Casebook

Bowen, Fred. “College sports can bring in big money. Should athletes get some of it?” The
Washington Post, WP Company, 9 Apr. 2014,
www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/kidspost/should-college-athletes-get-
paid/2014/04/09/5cfb4b2c-bf36-11e3-bcec-
b71ee10e9bc3_story.html?utm_term=.a869e30b4e15

In this article the author reasoned that college athlete should be paid due to the amount of
revenue universities through sports like football and basketball. Bowen question why student
athletes aren’t already being paid especially because they are considered employees of the
university already.
The authors purpose for writing this article is to persuade the audience that college
athletes should be paid because of the money the university makes off them. The audience for
this article is anyone connect to athletics whether its television viewers or young athletes who are
considering playing in college. This piece was written in April of 2014 which is recent.
This article was written by Fred Bowen, a sports fiction author and a Washington Post
sports analysist. I believe that the author is because his he uses statistics and facts to support his
claims. He clearly has an opinion, but he does not use any language to disgrace the opposing
argument. This source is reliable because it is the Washington Post, a nationally recognized and
and award-winning newspaper. It has clear links to its authors to show their credibility and has
citations for its articles.
This article is very relevant my topic because it argues towards my main claim that
college athletes should be paid. It will help me support My claim by allowing me to utilize the
many statistics and facts the will sway the readers opinion my way.

Cooper, and Kenneth J. “Should College Athletes Be Paid to Play? Michigan State Law
Professors Robert and Amy McCormick Say Division I College Athletes Qualify as
Employees under Federal Labor Laws.” Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 23 June
2011, pp. 12–13

Kenneth J. Cooper’s article argues that the reason athletes should be paid is because they
should be considered “employees” of the universities under federal labor laws. This would give
them the legal right to negotiate wags, hours and working conditions. Michigan State Law
Professors analyze whether Division I football and basketball players are employees under
common law and they outline how the law presents opposing opinions on whether the athletes
would qualify, and it even ends with the alternative solution of giving athletes a stipend rather
than a payment.
Kenneth J. Cooper is the writer of this article and he is a Pulitzer prize winning reporter
and writer. He has worked for many major newspapers and national magazines. Although this
article was written in 2011 and does refer to a previous president and his administration, the laws
and rules that they are arguing are applicable to current athletes. This makes them relevant and
accurate.
This information will be helpful in my paper because many of the arguments for athletes
being paid are opinions that have good points behind them, but none are legally binding
arguments. This would be hard evidence that the players should be paid.
 Holliday 2

Edelman, Marc. “21 Reasons Why Student-Athletes Are Employees And Should Be
Allowed To Unionize.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 6 Jan.
2015, www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2014/01/30/21-reasons-why-student-
athletes-are-employees-and-should-be-allowed-to-unionize/

Marc Edleman’s article provides twenty-one different reasons why he believes college
athletes should be allowed to unionize. The purpose of being able to unionize would be so that
the players could get paid and negotiate with the NCAA. Many of his reasons help validate my
viewpoint that athletes should be paid.
The author is a law professor and attorney that focuses on sports business. This makes
him very qualified to write on this topic. Although this article was originally published in 2014,
the author has published subsequent scholarly papers on the topic. While he is presenting an
argument only for student athletes being able to unionize, he has the legal background to back up
his points. Also, his points are logical, fact-based argument rather than it being just his opinion.
While I will not use all his twenty-one points, I will incorporate many of his reasons into
my argument. I will also use some of Edelman’s later scholarly papers to show the legal
argument for why players should be paid.

