 In modern America, athletic competition dominates large aspects of everyone's lives, both at the professional and collegiate levels. First off, how and why should student athletes be compensated? Student athletes of all levels, primarily basketball and football, are far closer to professional level, full-time employees of these typically large university systems and should be compensated accordingly. In addition to this, both the Universities and the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the NCAA, profit immensely on the backs of these student athletes, making close to billions over just tournaments such as March Madness, in which television deals for the event are in the billions. At the very least, student athletes should be able to profit off of their own name, such as autographs, and personal memorabilia. The NCAA is allowed to advertise their athletes, so why should student athletes not even be compensated for participating in these commercials, something which every other advertisement agency must pay their employees. In addition to this, many students, including myself, are able to hold part time jobs to cover either tuition or personal expenses, something which a lot of student athletes need, typically coming from lower income demographics, but are unable to do, due to their athletic engagements. Overall, student athletes profit very little from their experiences, being that only a small percent are able to move on to the professional level, and are eventually left without a college degree or any applicable skills to the modern economic world.

I am interested in this subject because I have always loved sports and participated in them my entire life, watching collegiate and professional basketball, football, and ice hockey. This topic absolutely affects my values mainly because I believe that everyone deserves to be fairly compensated for how hard they work, as well as how much they have earned. This is particularly important in the case of student athletes because currently, I make more than most student athletes and work only a small fraction of how hard they work. In my personal experience, I was recruited to play college lacrosse at three small, division III universities in Virginia. The choice was to either attend these smaller, less academically inclined school and participate in athletics, or attend a larger state university in which I would be able to gain a better education with which I could obtain employment after my college career ended. Ultimately, I was faced with choosing between athletics and academics, one being more realistic in my case. While this pales in comparison to what division 1 football and basketball players go through, I would like to think it gives me some insight into what they must go through. The only qualifications I have to write about this involve my recruitment to play a collegiate sport, as well as being a college student, giving me somewhat of an insight as to what these student athletes must go through every day.


This Huffington Post article argues that student athletes simply can be paid because the NCAA is very able to, just unwilling. The journalist starts by explaining how critics of the NCAA argue that, being a non-profit organization, are not only extremely able to pay the athletes, but are profiting off of their performances through apparel and advertisement. The article continues by showing the staggeringly high financial figures that the NCAA profits through television deals and endorsements from larger corporations.

The major interests of this article rely heavily on how much the NCAA profits off of sporting events, particularly March Madness. The article continues by saying that some of the smaller, typically less competitive schools, actually end up loosing money, resulting in the closure of sporting programs. This article explains how the NCAA can aid schools and their athletes in these programs, as well as larger programs, by showing, in pure financial, just how much the NCAA is able to gain from these events.

This author is credible, in that he is a senior editor at one of the largest news media sources in the nation, but with a typically clear bias. While the author's credibility is not in question, being a senior editor at the Huffington Post, this article has a very clear address and message to its readers. While the author wrote this article with fairly little bias, the message directed toward a large audience is skewed, favoring those who wish for student athletes to acquire compensation. While showing fact and ways to pay student athletes, the author goes above and beyond by explaining in what ways the NCAA can pay for its athletes. 


The central claim of this Forbes article, explains why student athletes should be paid, rather than how. This article explains, in many ways how college athletes work longer hours than typical Americans, in only their athletics not just schoolwork, how much the NCAA makes, as well as other major extracurricular ways in which student athletes are not aloud to act, but typical people and students are. Overall, the Forbes article is explaining how student athletes are far more similar to full time employees of the Universities than students.

The major values and interests in this article revolve around comparing the student athletes to full time employees. This article makes this stake by explaining how student athletes work longer hours and are forced to abide by as strict or stricter rules outside of their workplace. Overall, the article's main stake revolves around the fact that Student athletes on average work longer, harder, and under stricter conditions than the average working person in America.  

The bias in this article favors the side of the argument, which states that student athletes should be able to profit during their respective careers. It is credible, having come from Forbes and written by a financial journalist. This article appears to lay the background information out for an argument that would typically agree with why student athletes should be paid. Overall, both the source and the author are credible and relatively unbiased, offering typically fact and data for the vast majority of their arguments. 


The central claim of this article revolves around the O'Bannon Case, in which several Northwestern football players began a class action lawsuit against the NCAA, arguing that they deserved compensation for their efforts. The article continues by explaining how hard these students had to work to get where they are, as well as how hard they continue to work for their school and positions on their football team. 

The major values in this article are directly related to defending the members of the O'Bannon case, whom attempted to sue the NCAA.  The article is clearly on the side of the student athletes, as well as defending their needs as young men who appear to be undefended by even the organization that profits off of them.

The bias in this is very leaning toward the argument of the student athletes. This appears to be a credible, argumentative source, but does lean heavy in favor of one direction of the article. Overall, the article is mainly staked in defending the student athletes and their cause, by offering countless examples of how these athletes are affected by their lack of compensation. 

This research is very arguable because there is countless evidence and data that shows how student athletes are being treated. There are many sides to this argument. The arguments against student athletes being paid include; student athletes are students, not professionals, as well as the simple fact that a huge majority either goes to school for free or for very little through scholarships. The arguments against this include that student athletes work longer hours than most modern American workers, student athletes come from lower income families and need financial aid in addition to scholarships, and the fact that student athletes cannot profit off of their own names, but the University systems and the NCAA both can. I find myself in this situation leaning toward the student athlete side of the argument because of how hard and long they must work, especially in the sense that they cannot acquire sponsorship through their own name or even acquire income through endorsements, while the NCAA and the Universities can. In the future of the project I will probably need to revise my research question through narrowing my topic to fewer sports, or how much each individual sport actually brings to the table, in terms of how much athletes the NCAA acquires through television broadcasts of student athletic events as well as how much money the Universities are able to acquire through ticket and apparel sales. 
