The Dangers of Parallel Development

What puts our national parks/forests in danger you may ask. It is easy to assume pollution and our lack of "going green" could put these parks at risk, however, I feel differently. Of course, pollution does play a factor in the danger of our National forests, but the constant development of housing and buildings being built horizontally rather than vertically will soon be the death of many parks. It is truly inevitable to stop such rapid growth and development and the persistent urge to expand our cities only puts our forests at a higher risk. There are plenty of groups trying to protect our forests and stop deforestation but it is only matter of time before our levels of oxygen are depleted to a minimum and we must gasp for air in our last few breaths. Yes, this is a slight dramatization, but the problem with our endangered National Forests is no joking mater. Development parallel to our Earth affects our forests and ultimately our entire ozone level and world.

The biggest problem with national parks are that humans are too careless.  We pollute the parks which cause even greater problems.  Rivers, lakes, the land, and the air gets polluted and animals pay the price.  Eventually, a lot of animals are going to become endangered and we are going to wonder why, when in reality, it was our fault all along.  We all need to realize the damages we put on our parks and fix them or we won't have them anymore.

National Parks

National Parks are some of the most beautiful and pristine wildernesses in all of america. These parks are the only things that keep wildlife safe and preserve the natural history of the outdoors. Modern day ethics and issues are creating problems for the national park systems. One of the most influential issues with the National Park system would be the people. Citizens and visitors who visit the parks disrespect the natural beauty and disregard important rules. People often disrespect the parks by leaving trash behind. When people leave trash out they provide an opportunity for animals to find unnatural food sources. If animals are used to finding food from people, they will cause issues and endanger the people in the parks. People also disrespect the wilderness aspect of the parks. Hiking trails are marked to preserve untouched wilderness. If people continue to go off trails and destroy natural habitat, animals and plant life will die and the parks would be useless. Another issue with the people is the lack of interest in the new generation. Kids these days would rather sit down on the couch and watch tv or play video games. The lack of interest is going to start to affect the profits of the parks and the importance in the newer generations eyes. If the next generation doesn't find the national parks important, they will be disregarded and utilized for other needs, Ultimately destroying the national parks and their beauty. The issues with funding are problems that need to be resolved in order to preserve the natural beauty of  the park systems. Without proper funding, parks wouldn't be able to regulate people and keep control over the park systems. Overall, I believe the national park systems are some of the most important and beautiful areas left in the united states. Without these parks, we would be losing a large area of endangered wildlife and plant life.

National Parks

Based on the articles, I believe that there are two main problems the National Parks are experiencing right now. Number one involves a lack of knowledge and respect of the great outdoors by many of the parks' patrons. Litter, destruction of property, feeding the animals, and a lack of respect of all of the plants and animals by the visitors are all reasons that are bringing down our national parks. Many visitors to our national parks are tourists, which see our parks as more of a zoo just for their enjoyment. They don't understand that most parks are still wilderness, even though they are populated by people. They leave garbage around, feed the animals like pets, and disturb plant life when they hike. The best way to protect our national parks would be to take all of the people out of them. But if we did, what's the point of having any national parks if we can't enjoy them. The second issue involves a lack of funding. Both Nat Geo articles say our national park system costs 9.5 billion a year to run. In terms of popular politics, nobody will ever bring up the idea of giving our national parks more money. Our government is too focused on intervening in foreign countries and studying healthcare. We need to give our national parks all the money they need to keep in good shape. If our national parks are ruined, there is no way to get them back. We need to appreciate them while we still have them and treat our planet nicely.

I think that the biggest issues facing the National Forests are both the lack of funding and the lack of knowledge given to the United States about the issues that the National Forests face every day. Because of the economic hardships of this day and age, the people who are paid to take care of the forests are faced with less resources to keep the forests safe and properly maintained for the public to enjoy. Due to the lack of funding heading to the National Forests it causes the Forests to face hardships that can't be overcame or improved upon. The lack of money also ties in with the fact that the people of America are unaware of different problems that the National Forests face. They aren't fully aware of the money that is needed to maintain the forests, as well as what we can do as a nation to keep the Forests safe and protected from possibly natural causes or unnatural man-made problems that happen in forests across the world.

