Literature Review 3

Lit Review 3

Hruby, Patrick. "The End of Amateurism Is Not the End of Competitive College Sports." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 28 Aug. 2014. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.

Summary:

This article is explaining the fact that the NCAA is not equal. The authors main point is that the rich college teams (or successful for this matter) will get richer, and the poor teams will get poorer. Some teams will just continue to be underfunded and it will result in them sliding into irrelevance. The future of college sports depends on balancing the way programs can work, so that some do not get left behind.  

Author: Patrick Hruby, writer for The Atlantic.

Key Terms:

Autonomy- NCAA Division I Board of Directors voted for greater power-conference “autonomy,” which allowed the 65 schools that earn the bulk of the football television money to give athletes larger scholarships and increased medical benefits without breaking away from the association as a whole.

Amateurism- A term that describes the NCAA's way of price fixing. Every school in the country can only offer recruits free tuition, and room and board, nothing more. This new term “autonomy” is now challenging amateurism.

Quotes: 
“College football hasn’t had a mid-major national champion since Brigham Young University in 1984, while in men’s basketball, more than half of the Final Four appearances between 1979 and 2011 were made by just 12 power conference schools.”

“Ending amateurism could actually lead to greater competitive balance. Under current rules, Ball State will never beat out Kentucky for a basketball prospect—but if the school’s boosters could pool their cash and target, say, Kentucky’s fifth-most-coveted prep player, they might be able to win a few recruiting battles, and over time construct a more talented roster.”

“For bigger and smaller schools alike, amateurism acts as a wage suppressant, allowing them to funnel every television, ticket-sale, and booster-gift dollar that doesn’t go to the on-field talent into ever-expanding facilities and executive salaries.”

Value:

I can use this article for my argument because it has a strong focus on the impact that not paying college athletes has on college sports. It explains how the national championships in both college basketball and football have been won by the same top teams for many years now with no changes. It has many points on how by changing the rules of what schools can offer, it will ultimately bring more colleges into the competitive mix and allow for more competition from a greater variety of schools. The author’s point he is trying to make is different than mine for my paper, but we both see eye to eye on certain things and that is why I will use this piece of writing for my project.