but just a minor hit in the road and just keeping my head straight towards the claim I had said. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010490205/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=672edb00
In this article it about Jeremy bloom who played football at the university of Colorado, but went to the world cup for skiig in 2005 but was then banned from playing football because of his endorsements and money made from it. The NCAA said either take endorsements and be banned from collegiate sports or quit skiing. Bloom then decided to test them and the NCAA ended up banning him. Later on was eventually got drafted by the Eagles and still skis today.
This source is very useful because it shows a different side of things in a situation where a student played two sports and was professional in the other. Comparing this to my other sources it is divergent in a sense because this dives into a player who suffered loss of the money because the NCAA would not let him take his endorsement money while playing his collegiate sports. This is a reliable source because it has a great story of a player who had one of his passions taken away, but for right reasons because it would cause too much conflict than it already has. I can use this source to emphasize how fair the NCAA is because if Jeremy Bloom was able to do both, all the college athletes would try and get endorsements for playing their collegiate sport which is illegal, nobody makes a profit as a player.
This source is helpful because it helps me structure my argument to create more sense to me and for my peers. My argument is still true since I have first said it, they get paid enough it is just not in the money form in which they would rather want, but would be not the smartest thing to do. I can use this source to create a visual for my peers to see why college athletes should not get paid and this is why with Jeremy Blooms story. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A446932182/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=0880decc
This magazine article is about a federal judge who tossed out that College athletes should get paid at least minimum wage. The judge said even if they deserve this type of payment it would have violated the Fair Labor Standards Act. Also did not pass it because the judge does not know exactly if the Congress intended the College athletes to be apart of the act.
This source is useful because you can see what they have to go through (violations, acts, rules, laws) to get it passed and be able to give college athletes their money. Comparing this to other sources I have already used this is credible because it dives into the court system and why even if judges agree why it cannot be done. I can use this source to keep providing evidence to make my argument stronger.
This source is helpful from a civil, lawsuit situation to provide how it goes through a courtroom or trail and what has occurred and resulted. My argument after reading this makes it better because the highest arch to get it passed will not, because the evidence and sanctions won’t let it. I can use this source for dramatic representation to bring my peers to attention and to justify my argument. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A383048730/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=24771bc3
This magazine article is about how back in 2014 two lawsuits came out for having college athletes get paid and university of northwestern being labeled as employees of sports, but were later appealed. In this they had players like Napier who played for UConn and stated some nights after games he would lay in bed starving. As most of these sources I have read they explain the revenue coming in from NCAA and how they will not distribute to any players. NCAA states that they aren’t as profitable as they think because most of the other collegiate sports lose money, so football and basketball pretty much takes on all the money universities and the organization makes.
The source is useful because it takes accounts of players who are now pro athletes speaking on their behalf of playing collegiate sports and whether it is fair to not get paid. Comparing this to other sources I have it is more of a reasonable source because it takes personal accounts I do not play college sports, so I cannot be in their shoes. I can use this source to help me show benefits that these college players have because mostly everybody else is in debt and starving.
This source is helpful because it helps me guide my research like I am cruise control. My argument is still staying strong even a lot of the accounts from my sources I stay strong because this type of conflict has a lot of emotional appeals and persuasion to make you think that is what it really is but is not most cases. I can use this source to carry on how strong my side is against the for side. A lot of people do not understand by attending bowl games and they get little money here and there. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A171431936/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=2de85ba3
This is actually an argument on my side, stating that these kids get paid for the sport they played with a great education that is free. Especially since kids get these offers and compare their grades to the school standards most would not be there because technically they are failing. People are mistaken getting paid has to be a check or dollar bills in your hand, but giving them a full four year college program with no cost is better according to this article. As people believe these students are treated poorly they have the best college life.
This source is helpful because it helps my argument and he agrees with me! I like how he interprets money is not the equalizer as in money doesn’t control what we can do all the time. Comparing this to my other sources I will highly recommend using this often to back me up as I will do the same for him. The author just brings great opinions and conflict resolutions to the questions that I will interpret for him. The source is for sure biased as it sides only with the athletes not getting paid.