National Parks

In our current times today, there are many things wrong with our National Parks. These issues range from climate change and wildlife management, to foreign invaders and water/ air pollution. Personally, I believe that the biggest issue regarding our National Parks is the lack of knowledge of the public. As humans who live upon this earth, we are responsible for what we do and how we effect our surroundings. When looking at issues such as climate change, and pollution, that is mostly caused because of our actions and the waste we are disposing into our planet. People are becoming so ignorant and careless that we are practically choosing to destroy our environment. By putting in the effort to become informed and care, we can start saving our precious National Parks from during into National Dumps.

Air Pollution

     The problem I see with national parks is the air pollution. There are many factors why I think so. One I would like to discuss is tourist travel thousands of miles to see some of nature’s beauties. Nature can be pretty neat, but when there is smog in the air and the visibility is blocked, it can be pretty shameful for those who created that smog. I would be pretty disappointed to see nothing but smog when attending great Smoky’s national park. Another issue on air pollution is that the smog is not healthy for the environment. It slowly kills plants and wildlife as well as contaminates the purest mountain water. These issues should be acknowledged but I don’t know if there’s quite anything you can do about it. There are other more important issues in the world currently at this time.

I believe that the biggest issue affecting our parks in the disregard for the native species and our infatuation as the human species with consuming for without the farsight to see how it will affect our future. Yet I am going to take the idea of park a little bit farther and write about our planet as our “park”. Most educated people know that the planet is warming up due to the massive energy demand that humans need whether that be through coal plants or nuclear power plants our energy consumption keeps rising due to the fact that our population is rising. People tend to think that we are the apex predator species of our planet and that is true but what we need to know is that we are sharing this earth with thousands of other species that we need to protect. Our earth as a park is leaving species in the dust. Every year you see that another species of bird, or fish as gone extinct because of human’s greed or disregard for other wildlife. For instance the Australian government chose to create shipping lanes that cross the barrier reef to cut prices on gas need to power the ships. I think that we as a human species need to redirect our thinking of how we disregard the many different species that we live with.    

National Parks

I believe the biggest issue right now for national parks is the foreign invaders. Many don't realize what problems all the invaders can cause but it's actually a lot. The animals or plants native to the region can get taken over by these new invaders which can then cause extinction. Prevention is key to this problem because say a milfoil plant is transported from the one lake to another it makes it nearly impossible to get rid of this invader with out killing everything else in the lake. It's kind of a domino effect that is very difficult to reverse.

National Parks

I think that the articles that we read are a good slap in the face for some people. We have this beautiful planet and we are treating it like poop sometimes. Pollution is a big problem that we face and I think that people are gradually taking little steps to make it better. We are the reason why most of everything happening to these places is. We take the water, the trees, we move animals to other places, we tear things apart. Surely we could give back to the parks that give us so much.

National Parks

The biggest issue affecting our natural park system is simply us humans. We are the cause for most of the top ten issues. We the people are the causes for invasive species by being the transporter of bug and unintentionally transporting in snakes. Water demands grow as human race exponentially grows, depleting the water from the natural parks as we see fit. We aren't the ones held responsible for the climate day to day but we are the ones that are responsible for global warming that then affects the climate by polluting it and warming it up slowly. Human development in the search for new land to build as our country grows in sizes greatly affects the parks. Overall in the end, I believe it is us humans that are to be deemed the biggest problem for our natural parks.

