Pay For Play Analysis

Matthew DelSanto
3/16/11
Analyzing a Text
Amateurs or Exploited Athletes? In the article titled “College players deserve pay for play,” Rod Gilmore makes his case clear; it’s time for a change in college football. Since college sports originated, the athletes have been considered amateurs that receive benefits through scholarships. Recently, college football has become a multi billion dollar industry, and controversy about whether or not players should get paid has risen from it. Through factually supported claims, clever attacks at the system in place, and intelligent and reasonable requests, Gilmore presents a convincing argument to persuade readers to support college football players being paid. The article begins by claiming that there is a need for change in college football. That change is players being paid for their contributions to the school. Gilmore goes on to discuss how certain schools tremendously profit from football every year, through numerous sources of revenue. The next topic discussed is the similar number of games college football players play compared to professionals, and the support college presidents give for this. Then Gilmore discusses the benefits that coaches and facilities gain from the games
played by the athletes. Gilmore suggests that the players are more valuable than the coaches to schools, and compares the coaches’ salaries to the value of a scholarship at a university. Later, the text discusses how players are being exploited, and provides evidence that many football players aren’t even graduating, which is all that can be gained from their scholarships. Lastly, Gilmore offers a solution to the problem he has with players not being paid, and demonstrates that it would not require much more in costs for universities. Throughout the article, Gilmore supports his arguments with staggering facts that show he has reason behind his argument. In the second paragraph, Gilmore lists the profits of colleges throughout the country, which share none of the money with the football players. He questions whether or not the football players can be considered amateur athletes when they are making millions of dollars for their schools. Gilmore shows how college football is clearly an entertainment source with television rights, marketing, and media everywhere. The article then moves on to another comparison to professional football. The NFL currently has sixteen game regular seasons, while in college football, “Now, some of the colleges are playing almost as many games as the NFL teams. Twelve schools played 14 games!” Comparisons such as these make his argument much stronger by showing how much time is put into a college season. Gilmore further discusses factual reasons why players should be paid, by stating the financial benefits coaches and facilities receive from money earned from college games. “For example, Oklahoma State is receiving $165 million from business tycoon T. Boone Pickens to upgrade its facilities. Michigan spent a reported $226 million upgrading its stadium and adding suites and luxury boxes. Texas dropped $150 million on its digs. Those are just a few examples.” The article’s facts are quite convincing, because the staggering numbers give the feeling that the players deserve a portion of the money people pay, to see them play. By attacking the system in place and making it seem lopsided, the author continues to push his argument ahead of its counter.
While discussing why players should feel exploited, Gilmore addresses the counterargument that players are student athletes that already receive benefits through scholarships. Gilmore uses quotations around the words “free” and “voluntary” to give readers the message that the athletes aren’t really getting a free education. For example, “Clearly, a significant number of football players aren't receiving the benefit of the bargain of this "free education." The mandatory and "voluntary" workouts are often at odds with obtaining that "free education.” This is an effective technique, which discredits the other
side. In the text, Gilmore compliments this technique by providing an interesting fact that “The national average graduation rate is 55 percent for Division I-A football players, according to the federal government's calculation,” which keeps Gilmore’s credibility by not seeming slanderous when assaulting anyone who disagrees with him. By providing facts that push the reader in his direction, but also let the reader make a judgment for them self; Gilmore does not make things too personal. If Gilmore made a furious argument with harsh attacks his credibility would sink as he became less and less composed. Gilmore continues to prove that this article is an intelligent and credible source by offering a solution to the problem he is addressing. Not only does he offer the solution, but he takes a reasonable approach to it, which is impressive for a person who is so strongly opinionated. Gilmore doesn’t ask for the players to be paid like the super star athletes at the professional level, but just enough to be compensated for the time and energy they have put into earning their school millions of dollars. Gilmore even addresses a compromise due to the issue that many believe the players shouldn’t be paid while playing the sport. The article’s solution is to “Put some of those millions generated by this business into a trust to be used by players after their collegiate careers are completed. The funds could be used by players for a variety of purposes, such as completing a graduate degree, starting a business, making a down payment on a house, etc. I'd make the players who have an NFL career and earn over a certain threshold amount ineligible (based on the reasoning that the school has assisted them in cashing in on a career). But those guys are the exception, not the rule.” By being so reasonable, and making the reader feel sympathetic towards those who won’t be cashing in on the NFL, Gilmore’s solution makes you want to reach in your pocket and donate some money to the players yourself! In the solution, Gilmore continues to make the benefactors of the current system, such as the coaches seem like the bad guys; “Would it be so awful if Alabama paid Saban $3 million a year instead of $4 million and the difference went into a fund for Bama players?” Gilmore truly masters the argument which convinces the reader that everyone wins. In conclusion, this article convinces readers that college football players should be paid for playing for their schools. With factually supported claims, Gilmore discredits the opposing arguments in clever and intelligent ways. By offering a reasonable solution, he raises his credibility which is a key part of convincing an audience. Gilmore is very effective at showing that college players have been raising millions while barely supporting themselves for years, and that they deserve a piece of the pie. The text implies that schools are using the players for profit in an unfair way, and that it is time for change. With enough readers, this text could change the way college football revenue is distributed forever.