The source is credible because I can use this very well to state my argument in my research piece. My motivation for my argument has increased tremendously as it made my point of view more visible and confident to speak on this issue. I can use this to show my peers and abiding people that there is really no point to getting them paid because technically, they already do.
McCormack, Eugene. “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid due to Post-Eligibility School Benefits.” Should College Athletes Be Paid?, edited by Geoff Griffin, Greenhaven Press, 2008. At Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010490204/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=dc832c12. Accessed 22 Oct. 2019. Originally published as “Classroom Comeback,” Chronicle of Higher Education, 7 July 2006. Select
In this article surprisingly it is actually against athletes getting paid because of the post eligibility school benefits. Especially the fact that these athletes that leave early in hope for a professional gig does not work out they are left stranded, but the huge benefit for these people is that they can comeback and finish out their school degree. It is so easy to go back to college for athletes that all they need to do is have 10 hours of community service hours a week and all the colleges have to do is pay a small fee. What is nice is usually people like these athletes that go back to college will be successful out of it. Also how they are able to bring these players back the university’s revenue from tickets and such they will donate a part of that so players can comeback.
As I assessed this piece this was a really cool article. Shows that you will get your money earned through your education. Now I believe if a school pays an athlete to play a sport they will forget what is the most important, education itself it is the soul reason whether they like or not why they are there in the first place. The thing is the piece is not biased and very credible with the data, facts, and statistics. The information was reliable because I had no idea that the former student athletes came back to school for free, and showed me with facts that it is true. So I really enjoyed reading into this article because as I think for many other people it will open your eyes to see that the money you get is gonna be through the education.
Yes this source was helpful to me because it kept digging down giving me clues that student athletes should not get paid. The source was very helpful and will go back to it for strong examples and facts to back me up. It helped shape my argument that even through busy schedules of these players to opportunity given to them is huge and they can take huge advantages towards it. I can use this source in my paper by having it support my claim strongly. It kept my head on straight towards this topic and cannot wait to find more clues and answers.
This article is pretty relevant and is asking in a political type of standpoint with democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang. Yang states that everyone knows it is wrong the whole system itself not giving enough money or no money at all. Yang wants the bill to go through every state like California to get money from your name that is being sold to fans. The Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith disagrees strongly with the bill and does not want any NCAA student athlete to get any profit.
The source is somewhat reliable it really only had two people and the NCAA organizations opinion involved on the matter. I do side with the Ohio States athletic director Gene Smith because in all fairness lots of scholarship money go to these students and if they would rather get paid you would have to take out one or the other school scholarship, or being a wage maker.
This source is helpful you see opinions of political figures and also workers inside the NCAA organization sparking fumes of arguments. I can use this when trying to balance and even out the conflicts to show what each side is fighting for and why. It is credible because straight sources are used from the mouths of these people. I can also take this and use it on my body paragraphs when debriefing this topic. My mindset now towards this after reading this article is shaping my head clearer to a better understanding for both sides on what they want and why.
My first source (College athletes should get paid) is about how the NCAA economically get money from the economy like selling to broadcasting televisions to commentate and have the games to be viewable for around $6,200,000,000. They have also stated in the article some of the coaches will earn over $1,000,000 after one season. Then after all the statistics and facts towards that the writer begins to state the injustice in where athletes do not get paid, but they should. Then begins to veer how coaches of these teams are sponsored and get paid for these deals as athletes are left empty in their pockets. Being a student athlete and becoming a professional athlete is rare, but as they try it is hard to keep up with studies and the graduation rate is bad especially for the first 4 years because they have a lot on their plate according to the article.
Assessing the information I see that there is a lot of justified information, facts, data, and statistics to get college athletes paid because of the workload they have upon them throughout the years. You can also say a full ride scholarship is paying you for instance to get an education and to play a sport for the school. At of all honesty is it that hard? As a regular full time student and paying loans they have it a whole lot easier than most. I believe the only way they should get paid is if they sell a jersey or something entitled in its name to get most of the profits.