Biggest Issue Affecting our National Park System

The biggest issue affecting our national parks, especially in recent years, is budget. You know as well as I do, that if you want something, you have to pay for it, National parks included. The reason this is the biggest issue is because all of the other problems they face can only be solved if they have money. Barna says,  “Depending on your funding, you take care of the most essential ones first. However, if your pipes burst or the roof leaks, your priority list changes and things that were on the top of the list get pushed further down the list.” Since we are on the topic, I’d like to point out that, at the moment, national parks aren’t exactly on the top of the nations priority list. So, if I were in charge, I would start learning how to manage my money and realize that we’re lucky to get any funding at all. “It is incumbent upon us—regardless of our budget—to look for innovative approaches that allow us to do our work more effectively and efficiently,” (Barna).

National Parks

Climate change seems to be one of the biggest problems to date with our national park system.  The warming climate will cause glaciers to melt, which may lead to the closure of Glacier National Park in Montana.  In addition, the warmer temperature can cause fire season to grow longer.  Wildfires, such as the rim fire in Yosemite, will prevent people from enjoying its natural beauty.  It can also change landscape and have devastating effects on species that populate these national parks.  Changes in temperature and precipitation can push species out of their previous ranges towards softer temperatures, either upwards in elevation or northward.  This proves to be the biggest problems with our national parks in our world today.

National Parks

I think a major issue for national parks is climate change. Whether that is drought, flooding, or fires, natural lands stand in the position to be destroyed despite best efforts put forth by the staff to prevent such catastrophes. All lands are vulnerable to natural disasters; a fenced off, titled area does not mean that it is invincible. Fires consume great chunks of national forest lands each year and heavy smog from nearby cities creep into the clear mountain air as well. I would say that climate change and pollution are major obstacles for national parks, but they are also issues that affect just about every area in America.

Issues Concerning our National Parks

I think the biggest issue facing our National Parks is climate change. The erosion and weather deterioration has greatly affected our land. The weather destroys the natural landscape that we have grown to love. Another problem facing our National Parks is the decreasing amount of interest shown by the younger generation. They are more interested in electronic devices and texting "cute boys". The interest shown is nature and the beauty of getting outside and enjoying mother nature is not as present nowadays. Back in the day, people didn't have the incentives to stay in the house, so they enjoyed the outdoors more. I think that people need to get off the couch and go for a hike.

National Parks issues

I think our biggest problem we face today in National Parks are wildfires and pollution. Some of these wildfires this year for example the one fire in Colorado this summer really got out of hand and burned thousands of acres. Once these fires are lit they become rapidly out of control. Also they become very hard to stop. Air pollution too is becoming a big problem also. These industrial factories are producing so much pollution in the air then the winds come and sweep it into our National Parks and forests. Which contaminates our trees and animals.

Top Issue in Our National Park System

Our national parks are very important because they ultimately protect and help maintain our nation's history as well as the wildlife living around the area. Unfortunately it is a part of nature, which means that it changes whether we want it to or not. The top ten issues that it fights today are: the uncategorized artifacts that have been found, but parks do not have anywhere to store or examine them;  the natural deterioration of historical monuments and buildings; the lack of space to protect wildlife; foreign invaders reeking havoc among the native species; pollution from factories, prospecting, and power plants; climate change; freshwater shortage; overused roads and trails; and the negative impacts of overcrowded visitors on the environment. Out of all of these confuddling issues, I think that pollution and money are the most critical when it comes to maintaining our parks. After reviewing National Geographic's article on national parks, pollution is a main factor within all of the issues. The overused roads and trails, the crumbling historical artifacts, climate change, contaminated water, all general pollution which comes from gas emissions, power plants, and etc. One of the unfortunate factors from this issue is that it is impossible to end pollution, many people need vehicles to get from location to location, countries and businesses need natural resources in order to thrive and the list goes on and on. In the article, it was implied and stated a few times that the maintenance backlog which is the parks $9.5 billion maintenance budget is not enough to split between all of our countries parks. As much as I love nature and care about preserving our historical culture, I don't think that there is much that can be done regarding money. $9.5 billion is a lot of money and just as it relates to what was mentioned in the article about prioritization, there are many other causes that need governmental funding's.

