 The discussion of whether or not to pay college athletes has always interested me. I have been an avid follower of college sports for an extended period of time and have seen great athletes develop and turn into great professionals.  The question "How would paying NCAA Athletes affect college sports?" does not specifically affect my values, but it could affect the perception of college athletics as a whole. The question affects me personally because it brings up the idea of paying students, the same age as I am, an adequate amount of money, even though they are already attending a university for free, which I am not. 

The first article "Will Paying College Athletes Ruin Everything We Love About College Sports? Not If We're Smart About It" written by H. Clay McEldowney can be summarized as an informative article that provides many scenarios of the possible outcomes if there were to ever be a ruling allowing college athletes to be paid. The major points of this article are to point out the many flaws in the theory of paying college athletes. McEldowney states that based on the number of athletes on scholarship at major football and basketball programs, it is estimated to cost up to $500 million just to give every athlete $5,000. The number will only increase when bigger programs with more money start competing with one another and the young players will have more and more power over the league. The author seems very credible in his article posted by Forbes Magazine, at first he seems a tad biased on the idea of paying college athletes because he continually points out the negative repercussions of the theory. At the end of his article he does push for a process for a solution but stands firm on his belief that education matters most for the student athletes.  

The second source "Cracking the Cartel" by Theodore Ross is a lengthy article written by a former employee of an student athlete success center at the University of Southern California. Ross is very detailed and specific in his article and holds a very firm stance on the idea of not paying college athletes. The major interest of this article is enlighten the readers that while the idea of paying college athletes for their labor is great, it is impractical and non sensible.  The author, Ross, is very credible based on prior work experience and first hand experience with many college athletes. He uses an abundant amount of factual information to support all of his claims.   

The last article is from the official National Collegiate Athletic Association website. It gives a definition on the concept of "Amateurism", the basis of collegiate sports for many years. The NCAA uses amateurism as a way to put academics before athletics. " In the collegiate model of sports, the young men and women competing on the field or court are students first, athletes second" (NCAA). The NCAA is very interested in this concept of amateurism, and it is often the subject of argument while debating the compensation for student athletes. The NCAA is clearly on the side of not paying athletes to maintain the ideology of amateurism and for monetary reasons. The bias in this article is clearly evident because they are a party directly affected by the question, "How would paying NCAA Athletes affect college sports?" The NCAA is firm on the stance of keeping amateurism alive and saving as much money as possible. 

The question, "How would paying NCAA Athletes affect college sports?" is a very arguable and debatable topic. The parties for both sides of the argument have many legitimate reasons why one is more right than the other. The sources do agree on some points, such as the importance of maintaining amateurism and making sure college athletes understand that academics come first. The sources disagree in some means because in the first two articles they at least acknowledge the fact that paying college athletes could potentially work in a limited system, but in the third article it is strictly a no compensation standpoint. The different perspectives of the three articles allowed me to see the argument from different points of view and better understand the argument that they should be paid, but I still believe that athletes should not be paid. I think my research question is sufficient and specific but, I need to do more research on the repercussions it would have on the collegiate sports world. 