To conclude and reflect the article was very well, professionally typed to put you in a good perspective of a student athlete. In my opinion at the end of reading it and having it digest it actually made me believe student athletes are paid through their scholarship which is a lot. I understand why this has been coming up a lot as of late, it is only because of social media (a whole different topic to get into) but yes student athletes are paid for their education and playing the sport, does not have to be in a check or in cash money form to prove it. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010490203/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=98ca532d
The article I read called “Play to Play: Should college athletes get paid?” dives in right away the revenue most colleges get and know most of its profit is from sports. A big argument it has in this article is if college athletes got paid they can be able to finish school and graduate school. Then it begins to discuss even though getting paid technically through a scholarship they get no money at all from shoe deals, sponsors, television, and gear sold with their number or even last name on it included also. Especially with games and practices players cannot make it to every class which causes them to fail out or not get the grade they want, so by paying them they can be able to stay on task all the time and get both parts of their job done as a student-athlete.
As I assessed this topic and article this was a lot of a stronger piece than my last source (no offense to the writer of the first source) just because it was short and straight to what it was trying to say. As I assessed my first source I was very strong towards that they are already paid through a full ride scholarship, but the writer from this article made me rethink my thought process of it. I liked how it stated that as schools title these players as student athletes the two words should be switched around. Athletes can never get a perfect attendance because the coaches of their teams drag them out for a game or a practice. If this consistently happens to these types of students I believe a payment should be placed for them so they can keep focus and not lose insight on what is more important, education.
In conclusion after reading this article I am 50/50 on if college athletes should get paid or not. Such a great conflict that could get resolved in 5-10 years or for a very long time. As I keep researching and observing what I have at hand with this argument I believe by following these steps of this I can vividly find myself in the perfect decision to know 100% if athletes should get paid or not.
The research I want to do is on college athletes getting paid or not. I will interview a football player on the team (which will not be named, but nickname will be Gary). I will interview him before thanksgiving break talk to face to face and record the conversation. Then after break start to structure my researched piece.
My research topic in assignment two was if college athletes should get paid or not.
issue the court just passed for all NCAA to get paid off their image and likeness.
What I want to say about this issue is athletes are benefited enough with pay through their education.
If schools are saying its student first then athlete why are we now giving them money as a sport, like it is a job to them rather than the opportunity to play the sport longer than most even do. The NCAA needs to take a stand and file an appeal.
Personal experience from her eyes what she sees in her spectrum, perspective.
screen panel, screening of the film, panel discussion.
Her claim is the dream we had lost because the impact of building super sized houses and affecting our environment.
she continues to put pictures in the essay to emphasize her argument and make it a visual aspect for you to see what was there and how it affects us today and the environment.
make sure you read the whole thing and get a better aspect of the conflict so you can articulate the most accurate information.
In this magazine article I read it explains in two different standpoints on if college athletes should get paid or not. The one for paying these student athletes say the two words are flipped and they should be called “Athlete student”. They begin to explain that the NCAA is a multi billion dollar business and without these student athletes they would not be where they be at today. The one against is saying that if they begin to compensate these students most of the athletic programs would shut down because they will not be able to afford it. It is also arguing the fact many would not have went to college if it wasn’t for the athletic scholarships they received. Lastly, the fact that these students do not have to face a mountain of debt.
This is a helpful source because it has both views of the argument to get a better sense for both sides. Comparing this source to the other ones I have it is one of the more reliable ones because it had a lot of statistical facts and very sincere arguments. The source is objective because it is open to hear both sides account and take recognition, and fairness towards both ends. The goal of this source is to open my mind to the yes side of getting student athletes paid so I won’t be biased on the topic because I want to know more about this, and dig deeper.
