The chorus has been getting louder and I now hear it from all directions: college athletes deserve to be paid! The argument is easy. College football brings in monster crowds and huge profits to universities. Beyond that, schools can sell players jerseys and reap all the benefits, while the college athlete being marketed gets nothing.

These arguments are wrong, college athletes should not be paid. There is a crowd that agrees with me, but for the most part, their arguments are either flawed or easily argued against. The main argument against paying athletes is that they are already being paid. Athletes receive the opportunity for a free education at great institutions across the country. While people like me are still paying off student loans from college, former athletes have a zero balance when it is all said and done. On top of that, they get free meals, free swag, and are hardly living in the same situation as most college kids.

The argument against this is pretty easy, even though I disagree with it. Those who believe that athletes should be paid will point to the fact that many college athletes barely go to class and get nowhere near the education that universities say they receive. While I would say that is each individual’s prerogative, they receive the opportunity for a free education, I’ll let the argument slide. We can count the free education because many athletes never receive it, especially those who are stars destined for profession sports.

The other common argument against paying athletes is that despite the appearance of being poor, these athletes are getting cash from boosters left and right. $100 hand shakes are common and to pretend that these athletes get no money from their endeavors is naive. Again, I agree with that argument but it is flawed. The NCAA can never admit that such practices are common. More importantly, if the athletes were paid, these infractions would no longer have to go on. In fact, this argument is often the reason that people claim athletes should be paid. They claim it would stop much of what is wrong with college athletics today. So again, I’ll let this argument go.

The reason athletes shouldn’t and can’t be paid is because instituting a system to do so is impossible. How do we decide which athletes get paid? Football is the money maker (even Duke lost money last season on college basketball), so it seems like the natural place to start. Let’s use a player like Mark Ingram. He was a star at Alabama, won a Heisman Trophy, and led his team to a National Championship. Naturally, he brought in unbelievable amounts of money to the University of Alabama. So let’s pay guys like Mark Ingram. At this point, I have no problem.

But now we have to expand. If Mark Ingram gets paid, we have to pay every player on the team. Once you start paying these players, Title 9 comes in. We have to spend equally on women’s sports. Once an athlete gets paid the domino effect is clear: every single college athlete has to be paid. Even if a school like Alabama could handle that, which I highly doubt, what does a school like Indiana do? Their football program is in shambles, they have a tiny basketball gym, and clearly aren’t raking in money at the same rate. In this time of poorly funded state universities, we expect them to put their sports programs further in the red as they pay thousands of athletes each month? It just isn’t practical.

One response to this is to pay athletes only based upon a portion of the gate profits at their teams’ games. That leaves a few problems. First, I hardly claim to be an expert, but Title 9 doesn’t care what the gate is: expenses on men’s and women’s sports must be equal. Second, this still leaves players whose jerseys are being sold without any compensation. And third, one rarely discussed, is that schools aren’t tied to any NCAA rule. If the NCAA passed a rule to pay athletes, major schools like Texas would simply leave the NCAA. Once that process began, the other major schools would follow. Schools are not going to willingly walk from the profits that they are accustomed to.

In the end, if you are going to argue that athletes need to be paid, you need to answer how these issues can be corrected. Every time I bring up these practical issues, the person on the other side simply dodges the issue and says they need to be paid. This isn’t the US government, you can’t just throw out new programs without thinking through the consequences.

With that said, I will now try to make some money off of college athletes!

Florida St./CLEMSON OVER 47.5

I was a whopping 10 points off when I predicted this line, I cannot possible see how this is the number. Don’t be fooled by Florida St’s low scoring game with Oklahoma, this game flies over.

Oregon -15 over ARIZONA

Arizona isn’t very good and they have little chance of stopping the Oregon offense. I’ll likely spend most of this game in an internal debate over whether I dislike Chip Kelly or Mike Stoops more.

Oklahoma St +4.5 over TEXAS A&M

A&M is led by Mike Sherman and his breast high pant line. Oklahoma St is led by Mike Gundy who is a man…he’s in his forties.

Ucla +4 over OREGON ST

I hate this bet, but think both teams are awful and this line should be three. This is probably my guaranteed loser.

Lsu -6 over WEST VIRGINIA

I know the hicks and inbreds will be loud in a night game at Morgantown, but that doesn’t change the fact that I don’t think the Mountaineers will be able to move the ball.

WASHINGTON pk over Cal

Whatever.

ALABAMA -11 over Arkansas

I think Arkansas is a bit overrated as they have ran over three terrible opponents to start the year. They now come into Tuscaloosa as less than two TD underdogs. This one gets ugly.

55 Percenters

2011 - 2012 Season Record: 4-4-0 (.500)

All Time on ADPTP: 133-133-4 (.500)

Last Post: 4-4 (.500)