National Park System - Alicia Combs

In the first article they list some of the top ten issues facing National Parks which include: Untold stories, crumbling history, wildlife management, foreign invaders, adjacent development, climate change, air pollution, transportation troubles, and visitor experience. Basically the biggest problem right now is that humans have screwed over the system, and the government doesn’t have money to fund National Parks. Nature is always changing, so this is a natural occurrence, but when it comes to foreign invaders, air pollution, and damage to the land, there’s nothing else to blame but ourselves. It’s sad that great things like our National Parks aren’t a priority because I honestly think they are! I want to help and volunteer my time to help out, and I hope you consider the same. You’d think the government would be ran by responsible adults that could agree and make educated decisions all together, but in reality people are stubborn and want things their way, or no way.

Should College Athletes be Paid?

I dont think college athletes should be paid. It is unreasonable to pay athletes when they choose to play the sport that they love. College sports have better sportsmanship and a more competitive atmosphere just because athletes are not paid. The students want to play sports and they are motivated by the game. Professional athletes are driven due to the money incentives. Pros are more likely to have poor sportsmanship and values. They are completely driven to make money. College athletes play the sport out of passion and drive. If college athletes were paid, it would create an unbalanced playing field. Some colleges could afford to pay athletes more than other schools. Good athletes would choose the school that would pay them the most. With this said it would create an unfair advantage for wealthy schools, and would allow these schools to dominate over others. Overall, I believe it would be unfair to pay college athletes. The game should be played out of passion and drive.

College athletes should be paid

College athletes should be paid under certain criteria. If an athlete is able to strive to be better because they are getting paid, of course I feel it would be right. College is a time for growth and development, and sports are able to grow if more players are doing everything they can to be the best. Naturally, not all college athletes shouldn't be paid. There are circumstances that would refrain many from being paid like the obvious ones: Grades, drugs, etc. If a college athlete can maintain great grades, is the most valuable player on a sports team, allows for the team to go to states or nationals, and is regularly tested for steroid use, then I feel it is only more beneficial to that sport for a student to be paid.

Should College Athletes Get Paid?

I am going to have to disagree on this one. I do not think that they need to get paid. One reason from a student’s point of view is that it will raise prices. Paying college athletes will raise the tuition prices for the school and or ticket prices. If they were to get paid then we would need some sort of revenue to pay them with which would either come down to raising tuition and or raising ticket prices. Both these two potential outcomes I see will not benefit anyone but the athletes. Also why pay them when they are already getting some sort of free tuition, either with a full ride or even just a couple thousand dollars. Either which way they are getting free tuition they are already getting college paid for. Scholarships already give athletes free or reduced prices for attending the school and if they are good enough to get paid anyways they will be picked by the major leagues and become professional making millions of dollars. Another problem with paying college athletes is that it will corrupt college sports; it'll become which school will pay more for what player rather then that player picking where they want to go to school and who they want to play for. Overall I don't think that it is fair to the fans the students or the athletes that are competing if college athletes get paid.

Should College Athletes Be Paid?

I believe that colleges should at least be allowed to pay their athletes. It is no secret that college athletics are generating billions of dollars each year for their schools. It seems perfectly logical to me that the students putting in the work should be reaping the rewards. I don’t think it should be required for colleges to pay their athletes, but if they want to use payment as an incentive to encourage higher-level athletes to come to their school I have no problem with that at all. Both parties would be benefiting. The desirable athletes would be paid to play and the school would be making more and more money, as their teams got better.

It is important to realize that most of the sports aren’t creating much revenue for the school so it seems to me that a scholarship would be a fair trade. But for the sports like football and basketball where the schools are making a very large profit off of their athletes, the least the schools could do is to give their athletes a small portion of the revenue they themselves have generated.