This source was very helpful to me in many ways. It has kept me in a more open mindset of this conflict rather than being biased towards not paying college athletes. Made analyze the stats and facts more deeply to get a great understanding why they are putting it out there and for what specific purpose. It helps me shape my argument by the fact that student athletes want tog et paid, but by the end of their 4 years they can make $100,000 all put into school and have everything they need. It has not changed on what I think on the topic, it had only make me side way more with not paying them at all.
In this audio she explains the immaturity and wrongful usefulness of student athletes and should get paid under the National Labor Relations Act. Arguing that with all the plane rides, hotels, coaches getting paid in millions, etc is ridiculous because the ones that are getting all of this are not the ones playing the actual sport. She believes as everybody else gets their benefits and rewards within the school because of the athletic programs the players are rewarded with unpaid labor. Ton conclude she wants people to stand up for the college athletes today are facing awful injustice.
It was a useful source, but not the best source. She began to relate this situation to the National Labor Relations Act which is fine, right to have an opinion but I wanted the evidence within that act to compare it to student athletes playing sports. Comparing this source to my others it is not the best one and not the most reliable because it was all based on her own opinion rather than research. This source is very biased as it strongly is on the case for getting these college athletes paid.
This source was somewhat helpful just because I can receive more insight and perspective on peoples’ argument on getting college athletes paid. It keeps shaping my argument better for me in my opinion because she was speaking just on her behalf and no real evidence in the piece at all to back her up. I can use this source in my research project to show people do not really know what would happen if athletes got paid where the money would come from. It has not changed at all on what I feel on the topic and still hold on strong towards athletes not getting paid in college.
In this magazine article it talks about how like the source I had before is either for or against it. In the argument for getting these students paid talks about how the NCAA racks up to around $6 billion in profit , and the extra profit they have they give it to the school or coaches and leave the players hanging. Even if the athletes want to have a part time job they can’t because the busy schedule of their sport and education. The argument against it is more money more problems. As of the now these college students get enough benefits as it is and will make over $100,000 in the four years in education. They are labeled as students and by paying them you will have them veer off into sports and not care about academics which could lead to a ton of violations and conflicts within the NCAA. The issue of this topic is that people are worried about putting more money in sports rather than putting more into academics.
This was a useful source because brings more light to the conflict itself, where will the money be coming from and what to sacrifice for it to happen? Comparing this source to the other sources I have now is very useful and will most likely go back and read this magazine article no doubt. This is a very reliable source as it creates more understanding and focus on what would happen if athletes did start getting paid and just also present day on how it goes for these college students not getting compensated. The source is objective and it experiments on both ends on their strong based opinions, but with factual information to backup their claims.
This source was helpful got me more intact to keeping my mind open to different scenarios if or it still doesn’t happen for student athletes to get paid. My argument for student athletes not getting paid graciously improve because so far all the ones on my side have the most factual, statistical, and proven information as in the side fighting for it are either opinionated or finding ways to get them paid. I can use this source for great evidence and display it in my research project. This source made me feel better for my argument gave me courage to proudly side on not having college athletes paid.
This audio is about the NCAA letting players get compensation over their image and likeness. They believe the main reason of doing so is that other people like fans will not be able to use their name for their self profit. As they kept discussing they said if the college athletes get paid they will not be typical students anymore. As for paying them their first priority they will not put in first anymore.
This is a useful source because this is a specific action that actually just been passed in the court system that players will get paid off their own image and likeness. Comparing this to my other sources it is the sole one to use because this article is especially the most recent and critical in the argument on if college athletes should get paid or not. This is a reliable source because I can use this to bring the current news to this conflict. This source is biased because this person is mad at the NCAA and the fans because we are calling these college athletes amateurs.
This source is very helpful because it digs in deeper towards my conflict and to observe how far it has gone since this conflict has begun. My argument has changed a little supporting the fact that they are on a video game with their number and name and people will buy this game because of these players image and likeness. I can use this source to configure my piece in my research to show this will be the only move can make to give these athletes some sort of money for playing the sport they play. The source has made me shift a little, but just a minor hit in the road and just keeping my head straight towards the claim I had said.
