Second & Third Annotated Bibliography

First Annotated Bibliography

1. Levy, Dan. “Paying College Athletes Is Possible, If the NCAA System Gets Broken (Or Fixed).” Bleacher Report, Bleacher Report, 3 Oct. 2017, bleacherreport.com/articles/1771951-paying-college-athletes-is-possible-if-the-ncaa-system-gets-broken-or-fixed.
2. This source explains the job of the NCAA which is to make sure everything is fair and ethical, make sure that any violated rules are indefinite would face a consequence, and lastly to make sure athletes don’t make money and stay an amateur. The main point in this source is to explain how the rules implemented by the NCAA are not smart and make it harder for those who are less fortunate. The author does give multiple alternatives that would be beneficial for athletes to support and help athletes that want and need to be paid. The author concludes the paper with the alternative essentially telling there should be no excuses for athletes to not get paid. There is so much money that the NCAA generates because of the players and aren’t being compensated or don’t even give the player insurance, cause not everyone makes it to the league to get millions.
3. In my opinion, not every athlete obtains a full ride to college meaning some people have to take out loans to pay off the debt that they had build, and it is just because there not fortunate financially-wise. And not everyone makes it to the pros so getting paid in college is insurance to them. 
4. Looking at the author of the source Dan Levy’s credentials he didn’t have any accomplishments but he has worked with many different media such as Washington Post, Philadelphia Sports Blog, Bleacher Report and etc. I think he’s reliable because he’s experienced and works for really big sports media.
5. Levy’s choice of genre is sports journalism because he dives fully into college sports analytics and when stating the issue he provides solutions with really good statics of how it would work out. Looking at his background this worked out well for him because of how reliable he is and how thorough the article is.
6. The key quote in this source is “Pardon the fuzzy math, but it’s safe to say the NCAA and its member institutions will rake in more than $40 billion over the next 15 years from TV partners, and that doesn’t include other corporate sponsors, radio partners, ticket sales and merchandise deals. How much of that do the players get again?”. This quote is astonishing to realize how much money the NCAA makes in 15 years and won’t pay an athlete at all. Five billion disputed fairly to the players would help the less fortunate athlete a lot. 

Third Annotated Bibliography

1. Vance, Hunter. “Student-Athletes: A Scholarship Is Not Enough.” BYU ScholarsArchive, Marriott Student Review, Sept. 2019, scholarsarchive.byu.edu/marriottstudentreview/vol3/iss2/8/
2. Throughout the article, hunter explains the life of a college athlete which a student who goes to class in the morning and right after goes to practice for the rest of the day, and this is repeated. Athletes attend multiple practices in total for more than 40 hours a week, play 25+ plus games a season, and based on how much each school gets money off the athletes each player is worth around $289,031 a season and none of them get paid anything. This Hunter’s main point in the article is to void or destroy the notion of how athlete compensation is a free education and other free benefits that college doesn’t realize isn’t enough especially for those who are less fortunate financially wise. Athletes were told they weren’t going to be paid because they were amateurs which essentially means they say only pros should be paid. What they don’t realize is not every college basketball player make it to the pros only 2 percent of all the college basketball player get drafted to the pros. The author wraps the article up with how other college students on scholarships are allowed to get paid for the work they have done but if the athlete tries to get paid he could lose his eligibility to play and maybe even his scholarship which is devastating.
3. In my opinion, athletes should not be losing everything they had worked so hard for due to them trying to make money selling merch, receiving gifts or etc. They work so hard and need to be compensated for that. The rules should change and pay the players which are they are the reason the NCAA even receives a LOT of money. 
4. The author Vance Hunter isn’t a credible writer compare to the others because he doesn’t have accomplishments and there isn’t much data on him other than what school he’d attended. What do think is reliable is the publisher which is BYU college. 
5. This source is categorized as an article genre because it informs the reader on the problem and explains how bad and also how it affects others. The choice of genre fits the work really well because of how he formatted the paper.
6. The quote that was most interesting to me is “In January 1996, Google was invented. The invention came through a research project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Ph.D. students at Stanford University. Who received the current $102 billion business? Was it Stanford? No. It was Larry Page and Sergey Brin who became rich off their invention, not the university”. This quote explains how any college student other than the athlete is able to make money off of what they do best or even make money off of sponsors just for some odd reason athletes don’t make any money at all and they’re the ones who 100% help generate all the money. College athletes are given a book full of rules they can’t do mostly consisting of not being able to sell merch or have sponsors or receive anything from anybody. And yes I said “ Receive anything from anybody” in the article there was a student who loses his eligibility to play sports because he received a free meal which is outrageous.