College athletes should be allowed to make money related to playing

========Pro"s Case======== 1) Pro makes the case that because the businesses did not create the value in the autographed merchandise, they do not have any right to own it. If that"s the case, then regular stores like Target have no business selling any of their products that were produced in factory lines in other countries because they did not make them, so it is unjustified for them to be selling them. Does that make any sense? No. Pro also brought up the following argument: "Let us now look to the practical side of the equation. Will students really corner the market? No, just like with pro NFL stars, they do not do the signings and sell the merchandise." 2)It is not practical for you to speak for college athletes that need money. That is a completely invalid argument because you are merely assuming that by moral rights and wrongs college athletes will not try to make a business off of their merchandise. Surely there will be some who avoid that, but there will also be some who don"t. You also said that pro NFL stars do not do the signings and sell the merchandise. Well, pro NFL players have salaries because that is their job. They do not have scholarships that were paid for them to get an education. "It costs $57,180 to go to Duke. It's $31,946 to attend Butler. The University of Cincinnati, a public, urban place with lots of commuters, costs $24,942 if you're from out of state, which describes the bulk of football and basketball players. If you want to go to the University of Texas, and you're not a Texan, it's $35,776 a year. Many people who work full-time jobs don't make $35,776 a year. Some even have college degrees." [1] It would be a lot more to ask of the college to have them pay $60,000 and pass up the scholarship. If collegiate athletes get a freebee on the scholarship AND a $60,000 cap, they open up a store. I know many people who have done so for less. 3) Pro also brings up the point that "would be better for the smaller schools as skilled players could go to smaller schools where they could be a starter all four years (rather than just their last 1 or 2) and do really well (by not playing as tough of opponents)." If anybody who knows anything about sports hears that (which I do, being on a regional champions soccer team when I was a teenager), they will flat out disagree. Which I do. No sports player gets better AT ALL from playing weaker opponents. Opponents who challenge them will make them better and better. Athletes will choose higher ranked colleges because playing better people will make them play better. You also said they"d get more of a localized fan base. That"s great, but when you"re localized, you eventually run out of people to sell to. And, they won"t get much national attention from smaller schools, which you also brought up. You"re proposed idea about smaller schools will never work. 4) You also mentioned that a moderate-sized college could afford to pay their entire starting line up at a 60K cap. Is that football? Or soccer? Or basketball? Or baseball, or tennis, or any of the littler sports played in college? Because, let"s get real, football, soccer, basketball, and baseball are the real crowd-drawing sports in college. If you allow some collegiate athletes to get paid but not others, how would that work? The answer: It wouldn"t. =======Conclusion=========== My case stands that you cannot stand as a representative of collegiate athletes when you aren"t one. You"re stance on giving the advantage to bigger schools is absurdly wrong, you are willing to put thousands of people out of business for a handful when there is a much better solution, and paying every single athlete is completely unreasonable. Thank you for challenging me to this debate. I hope that voters see the truth and logic in my argument and side with the opposition. "That would defeat the whole amateurism aspect of college football for players to be paid. For me personally, do I think it would be cool? I think it would be awesome, but at the same time if it wasn't kept equal for everybody, it could lead to a lot of problems and lessen the experience of being a college athlete." [2] -Matthias Farley, Notre Dame safety "I don't think we should get paid. The problem with that is there's only a few teams that make money, so how are you really going to pay everyone." [3] -Barrett Jones, Alabama center "When you think about the thousands of dollars we get in free education, it's hard to say." [4] -Harrison Jones, Alabama tight end "Honestly, we get so much at Notre Dame just getting a scholarship, so asking for more is getting greedy." [5] -Justin Utupo, Notre Dame defensive End [1]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com... [2] http://www.usatoday.com... [3] http://www.usatoday.com... [4] http://www.usatoday.com... [5] http://www.usatoday.com...