1) "Bar pay-for-play in collegiate sports." Tampa Tribune 25 006 2011. 14. Web. 27 Oct. 2011. <http://www.lexisnexis.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=8422&sr=lni(536H-H4G1-JBV0-D2JD)>.
The author isn’t objective because he leading toward the issue of not paying college players for their play. This article is directed toward players and fans that have anything to do with this issue. The main idea is that athletes should not be paid outside of their scholarship because they have the opportunity to work just like non-athletes, also he states that getting paid to play is what professional sports is for. Things that I learned from this article is that when this issue is brought up in the NCAA meeting it will quickly be resolved because of some of the issues the author talks about. I disagree with this author because being an athlete I know how little time athletes have for jobs outside of school and practice. This article will be helpful because it is something that I can argue against.
2) Goldman, Lee. "Sports and Antitrust: Should College Students Be Paid to Play." Notre Dame Law Review. 65. (1990): 206-61. Web. 27 Oct. 2011. <http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/tndl65&div=16&g_sent=1&collection=journals>.
The author is not bias because he argues for and against the issue. This article is related to athletes and fans as well as lawyers and government officials. This article argues that athletes should stay amateurs but they should be paid because NCAA is making money off of them and the players don’t see any of it. I learned about the fair market value, which states that players should be paid according to how they perform. This makes sense to me because I agree that if a player puts people in the seats then he should be paid more than someone that doesn’t ever play. This will be helpful in my papers because it is an article that supports my side of the issue.