John Acquaviva Paying College Athletes Summary

In Dennis A. Johnson, Ed.D., and John Acquaviva, Ph.D., article Point/Counterpoint: Paying College Athletes, the authors say why they believe that college athletes should or should not get paid. Dr. John Acquaviva argues that college athletes should not get paid because they already get a free education, while Dr. Dennis A. Johnson tells why he believes that college athletes should get paid on top of their almost free education. Acquaviva has many great ways of stating what he believes by using good quotes and to get the attention of people who had to pay for their tuition. Both authors use some very good techniques and some very bad techniques throughout the article.
Dr. John Acquaviva compares the advantages that college athletes get compare to regular college students. He does a good job of saying how college athletes should not get paid because not only do they get a free education but they also have benefits like their own special meal plan, workout facilities, and medical care. Acquaviva states, “For example, a full scholarship over four years can range between $30,000 to $200,000 depending if the institution is public or private.” Another thing he mentions is that most college athletes are on some type

Johnson states, “This type of a proposal could pay athletes anywhere from $300-$1000 per game based on time played per game. Since most players do not play more than 30 minutes a game, a player could be paid on a per-minute of competition basis. At a rate of $20 per minute a player could net $600 for a game and approximately $6000-$7,000 per season.” I think this was a great thing to add because that way instead of just saying why the NCAA should pay college athletes, he has a way they could do it. This money he says will get with the $2,000-$3,000 gap that he says is not paid for by the