In this article it about Jeremy bloom who played football at the university of Colorado, but went to the world cup for skiig in 2005 but was then banned from playing football because of his endorsements and money made from it. The NCAA said either take endorsements and be banned from collegiate sports or quit skiing. Bloom then decided to test them and the NCAA ended up banning him. Later on was eventually got drafted by the Eagles and still skis today.
This source is very useful because it shows a different side of things in a situation where a student played two sports and was professional in the other. Comparing this to my other sources it is divergent in a sense because this dives into a player who suffered loss of the money because the NCAA would not let him take his endorsement money while playing his collegiate sports. This is a reliable source because it has a great story of a player who had one of his passions taken away, but for right reasons because it would cause too much conflict than it already has. I can use this source to emphasize how fair the NCAA is because if Jeremy Bloom was able to do both, all the college athletes would try and get endorsements for playing their collegiate sport which is illegal, nobody makes a profit as a player.
This source is helpful because it helps me structure my argument to create more sense to me and for my peers. My argument is still true since I have first said it, they get paid enough it is just not in the money form in which they would rather want, but would be not the smartest thing to do. I can use this source to create a visual for my peers to see why college athletes should not get paid and this is why with Jeremy Blooms story.
This magazine article is about a federal judge who tossed out that College athletes should get paid at least minimum wage. The judge said even if they deserve this type of payment it would have violated the Fair Labor Standards Act. Also did not pass it because the judge does not know exactly if the Congress intended the College athletes to be apart of the act.
This source is useful because you can see what they have to go through (violations, acts, rules, laws) to get it passed and be able to give college athletes their money. Comparing this to other sources I have already used this is credible because it dives into the court system and why even if judges agree why it cannot be done. I can use this source to keep providing evidence to make my argument stronger.
This source is helpful from a civil, lawsuit situation to provide how it goes through a courtroom or trail and what has occurred and resulted. My argument after reading this makes it better because the highest arch to get it passed will not, because the evidence and sanctions won’t let it. I can use this source for dramatic representation to bring my peers to attention and to justify my argument.
This magazine article is about how back in 2014 two lawsuits came out for having college athletes get paid and university of northwestern being labeled as employees of sports, but were later appealed. In this they had players like Napier who played for UConn and stated some nights after games he would lay in bed starving. As most of these sources I have read they explain the revenue coming in from NCAA and how they will not distribute to any players. NCAA states that they aren’t as profitable as they think because most of the other collegiate sports lose money, so football and basketball pretty much takes on all the money universities and the organization makes.
The source is useful because it takes accounts of players who are now pro athletes speaking on their behalf of playing collegiate sports and whether it is fair to not get paid. Comparing this to other sources I have it is more of a reasonable source because it takes personal accounts I do not play college sports, so I cannot be in their shoes. I can use this source to help me show benefits that these college players have because mostly everybody else is in debt and starving.
This source is helpful because it helps me guide my research like I am cruise control. My argument is still staying strong even a lot of the accounts from my sources I stay strong because this type of conflict has a lot of emotional appeals and persuasion to make you think that is what it really is but is not most cases. I can use this source to carry on how strong my side is against the for side. A lot of people do not understand by attending bowl games and they get little money here and there.
This is actually an argument on my side, stating that these kids get paid for the sport they played with a great education that is free. Especially since kids get these offers and compare their grades to the school standards most would not be there because technically they are failing. People are mistaken getting paid has to be a check or dollar bills in your hand, but giving them a full four year college program with no cost is better according to this article. As people believe these students are treated poorly they have the best college life.
This source is helpful because it helps my argument and he agrees with me! I like how he interprets money is not the equalizer as in money doesn’t control what we can do all the time. Comparing this to my other sources I will highly recommend using this often to back me up as I will do the same for him. The author just brings great opinions and conflict resolutions to the questions that I will interpret for him. The source is for sure biased as it sides only with the athletes not getting paid.
The source is credible because I can use this very well to state my argument in my research piece. My motivation for my argument has increased tremendously as it made my point of view more visible and confident to speak on this issue. I can use this to show my peers and abiding people that there is really no point to getting them paid because technically, they already do.
