Shouts from the Stands: Why the Ncaa Shouldn’t Pay Athletes by Davis Malone and “shouts from the Stands: Why College Athletes Should Be Paid” by Tony Carroll

...

The other article states that there is someone out there who got denied from the school the player plays for and would’ve paid to go to school and would’ve loved the chance to get educated. Which is true, but it is not evidence that supports his claim. He just keeps giving examples of how NCAA athletes need to be more appreciative. The article says that an athlete who signs there NLI should know what they are getting themselves into. It seems obvious that this author is attacking collegiate athletes rather than supporting why they shouldn’t be paid. The next statement, “If going pro is their end goal and college education is not important to them they should not sign a NLI;” this has nothing to do with being paid or not being paid. Whether or not an athlete is being paid or not has nothing to do with the athlete thinking education isn’t important. Those are two completely different aspects.

In the article supporting athletes being paid it states that athletes’ scholarships do not cover free education. According to The Collegiate Athletes Coalition (CAC) in this article, this claim is true because scholarships only pay for tuition, room and board, and books. Scholarships do not pay for the full cost attending college. This argument continues to bring up valid evidence that is relevant to its claim. The issue with the article regarding athletes not being paid is that is makes up a lot of accusations toward student-athletes that could be true, but there is zero evidence to support those accusations. This claim, “Even if they were given money it’s plausible they would spend it all and create many distractions for themselves and others around them;” can’t be proven until the athletes get paid. This article summed up is an invalid argument because most of it is made up of invalid claims and assumptions about athletes.

The article supporting athletes being paid is a better argument because it had valid evidence that backed up its claims, it introduced many authentic sources, and had relevant topics toward this subject. It is in the best interest for the NCAA to begin paying student-athletes because there will be less incentive to violate rules and receive money or other benefits. The fact of the matter is the same reason scholarships were given in the first place is now the same reason why athletes should be paid.

...