College athletes should be paid.

Pro says I did not make any attempt to disprove his first opening statements, even though clearly in the 1st round it says "Con may offer rebuttals as to why he disagrees in order to help build his own case". See here it says "may". I will now counter attack all of Pros statements. It's not even about the money but it's about so many other things. Yes it's a nice idea that college athletes get paid but they're so many negative aspects to it. If the athlete were to get paid there must be a contract. Lets say this athlete goes to UCLA & signs a contract for 4 years ok? Now two years into his contract he already becomes a college basketball sensation and NBA teams want to draft him already. They can't though because he's signed to contract! Also college is for education, not to gain athletic popularity. It gives the wrong message to younger kids. These athletes are going to ask for million dollar contracts, if you thought the 30 year olds in the NFL were bad, what about a 18 year old with the chance to acquire a multi-million contract. They are just not mature enough to carry that much money. My last statement brings me to my next statement. It'll completely take away all NCAA competition and scholarships could disappear. Reason is because bigger well-known universities will have more money, a bigger reputation, etc. It would make Div 2 teams weaker because they do not have the money to buy top prospects, making it very difficult for lower teams to negotiate if they don't have the money. Now what about the female athletes? Don't forget about community college as well. Do they have to pay high school athletes as well to bribe them to accept their school and no other school? Yes athletes are a big resource to income money, but in high school that's why they have athletic program. This sets a wrong representation for college & high school athletes. College athletes ARE NOT professionals!! The reason for college is to train the athlete for next level of play. For example in football you go from little league, to higher age group, to varsity, to college to professional. Also how would this benefit other students on campus? Who's going to pay the athlete? If the college does then this could raise the tuition rate for a non-athlete. If a professional team paid the college athlete then that'd break the NCAA Benefit Rule. Also, which athletes get paid? There's tennis, soccer, baseball, chess, etc. It's not fair if only popular sports got paid. Basketball and football, the most visible of high school and college sports, have a very low percentage of athletes who play in high school and then eventually move up to the professional ranks. In men"s basketball, for example, there is only a .03% chance of a pro career. This means that of the almost 156,000 male, high school senior basketball players only 44 will be drafted to play in the NBA after college, and only 32 women (.02%) out of just over 127,000 female, high school senior players will eventually be drafted. In football the odds are slightly better, with .08% or 250 of just over 317,000 high school senior players being drafted. http://www.thesportdigest.com... Keep in mind this is just the NCAA, as the numbers are selective but in high school the number is wider because there's more opportunity. So the chances of a high school player skipping college and becoming pro is very low because they are not going to have the skills or experience from a lower level of play. How do they know if they can compete with other college level players? To wrap this up, paying college athletes would just be unjust. It would not be fair for the many reasons I've stated above. This debate is about college athletes being paid & I provide more than enough information as to why they should not be paid. My argument literally speaks for itself.