McCormack, Eugene. “College Athletes Should Not Be Paid due to Post-Eligibility School Benefits.” Should College Athletes Be Paid?, edited by Geoff Griffin, Greenhaven Press, 2008. At Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010490204/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=dc832c12. Accessed 22 Oct. 2019. Originally published as “Classroom Comeback,” Chronicle of Higher Education, 7 July 2006. Select
In this article surprisingly it is actually against athletes getting paid because of the post eligibility school benefits. Especially the fact that these athletes that leave early in hope for a professional gig does not work out they are left stranded, but the huge benefit for these people is that they can comeback and finish out their school degree. It is so easy to go back to college for athletes that all they need to do is have 10 hours of community service hours a week and all the colleges have to do is pay a small fee. What is nice is usually people like these athletes that go back to college will be successful out of it. Also how they are able to bring these players back the university’s revenue from tickets and such they will donate a part of that so players can comeback.
As I assessed this piece this was a really cool article. Shows that you will get your money earned through your education. Now I believe if a school pays an athlete to play a sport they will forget what is the most important, education itself it is the soul reason whether they like or not why they are there in the first place. The thing is the piece is not biased and very credible with the data, facts, and statistics. The information was reliable because I had no idea that the former student athletes came back to school for free, and showed me with facts that it is true. So I really enjoyed reading into this article because as I think for many other people it will open your eyes to see that the money you get is gonna be through the education.
Yes this source was helpful to me because it kept digging down giving me clues that student athletes should not get paid. The source was very helpful and will go back to it for strong examples and facts to back me up. It helped shape my argument that even through busy schedules of these players to opportunity given to them is huge and they can take huge advantages towards it. I can use this source in my paper by having it support my claim strongly. It kept my head on straight towards this topic and cannot wait to find more clues and answers.
This article is pretty relevant and is asking in a political type of standpoint with democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang. Yang states that everyone knows it is wrong the whole system itself not giving enough money or no money at all. Yang wants the bill to go through every state like California to get money from your name that is being sold to fans. The Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith disagrees strongly with the bill and does not want any NCAA student athlete to get any profit.
The source is somewhat reliable it really only had two people and the NCAA organizations opinion involved on the matter. I do side with the Ohio States athletic director Gene Smith because in all fairness lots of scholarship money go to these students and if they would rather get paid you would have to take out one or the other school scholarship, or being a wage maker.
This source is helpful you see opinions of political figures and also workers inside the NCAA organization sparking fumes of arguments. I can use this when trying to balance and even out the conflicts to show what each side is fighting for and why. It is credible because straight sources are used from the mouths of these people. I can also take this and use it on my body paragraphs when debriefing this topic. My mindset now towards this after reading this article is shaping my head clearer to a better understanding for both sides on what they want and why.
My first source (College athletes should get paid) is about how the NCAA economically get money from the economy like selling to broadcasting televisions to commentate and have the games to be viewable for around $6,200,000,000. They have also stated in the article some of the coaches will earn over $1,000,000 after one season. Then after all the statistics and facts towards that the writer begins to state the injustice in where athletes do not get paid, but they should. Then begins to veer how coaches of these teams are sponsored and get paid for these deals as athletes are left empty in their pockets. Being a student athlete and becoming a professional athlete is rare, but as they try it is hard to keep up with studies and the graduation rate is bad especially for the first 4 years because they have a lot on their plate according to the article.
Assessing the information I see that there is a lot of justified information, facts, data, and statistics to get college athletes paid because of the workload they have upon them throughout the years. You can also say a full ride scholarship is paying you for instance to get an education and to play a sport for the school. At of all honesty is it that hard? As a regular full time student and paying loans they have it a whole lot easier than most. I believe the only way they should get paid is if they sell a jersey or something entitled in its name to get most of the profits.
