For a while, whenever the question of whether or not college athletes should get paid, I always answered no. My reasoning was that most athletes were already on major scholarships anyway, and I believed a portion of their scholarship was already designated as spending money. However, after taking a closer look at their lifestyle, I realized that my assumptions were wrong. Many of the athletes' parents can't afford tuition and are fortunate enough that their children were gifted with a talent. Despite athletes being afforded a considerable amount of money, a lot of the times, their parents are unable to travel to their child's game. However, from the outside looking in, particularly at USC, you would never know that they lack additional funds due to them being decked out in Under Armour gear. After doing more research on the athletes, my views changed and I was in favor of athletes' pay. Although I'm not a college athlete, I have played sports since I was about six. Regardless of what sport I was on, the experience never changed. When we stopped to eat after a game, there would always be someone lacking funds. This was no surprise to me, being from a small town. Additionally some of the athletes who contribute the most on the team, may lack the most financially. 

The central claim in this article is that the NCAA continues to come up with excuses, supporting their claim that they lack revenue, to compensate college athletes. In his interview with Maurice Peebles, Jay Bilas also stresses that, "Regardless of how many billions of dollars are passed around between the NCAA, its broadcast partners and various sponsoring corporations, the players themselves still make zero." 

According to Bilas, if athletes were to get paid, there is this idea that other sports who don't generate as much money for the school will be canceled, they can't seem to find a solution to change the current system and it will change the value or status of many Division I teams. 

Maurice Peebles is a deputy editor at Complex magazine. Although, now, a sports analyst, Jay Bilas has played college level and professional basketball as well as been an assistant coach to Coach K at Duke University in the 1990s. Being that he has been involved with both parties, I believe that he was an exceptional candidate, who could give valid information.

Although, in 1906 when the NCAA was founded, and it was known that there would be no pay given to student-athletes, times have changed. The league is far more advanced now and generates billions of dollars. Much of those dollars are bought in by student athletes, in which, if the system stays as it is, they'll never get to see. 

Due to the NCAA making so much money, usually administrators, coaches and athletic directors of colleges profit the most from student-athletes' cheap labor. The rules and regulation of the league doesn't allow student athletes to be used for "promotional purpose" or "monetary gains", but ironically clothing brands and universities profit off of them wearing their gear. 

This article is from Listland.com and I wasn't able to find a direct writer on this source. However, after doing previous research, I've found very similar findings in the other sources that overlap with what the writer of this article is trying to present to readers. Based off of the historical evidence in the text, there were some pieces of information that was verified or corrected. 

In previous articles, the journalist or interviewee argued that the NCAA was responsible for not compensating student-athletes. However, this source claims that administrators are the cause of withholding funds, and are now guilty of their actions. In order to make up for lost time, they would now like to share the wealth. 

With new proposals, the Power 5, which consists of the SEC, ACC, Pac-12, Big 10 and Big 12, are able to challenge old NCAA rules and discuss possible new rules that they would want to implement to help provide funds for student athletes. With new proposals, it challenges the "worth of the scholarship to the compensation/benefits of the services rendered."

Dennis Dodd is the senior college football columnist for CBS Sports and has been a part of the Bowl Championship Series for about thirty years and has covered many games in his career. Although, he does give valid facts, many of the coaches' quotes are in favor of student-athletes salary showing that he gives a biased opinion.

My research question is arguable because initially one may think that it is a cut and dry question, however after reading they may find out that they're on the fence about the issue. After research, one of the main agreements I found between sources is that the system is designed for student athletes to designate most of their time to their sport, while also staying in good academic standing. If one fails to do so, they are acquitted of their duties and their scholarship is taken. I could revise my research question, by including more information. For example instead of saying "paid" I could say "compensated for their time and marketing clothes." 
