The ongoing debate regarding whether NCAA athletes should be paid is something that has always interested me and is now more relevant than ever. The topic is brought up for debate year after year especially during the beginning of the college football playoff and college basketball's "March Madness" playoff tournament. These are the two highest revenue events for the two highest earning college sports, so naturally the pay-for-play conversation arises again, especially when young adults are playing their heart out while the NCAA signs an $11 billion television rights deal with CBS Sports. As a huge sports fan, and more specifically college sports fan, this topic is something that has always sparked my interest. I rarely go a single day without watching or staying updated on college sports, so this is something that I have paid close attention to and formed my own opinions on. This research topic is something that does not directly affect my life because I am not a collegiate athlete but does affect my enjoyment of college athletics. My father and my brother were both collegiate athletes and majority of my friends play high level collegiate athletics. Any changes made to the current NCAA amateur system would directly affect their daily lives and athletic career. The extent of my personal experience with this topic stems from my personal relationships with family and friends involved in collegiate athletics such as how it has affected them and their educated opinions on the matter. I have also gained personal experience from dedicating my time researching this topic and learning about the different ways different outcomes of the debate will affect each group who is invested in it. I am qualified to write about this because of my knowledge of collegiate athletics, my personal relationships with many collegiate athletes and coaches with whom are my friends and family, and research I have done to formulate an educated solution to the injustices done to college athletes. 

My research will seek to solve the problem of the unfair treatment of student athletes. In my research I plan to address the injustices done to these college athletes and provide a solution

that will level the playing field between the athletes and the NCAA/ schools. The solution to debate on whether to pay college athletes lies in the middle of the two opposing arguments. The athletes have created the market in which they do not even have access to. I am arguing for the NCAA to permit student athletes to make money off their name and likeness, but not to pay the athletes. The NCAA should also work with the professional leagues to institute a rookie salary cap that restricts the starting salary of first year professional athletes based on their progress in college. This would allow for student athletes to make money by doing things such as appearing in commercials, making local appearances, signing autographs, hosting football camps and licensing their name a possible reboot of the NCAA Football video game which was discontinued because of legal issues. This solution is the best of both worlds, it is the most practical and fair method of compensating athletes who are treated almost like slaves for the benefit of schools and corporations. 

The online article written by Patrick Hruby summarizes both sides of the debate on whether student athletes should be paid for what they do for the NCAA and university athletic programs. The article points out that there has always been an underground economy for college sports which proves that these athletes are worth well more than their scholarship value. In this article, Hruby puts the value of the amateurism at stake, claiming it is a thing of the past now. Hruby is a sports writer and adjunct professor who contributes to ESPN and Washingtonian so he is credible in the matter and has a strong bias in favor of compensating college athletes.

In this article, Andrew Sharp recognizes the difficulty with implementing a strategy for paying athletes, which is why no solution has been enacted and we are still having the debate now. Sharp highlighted a proposal put forth by the Pac-12 conference and how the conference is on the right track to allowing compensation for student athletes. Sharp argues for student athletes to have the right to market their own name and likeness. For Example, if Pharaoh Cooper wants to do a commercial for a Columbia car dealership and get paid to do so, he should have that right to use his own name.  Andrew Sharp is a sports writer for "Grantland", a sports news website. His article offers counter arguments and explores both sides of the issue but Sharp ultimately refutes these and is biased towards giving student athletes the right to market their name. 

Ian Crouch's article explores if athletes are actually employees of the university and what implications such status would have. Crouch also challenges the outdated and misused notion of "amateurism". If athletes were to be paid, then under laws they would be considered employees. Crouch explains how this would change college football entirely, to the point where student athletes could join labor unions and have coverage of medical expenses. This source is not biased, moreover the article seeks to explain a court case and how the court case opened the conversation about student athletes being considered employees. The writer, Ian Crouch, is a sports writer for The New Yorker, a well known source for credible information. Ian Crouch has ethos with his audience entering the discussion because of who he writes for.

This research question is arguable on both sides of the debates spectrum. Many people believe student athletes should not be paid at all and that they must keep their amateur status. People who argue this also argue that the free education that the athletes often get paid to attend and play for the university is the payment that they receive as well as many individuals who believe that student athletes already have it easier than other students within the university. Many believe that paying college athletes will ruin campus sports for good and spoil the integrity of the sports. The other side of the argument believes that student athletes should be paid for their talents and to be compensated for the value and money they bring into the NCAA and schools. The NCAA made almost a billion dollars last year and athletes did not see a dime of that money. Supporters of paying athletes believe that they deserve more than room and board and tuition, many scholarships don't even cover books or food. Both sides of the argument are valid and argued passionately but lack a practical solution that can be achieved in the near future. I may revise my research question by trying to get as specific as possible to the best solution and how this solution would play out within the NCAA and fix the injustice that is being done to student athletes. 