To conclude and reflect the article was very well, professionally typed to put you in a good perspective of a student athlete. In my opinion at the end of reading it and having it digest it actually made me believe student athletes are paid through their scholarship which is a lot. I understand why this has been coming up a lot as of late, it is only because of social media (a whole different topic to get into) but yes student athletes are paid for their education and playing the sport, does not have to be in a check or in cash money form to prove it.
The article I read called “Play to Play: Should college athletes get paid?” dives in right away the revenue most colleges get and know most of its profit is from sports. A big argument it has in this article is if college athletes got paid they can be able to finish school and graduate school. Then it begins to discuss even though getting paid technically through a scholarship they get no money at all from shoe deals, sponsors, television, and gear sold with their number or even last name on it included also. Especially with games and practices players cannot make it to every class which causes them to fail out or not get the grade they want, so by paying them they can be able to stay on task all the time and get both parts of their job done as a student-athlete.
As I assessed this topic and article this was a lot of a stronger piece than my last source (no offense to the writer of the first source) just because it was short and straight to what it was trying to say. As I assessed my first source I was very strong towards that they are already paid through a full ride scholarship, but the writer from this article made me rethink my thought process of it. I liked how it stated that as schools title these players as student athletes the two words should be switched around. Athletes can never get a perfect attendance because the coaches of their teams drag them out for a game or a practice. If this consistently happens to these types of students I believe a payment should be placed for them so they can keep focus and not lose insight on what is more important, education.
In conclusion after reading this article I am 50/50 on if college athletes should get paid or not. Such a great conflict that could get resolved in 5-10 years or for a very long time. As I keep researching and observing what I have at hand with this argument I believe by following these steps of this I can vividly find myself in the perfect decision to know 100% if athletes should get paid or not.
Eitzen, D. Stanley. “College Athletes Should Be Paid.” Sports and Athletes, edited by James D. Torr, Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010233247/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=ebd776bc. Accessed 17 Oct. 2019. Originally published as “Slaves of Big-Time College Sports,” USA Today Magazine, Sept. 2000, p. 26.
Meshefejian, Krikor. “Pay to Play: Should College Athletes Be Paid?” Should College Athletes Be Paid?, edited by Geoff Griffin, Greenhaven Press, 2008. At Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010490203/OVIC?u=ucinc_main&sid=OVIC&xid=98ca532d. Accessed 17 Oct. 2019. Originally published in The Journal of the Business Law Society, 23 Mar. 2005. Select
1. Field research is recording what you see either in written notes, photographs, drawings, audiotapes, and notes from interviews and conversations. The three types are, observations, questionnaires and survey, and interviews.
2. Challenge for observation is not having enough personal experience or more information towards the topic you are discussing. A challenge for questionnaires and surveys is it can be hard to find a reasonable one to use for your work. The third challenge for interviews is finding the right types of experts to get you know your topic better or for what you are trying to find.
The challenge of using a monograph is your not always gonna get what you want out of it.
With articles it can be challenging by if you read along it is either you know it or don’t with the information given in the article.
1. The three interview types are, face to face, phone, and email.
2. A face to face challenge would be not having audio equipment with you and end up not knowing all of what that person said to you. Phone can be challenging when the connection you have is weak or the other persons is, make sure you guys are at a good hotspot to make sure there will be no difficulties. Email can be a challenge because it is not at a personal level so you gotta make it yourself through your email.
3. Make sure you cover only things you need to know and the answers you need. Do not waste their time and have them not waste yours either make it friendly and hostile free and youll get all the answers you need.
In field research you begin to observe with you can. Recording what you see can be either in written notes or with photographs or drawings. It can be a recording, what you hear as in audiotapes and in notes of interviews and conversations.
Observations wants you to spring and get what you personally know or want to share. It does not want you to shy away from it but get more involved in this part when gathering information because you could be the one with the best information there is when researching a topic.
In questionnaires and surveys look at previous ones or make up one and find the best reasonable ones you can rely on when working on assignments.
Interviews are big especially getting into contact with an expert, by doing that you are able to find out what you wanna know or hear more about.
Brandon's Blog 