Analysis Essay - Grade: 97 PDF

Preview

Summary

This was an assignment where we had to choose a scholarly article on an argumentative topic and argue for one side....

Description

Megan Millard English 100 February 23, 2020 Analysis Essay Analysis Essay The article I chose to analyze for this assignment proposes the question of whether or not collegiate student-athletes should be paid. One author provides an argument for the yes side of and another for the no side. The author named Marc Edelman who argues that student-athletes should be paid makes claims about how the college sports industry generates a large profit off of these athletes and says that the wealth should be shared with the athletes (Edelman 1). He gives a variety of statistics about how much the industry makes and also the ridiculous amount that coaches and other high up people in the business get paid. Edelman also makes the claim that the NCAA’s rule to prevent colleges from paying student-athletes may also be illegal (13). He argues that it represents a form of wage fixing that most likely violates this antitrust law (15). The author named Horace Mitchell who argues for the no side makes the claim that only a fraction of the programs are profitable while most operate at a cost to the institution (Mitchell 3). He also argues that they are students receiving access to a college education as well as earning scholarships to pay tuition, fees, housing, and other expenses (6). Considering that this article is written to compare, I would venture to say that the purpose of this article was to be informative and thought provoking. Incorporating both sides of the argument allows the reader to formulate an opinion that is based off of both sides. It can also be confusing because one author made the claim that the college sports industry generates billions

Millard 2

of dollars in revenue whereas the other author made the claim that only a small percentage of athletic programs actually make a profit. It is hard to decide which claim to believe, especially because there aren’t really any cited sources or supplemental information. That is not to say that the article isn’t a credible source, but it would be helpful to know how each of these authors could come up with such contradicting ideas about revenues from college athletics. The audience that this article is tailored to is a little more broad. It may be targeted to people who are looking for general information on this topic and want to get a better feel for what both sides of the argument entail, such as audience members of collegiate sports. If the NCAA were to allow student-athletes to be paid, it would affect a number of people that the authors mentioned. Of course the student-athletes who would be getting paid would be affected. You also have to think about the coaches, executives, and athletic directors whose salaries may be cut. There are also a lot of other things at stake here. The author who argues that student-athletes should be paid brings up the point that the NCAA claims it may destroy the competitive balance in college sports (Edelman 17). Though this could possibly be true, it is hard to tell because the statement is just an assumption. Overall, this article raises a lot of questions for the reader. If they were to allow student-athletes to be paid, how much would they be paid? Would different players receive different amounts or would they all get the same amount? With that being said, both statements directly contradict one another. It makes you wonder where they got this information from and also how they are related to the world of college athletics and if that may influence their opinion on the topic.

Millard 3

Works Cited Mitchell, Horace, and Marc Edelman. “Should College Student-Athletes Be Paid?” U.S. News Digital Weekly, vol. 5, no. 52, Dec. 2013, p. 17. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,uid&db=aph&AN=93386222&site= ehost-live&scope=site....