Not only do I see many situations in which paying the athletes would be beneficial, but also I can’t see one reason why it shouldn’t be allowed. This is an issue that the colleges and the Athletes can settle completely on their own. There should be no outside rules imposed at all. Each school knows what they make off of their athletes and they can determine how they want to use their revenue.

Should College Athletes be Paid?

After reading arguments going both ways, I have come to the conclusion that student athletes should not be paid.  They already are getting media attention that will make it more likely for them to be picked up by a professional team.  This gives them the advantage they need in life to get their desired salary later in life, so there is no need to pay them while still in college.  I agree with Allen Sack's argument that these student athletes are still students.  The NCAA should not pay their players because it takes away from the academic aspect of college.  They already get scholarships up the ying-yang, so why do they need a salary on top of that?

Should NCAA Athlete's Be Paid?

No, I do not think that we should pay NCAA athlete's. After reviewing the two arguments from US News, I concur with Allen Sack. Rather than taking the focus completely off of academics, which is one of the most important parts of college, athlete's should be given multi-year scholarships. These scholarships would put the focus back onto academics and valuing students. It is agreeable that the world wants to see talented players, but I think they'd also like to see successful men and women off the court or field as well. If we were to begin paying NCAA athlete's, they would most likely be striving towards their money reward at graduation, rather than the degree itself. Plus, it could potentially lead to players becoming cocky and more consumed with themselves if they were able to commercialize themselves while still in college. They would be too busy to work on their academics and get involved with the university's community and students, besides when they play for them. All-in-all, I do not believe that NCAA athletes should be paid for playing sports while in college and should rather be given multi-year scholarships for the benefit of the player, student, and community as a whole.

Should College athletes be paid?

I think no college athletes shouldn't be paid. The article does make good statements about how much money programs and the NCAA make but I don't think that makes it alright to pay them. They are their for school but if the athlete is good enough to go pro then that person should go for it. You want your school to make lots of money because then you get recognition and recruits and more people take interest in you and your school. Also if student athletes got paid what sense does it make for them to go pro or have a pro league if your getting paid already. That's not fair to actual pro athletes.    

Should student athletes be paid?

I believe that student athletes should be paid if they're spending as much time, and putting in as much effort as people working a full time job, like most are. I agree with what the first guy said, and think it would be fair to put the student athletes money into a trust fund that they can receive once they graduate from college. That way the money will be something that they can work toward getting and they'll know that if they do better at the game, they can potentially get themselves more money, which will be put in that trust. I feel that a lot of the media and organizations are getting money off of the student athletes, when a portion of the money should go to them, considering without them playing the sports there would be no money being made for the advertisers or networks. Some argue that they get all their compensation because they get put out there for the NBA or NFL to see, but I don't think that that's enough for them. They are students before they are athletes, so I think that not only should they be paid for what they do for different networks, organizations, and so forth, they should be given full ride scholarships (taken if they quit the team, break rules, get bad grades, etc.). This will show them that being a student still comes first, and that in order to pay for school, and their sports(JOB), then they will do well in school and stay out of any trouble that may come their way.

Should college athletes be paid?

I argue that college athletes should not be paid. Student athletes should not be all about making a profit or receiving all the perks in the world. After all they are ‘student’ athletes. They should be doing it for the love of the game and for the education they receive. I honestly believe college sports are better than professional sports for that very reason. A quarter back on a college team is looking for that giant first down to change the game and bring back the title for his school where as a quarterback on a professional football team is looking for the giant first down to make himself look good in hopes of collecting a raise next season. Professionals are ultimately playing for themselves rather than for their team, community or fan base. If college athletes were paid could you even imagine the selfishness that would be taught? They are already given benefits such as scholarships, top-notch attire and the chance to travel the country. So no I don’t believe college athletes should be paid. 

Should College Athletes Be Paid?

