
The question above has proven to show its presence in discussion for many years now. The topic has not only caught the attention of the athletes themselves but also the sport fanatics, such as myself, that give life to the games. As a freshman at the University of South Carolina, I have greatly enjoyed the entertainment that sports such as football, soccer, basketball, etc. have to offer. They are a way of releasing stress, having fun with friends, and creating pride for our university. As I watch these athletes bring such liveliness to their schools I start to think of their lives and have a hard time believing they can academically succeed to their full potential with all the work they put into their games.  As I go through a normal day at school it is almost impossible to not have moments of confusion caused by certain class material. It takes much time and effort to receive grades which keep one progressing in the college life. By comparing my life to that of a college athlete, I have truly gained interest in the topic of college athletes being paid for the sports they play. The question of whether or not these individuals should be paid for their sacrifices truly comes to life. The closest personal experience I have to this topic comes from thinking back to high school. Although it could not truly compare to that of a college athlete, I was involved in multiple sports. What I have taken from that past life is that skill of the game can only come from taking time to earn it. That time spent can have much value in the classroom and the knowledge that can be gained from it. I am qualified to write on this topic because I now have experience with the life of college and truly understand the discipline one must have to succeed in it. Having a full time job that a college sport demands cannot allow one to fully prioritize school academics. 

Three sources pertaining to research question:

In the article, "Why College Athletes Should be Paid", Tyson Harnet gives multiple reasoning's on why he believes college athletes should indeed be paid for their talents. He first exams the average worth of a Division 1 scholarship which proves to be $25,000 per year. Harnet explains that this may be true but in reality this isn't much money when it comes to paying for college. He also speaks of how being an athlete is a full-time job that consists of heavy workloads that go unappreciated by their very wealthy universities and of course the NCAA. The major value of this article is to express the reasoning for why college athletes should be paid. The writer believes these players are treated unfairly by their universities and the NCAA. If they don't end up getting paid, the NCAA will continue to make a large and unfair profit from these individuals. The author of this article is named Tyson Harnet. After looking him up on the Huffington Post I learned that he is a former professional athlete, writer and entrepreneur. Making him even more credible is his website, Athleteminded.com, which helps athletes through the mental side of their lives and career. Although the writer does not agree with arguments for paying college athletes he does show much respect to the opposing side. His sources are used correctly and shown through the article. 

In the article, College Athletes shouldn't be paid, McCauley Kieran speaks of his opinion on the issue of paying college athletes. He believes that they should in fact not be paid. One reasoning for this is that they are already compensated with athletic scholarships which essentially provide free education. He also argues that paying college athletes would show unfairness for certain sports through the question "Would all athletes get paid the same amount?." Lastly he gives a counter argument towards the NCAA making too much money off of these athletes. Instead it should be seen as them deserving financial upturns for great marketing work. The major interest of this article is to express how players are already being compensated enough with the free education given to them by their universities. If they are in fact paid to play then there will be much controversy to what sport gets paid how much. The earnings made will also take away from the focus of doing well in class.  When looking up Kieran McCauley I found that he is currently a sports columnist for The Dailey Local News in West Chester, PA. He is a graduate from Temple University. This matters because he constantly writes about issues in sports giving him knowledge and experience on the subject. Although the writer does not agree with arguments for paying college athletes he does show much respect to the opposing side. His sources are used correctly and shown through the article.

In the article, The Case for Paying College Athletes, Marc Edelman informs the readers on the issue of whether college athletes should be paid or not. He does not choose a side but instead gives the facts of the situation. He shows exact figures for the amount of money the college sports industry generates while also explaining numbers of profit for their athletes. Edelman also speaks of rules that the NCAA has created against the act. At the end of this article the author speaks of the two sides that generate from the issue but clearly states no opinion. The value of this article is to simply inform readers of the issue on paying college athletes. There are no values or interest at stake. The author of this article is Marc Edelman. When looking him up I found out that he is an Associate Professor of Law at the Zicklin School of Business. He specializes in sports law, antitrust, intellectual property, and gaming law. His experience in the category of sports makes him credible. He gives and uses his sources correctly and has no bias on the subject. 

Reflection on the feasibility of the research question:

This research question is indeed arguable as it has two different approaches with many different arguments. As I have read through multiple articles there have been many different explanations as to why they should or shouldn't be paid for their talents. One could look at the situation on thoughts of the NCAA, players, universities, or maybe even the pay of different sports. Some agreements that the two sides would have is that both universities and the NCAA make a great profit on college sports. They can also agree that most athletes are given free education to represent their universities. An argument that the opposing sides would have is if the free education is fair for the millions of dollars they bring for their schools and the NCAA. They could also argue whether or not paying college athletes would lead to individuals loosing focus on their school academics. The perspectives of multiple sources has caused me to have an open mind to both sides. At first I'd have to admit that I was leaning towards college players not being paid but as I read more into the situation I have moved towards an undecided opinion. I have not yet chosen a side as much more information from even more sources is needed. Actual numbers and cases of the situation have really given me more interest in the arguments of college athletes being paid or not. In the future I may need to be more specific on my research question. The one currently presented may be too broad as it can be taken by many different approaches. 
