1)      Do you feel that NCAA athletes should be paid for their athletics? If so, why?

Typical attorney answer but I am very split on this.  First, many athletes are responsible for a significant amount of revenue drawn by the school but that is limited to the popular sport at the larger schools.  (i.e football at Alabama).  Where would the pay be cut off? Women’s softball? Rodeo?  Who gets paid and who doesn’t?  That then brings up the issue of which players get paid.  Does the university pay all the players on the football team or just those that bring in the revenue?

It should also be said that these athletes are getting a free education, free living, and food.  The cost of this is significant.  Again, I can definitely see it through the eyes of the athlete who helps generate millions of dollars for the schools.


2)      How much of a difference could the added cash make to a college student?

Im sure it would make a huge difference.  I did not play college ball and with the time put in for studying, there was barely time to work.  With the athletes’ added time constraint because of practice and games, I can’t imagine how they would have time to earn any additional money.


3)      Do you feel that the scholarships provided to the athletes neutralizes the revenue colleges make through tickets, media, rights, and branding? If so, why?

Im not sure I would say it neutralizes but I do think it adds to the argument that the athlete receives something of value that the average student does not. With the cost of food, school, and housing, the athlete does save a significant amount of money that the average student may well be encumbered with for years after graduation.


4)      Do you feel it is an obligation of the colleges to pay their athletes with some of the revenue they make from the athletes?

Again, Id refer you to my answer to Question 1 with this thought..  the more difficult question would seem to be which athletes get paid and where does the college cut it off.  Do all athletes at the school get paid or just the players on the highest income-generating teams?  What about athletes at schools that don’t draw large crowds?


5)      Would the NCAA benefit by allowing their athletes to sign sponsorships and endorsements?

I do believe that if an athlete is popular enough to be able to generate income from his name, then he should be allowed to sign endorsements and scholarships.  This does not seem to be the school giving an athlete an “unfair” advantage.


6)      What were your opinions of the Johnny Manziel incident/suspension?

I never saw evidence proving the allegations against him and I wouldn’t be opposed to a player having the right to earn money from sponsorships or any other income derived from his name.


7)      How do ou feel college sports in general would be affected by colleges paying their athletes?

Im fairly certain that if a player is paid, he will be deemed a professional and not a collegiate athlete.  I think that as alluded to in previous questions, paying athletes would create issues of which athletes at a school get paid—All the athletes?  Just those on the 3 major sporting teams—football, basketball, and baseball?  And then which players on the major sport’s teams get paid—All or just the most popular?


Leave Your Thoughts!

Check Also

Penn take down Albany in Women’s NIT

Philadelphia: While the entire nation watches the NCAA tournament, there is another postse…