I do not think that college athletes should be paid. These student athletes already receive money in the form of scholarships which pay for most or all of their schooling. That alone is a huge financial perk for college athletes. Not to mention that at most schools, college athletes receive many other perks like special work out facilities  and high quality sporting equipments and merchandise. With the extreme cost of school, equipment, and tutoring sessions that is covered by being a college athlete, it would be foolish to give them even more money.

Student-athletes are students first. If additional money was given to these athletes, why would they even bother going to college? They already have a way of making a living, so what is the point of gaining an education if they already have an athletic career? I believe that paying college students would distract them greatly from the schooling that comes with being a student athlete.

Should college athletes be paid?

Saying college athletes don't get paid already is kind of false.  College athletes get paid in other ways.  They receive scholarships worth a lot of money to the greatest colleges across the country.  Money is also allowanced to athletes for free nike gear and clothes all the time.  And when college athletes are struggling with schoolwork, they have the option for tutoring for free.  So I absolutely don't think college should be paid for their playing, they receive enough money.  Money will only influence college athletes to play for the wrong thing rather than coming to college for an education.  Some college athletes play to reach the next level to get the big bucks, but until then, they should be focusing on playing for their school's pride.

Should College Athletes Be Paid

Heck no, they most certainly should not be paid. College athletes go into school knowing that they are not going to be paid, yet still chose that path. They already receive many perks such as scholarships, gaining popularity, athletic wear, and other merchandise. Yes, the NCAA makes butt tons of money off of them, which I do believe should go to something such as their education or that school in general. Just like how Allen Sack responded to the article,  "What is needed is a national movement of faculty and others to support multiyear scholarships that extend to graduation (five year maximum)." This would ensure that these athletes are getting through school without the burden of cost. As well as make sure they the money they are receiving is going to something important rather than them blowing it on useless nonsense. These kids are doing something that they love, and you can't put a salary on something like that. 

Paying players in the NCAA

Should college athletes get paid as well as their tuition waved? The question is sparking more fiery debates as time goes on. The NCAA makes a considerable amount of money off of the individual players in merchandise, game rights, and advertisements.The NCAA benefits with both NCAA Football, which is a football video game, and NCAA March Madness, a basketball video game. The games use players information, such as names and stats to generate players in the game. The game in turn sells for profit, which the players never get to see. The NCAA also distributes player merchandise, such as jerseys or other gear, which is another source of revenue for the NCAA. I believe that our current relationship between the NCAA and players of various sports is wrong. There are two ways to change the situation, but only one is for the better.  Players should not get paid for playing college sports.College sports are played for the pride. The pride of winning for your school, winning for everyone who follows the college's football program. As soon as college players begin to get paid, they will flock to the schools with the most money in the football program, I.E. Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, etc. Every school that isn't a football powerhouse will immediately drop off the map. The players will start to play selfishly, only seeking to find bigger contracts and better bonuses, rather than winning for their schools. The gap between pro sports and college sports will be over. Players will come right out of high school looking for money. There are many people who can agree that players playing a given sport for purely money are a detriment to the game itself. Games are about passion, heart, and drive. When the drive is money, passion and heart get thrown aside. When the paid college players lose, they will simply think "Oh well, I'm still getting paid." They will have no want to get better.

Now to quell the sudden burst of arguments about whether college athletes should be paid or not, the NCAA should stop using players personal information for profit. Names in video games, names on uniforms, players depicted in advertisements for the NCAA without reward to the player is just wrong. It is stealing an identity and using it for profit. If college players wish to get paid besides in scholarships, they should skip college and play professional, where the leagues are already corrupted by greed.

Should athletes be paid?