Marshall, Blake, and The Daily Utah Chronicle. “Should athletes be paid to play?” USA
Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 20 Oct. 2016,
college.usatoday.com/2016/10/20/should-athletes-be-paid-to-play/

“Should Athletes Be Paid to Play” was written by two students at the University of Utah
with opposing views on whether college athletes should be paid. The argument against paying
players largely revolves around the challenging questions of who would pay the players and
which players should be paid. The opposing argument focuses on the idea that player should be
allowed to be compensated for the name or image being used to make money.
This article is written by students who are offering their opinions on the topic. The reason
that this is still a good source to use is that it was written in the last year and it shows both sides
of the argument for the topic that I am covering. The authors, although they are students, were
reviewed and then reprinted by a national news outlet that has high accountability. Additionally,
they cite sources such as NCAA regulations and specific bylaws of the NCAA.
I can use both arguments in my paper for the point I am making and for my counter
claims. What was helpful in this article was the specific NCAA regulation and bylaws that were
named that I will use to back up my argument. These are hard facts that will help give strength to
my point of view.

Nocera, Joe. "Should College Athletes Be Paid?" New York Times Upfront, no. 10, 2017, p.
22. EBSCOhost,
sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tru
e&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.490622704&site=eds-live

This article by Joe Nocera offers two opposing opinions on my research topic. The
reasons behind each opinion are different than in any other source. Nocera focuses on economics
as the reason that players should be paid, and Williams focuses on the value of a college
education that athletes do receive as the reason they should not be paid.
 Holliday 3

This article was just written in the last few weeks, so it is very current. The author has a
list of sources that they used which show the accuracy of his points. By presenting both sides of
the argument, the article is not bias. The author is nationally recognized as a writer who is
qualified to write on this topic.
I will use this source both for my counterargument and to make sure that I have hard
evidence to back up my point. I will also use some of the sources that they listed for additional
research.

OBannon, Ed, et al. Court justice: the inside story of my battle against the NCAA.
Diversion Books, 2018

In the book by Ed O’Bannon, he shares his personal experience as a college player and
how his likeness was used in Xbox games without him receiving royalties or providing
permission. He chronicles his long battle with the NCAA over this and argues that college
athletes are not treated fairly. O’Bannon discusses throughout the book that the NCAA has not
been upfront about how much money they are making off athletes while at the same time the
NCAA is exploiting college athletes.
This book was just published in early 2018, so it is current. The information is relevant to
my topic because I also believe that college athletes shooed be paid. O’Bannon is qualified to
write on this topic as a former NCAA athlete who has taken on the NCAA in court over his
beliefs. O’Bannon is telling his story from his perspective which is against the NCAA. The fact
that his argument is taken through the US legal system helps balance what is his opinion against
what is legal. This contributes to the accuracy of his book because it is actual documented events
in the court cases. He is trying to show a side of the NCAA that he feels is not out in the open.
I will mainly use O’Bannon story as my example of how NCAA athletes can be taken
advantage of by the NCAA, and how the athletes should be paid when they are used in Xbox
games and other money-making items using their name or image. I may also use some of the
information that was presented in court about the NCAA.

Washington, Jesse. “Big-Time college athletes should be paid with big-Time

educations.” The Undefeated, 7 Apr. 2017, theundefeated.com/features/big-time-
college-athletes-should-be-paid-with-big-time-educations/

Jesse Washington argues in his article that universities need to prioritize athletes’
education and learning experiences over the sport and its revenue. He believes that an athlete’s
“payment” should be an elite education, and he outlines all that is included in a scholarship. He
also points out how the American culture, which is so focused on greed, contributes to the focus
being taken of the athlete’s education onto money. He believes that the focus needs to be put
back on athletes getting an education that will help them the rest of their lives.
Jesse Washington is the winner of the Journalist of the Year and also has won a National
Journalism Award so he is well qualified to write on this topic. Washington embeds his sources
within his article so that the reader can easily refer to them. His article was written in the last
year, so it is current. Washington provides alternative viewpoints throughout his article showing
both sides of the argument.
I plan to use this article because he does a good job outlining what is included in a
college athlete’s scholarship and can put an approximate dollar value on those benefits. I will
 Holliday 4

also use his idea that there should be more of a focus on the education over the athletics whether
the players get paid or not. This will help show balance in my argument.