Should college athletes be paid? This is a very controversial topic that seems will never come to an end. Exploring the different viewpoints, both sides have very logical reasons why or why not a NCAA player should or should not be payed. You teens reading this may be getting ready to jump into college and possibly play in the NCAA, is getting some or all your education paid for enough or would you rather be compensated and discounted on education? The player, of course, would love to be payed for what they accomplish at the college level. In a suit against the NCAA, shown that they weren't immune under the antitrust act for not paying the players. Although the players side got a win there, the court said it, “reversed a lower-court ruling that would have …show more content…
increase scholarship payouts to cover the full cost of college attendance” (Yankah). The next time both sides go to court, the players association will hopefully come out with a win, without the loss of blood. The players association of the NCAA need to focus more on the antitrust topic, if players want to win. In a meeting with leading antitrust economist, Andy Schwarz, he argued that, “We all should have the right to earn what we’re worth.” This is a true fact of life, players just need the opportunities and the rules restricting them to be banished so they can become what they are really worth. The NCAA does not want to lose any money, this is the baseline of the their argument against paying players. The six billion dollars of revenue the NCAA brought in last year will be less if they start paying the players and that is what the NCAA is scared of. In an article written by the founder of the National College Players Association states, “players' opportunities are not free, and half of the revenue-producing athletes don't graduate.” If the players don't graduate they aren't able to be successful in life after their athletic career unless on the rare occasion turning