I don't think that athletes should be paid. Everyone is saying that athletes come in on scholarships, and people are thinking that they should get some money back in exchange. I disagree, they shouldn't get paid because there is no way to judge the amount and spread it evenly amongst the players or positions. It is a privilege to be able to play on a team in college. My cousin was one of the best wide receivers in Texas, and he could have gone to many schools. His judgement wasn't based on money, it was by talent. Another example is my dad, he came in on a scholarship from Australia, he didn't get paid and his golf team went to 3 national championships. Money might help short-term, but at the end of the day it didn't make him swing his golf club better. He worked his butt off for what he has now.This isn't a bidding war, this is talent and since the beginning of sports in college, no one has been paid and theres no reason to start now. Our world revolves around money already, we don't need to add this to it.

Should College athletes be paid? - Alicia Combs

No, I don't think college athletes should be paid. It's a privilege, and something they usually enjoy and strive to be better in. Not to mention they can get college scholarships through sports. It's fair that they get those scholarships, but not if they get paid. I don't even think proffesionals should get paid as much as they do. I kind of agree with Allen Sack, that students shouldn't get paid but get multi-year scholarsihps. To get their college education paid for is basically like paying them anyways, except it keeps them on track and spending their money on something worth while.

Should college athletes be paid?

Although athletes bring in the big bucks for major businesses and sponsors, I still believe they are the ones getting the most benefit out of the two sides. They are being given the gift of education often times at no expense to them or their families. College athletes earn scholarships, which sometimes are worth up to $250,000. I would say that’s a pretty good deal. Also, money isn’t everything. For example, I was offered a full-ride golf scholarship out of high school but didn’t accept it because the educational quality of the school wasn’t what I was looking for. This just proves a real life example of how it’s not all about money. Money runs out, but a degree lasts forever. If college athletes were paid, their egos would get even bigger and they would be the ones running the universities with their money and voices. They would create an organization of destruction that would be hard to put to rest. In one of the arguments, the writer stated that they should be given a trust fund - money awarded after the completion of their degree. I still believe this could set up for disaster. The athletes would get out of college and rely on their trust fund and not focus on the career they studied for. They would lose interest in earning their money, and just brag about their past times successes. Overall, the NCAA is doing well right now and doesn’t need change. Go Broncos.

Should College Athletes Be Paid?

      College athletes should not be paid. Majority of the starting athletes have full ride scholarships worth upwards of about $50,000 per year for some colleges. That is a good years salary for most people in the United States. If you play in a sport you love but get a career ending injury, at least you are in the process of obtaining a college education. The sticky part of this is I believe that if a athlete would get injured then he should still receive his scholarships for his or hers four years of college. In conclusion, the scholarships that athletes receive is pay and should be maintained through the four years of his education unless he decides to go pro. It's like that NCAA commercial that says, "Most NCAA athletes will go pro in something other than sports."

Should athletes be paid? Kelsey Raynal

As I read this article I became curious what Kevin Ware’s injury was. Watching this video it is hard not to cringe at the sight of such a strong man jumping high just to come down exerting pressure on his shin, resulting in an open fracture. Due to this, and many more athletic related injuries I strongly believe that college athletes should indeed be paid, or shown greater benefits. Benefits for these athletes are slowly fading away, as shown in the legislative decision to replace the four-year scholarship in 1973 with one-year renewable grants. As I see it, our culture idolizes sports especially NCAA basketball, this will never change. If we really want to reward athletes for meeting academic requirements as well as their rigorous work schedules why not pay them for their efforts?

As much as we wouldn’t like to admit it, a college athletic program is a huge sponsor in advertising universities across the country. Athletes represent in a way, our student population. This is why Boise may be known for our football or Louisville for their basketball. Schools use sports to lure new students in. I believe that if this and so many other pressures are put on the shoulders of our athletes why not show them the value of which they mean to us. I agree with Warren Zola, schools should create a “Student-Athlete Trust Fund, which would hold a percentage of revenue generated by television and licensing contracts and place it into a trust for student-athletes to access upon the completion of their collegiate careers.” This would enable athletes to be rewarded, yet not be pushed to their absolute limits.