Should college athletes be paid? Recently, California’s governor proposed a bill for college athletes to be paid. Though the law wouldn’t go into effect until 2023, it would allow “the state’s college athletes to monetize their name, image and likeness, and sign endorsement deals and licensing contracts.” According to CNN, the NCAA may impose its own hurdles to this. 

I think college athletes should be paid because you never know what problems their family has or the athlete personally may need money for other things. 

Of course, there are pros and cons of paying college athletes, but the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. It would encourage college athletes to stay longer at their colleges. Because if they are getting paid, they would most likely stay and get their degree. It would increase competition for the best athletes, and it would create improve programming at colleges across the country.

It could be bad because athletes would just use athleticism over academics and perhaps athletes wouldn’t try in school because they are getting paid for playing sports. It might also burden the smaller colleges that are not in the D-1 division. 

This could make for an interesting change in the way athletes choose colleges. Athletes sign away his or her rights in college sports, and though tuition is great, the only one risking his or her health and earning potential is the athlete. College sports is a big time commitment, and this is time that athletes might not be able to have part-time jobs to offset the other costs of school or to help at home. If athletes have the option to earn money while in school, I think it should be allowed. They can get an education, play sports, and earn money to help themselves and their families.