The state of California sent shockwaves throughout the sports world on Monday when Governor Gavin Newson passed a law -- Senate Bill 206 -- which allows collegiate athletes to profit of their name and likeness without the liability of withdrawing their amateur or collegiate status.
The settlement is almost guaranteed to spark the ever-prevalent debate of whether or not college athletes should be paid. It's fair to say that we are PRO compensating these athletes, but, as always, there are cynics who provide the most mind-numbing rebuttals to advocate their side of the argument.
Let's highlight some of these moronic counterclaims, shall we?
4. "It Would Prioritize Athletics Over Academics"
This argument makes no sense in the fact that it suggests collegiate athletes weren't already focused more on their respective sport than their academic courses. What do you want us to say? That athletes who make their university a significant amount of money shouldn't be allowed to profit off their name and likeness because it diminishes the importance of academics? When you say it out loud, it's somehow even more shortsighted.
3. "They Already Get Paid"
It's well understood that college sports powerhouses provide the best services possible to their biggest stars, but to think they are being paid is utterly nonsensical. In other news, some instances have materialized in recent years that concern illegal forms of recruitment, but do we realize how rare these violations formulate? And not all of them actually feature coaches or schools compensating the player(s) or their families.
2. "Which Athletes Get Paid?"
I mean, seriously? You want us to come outright and say that Alabama's and Clemson's biggest football stars shouldn't be paid because a Division II golf team feels that they are getting the short end of the stick? It comes down to money, folks, and the fact that the majority of NCAA athletes are not being compensated considering the sheer surplus they deliver to their school and program is the definition of corrupt.
1. "It Would Eliminate the Line Between Amateur and Professional Sports"
The premium reason why student athletes are not presently being paid, per the NCAA, is because it would eliminate the dissolution between collegiate and professional athletes. So, the athletes who drive in a significant profit for their respective university because of their talent shouldn't be allowed to sign endorsements because they're still in college? Got it. The only difference between some of the biggest collegiate and professional athletes is those very labels.