Can we really put a price on the college experience without losing what makes it special? Look, I get the appeal of paying athletes. They generate millions for their schools. But here's the thing: college sports aren't the NFL or NBA. They're part of an educational system. Scholarships already cover tuition, room, board, and books — that's a huge benefit. For many athletes, that's a life-changing opportunity they wouldn't get otherwise. If we start paying salaries, we blur the line between amateur and professional. We risk turning college into a minor league system. Smaller schools would be priced out of competition entirely. And honestly, most college athletes won't go pro. Their real value is the degree and the network they build. The system isn't perfect, but paying athletes directly isn't the fix we think it is.

Picture a star quarterback at a big school. He gets a full scholarship, a $50,000 education, free housing, and access to world-class trainers. Now imagine a debate club president who grinds just as hard but gets nothing. Suddenly we're deciding who's worth paying based on TV revenue. That feels wrong to me. You mention limiting payments to food and clothes. But how do you enforce that? Once you open the door, agents and boosters will push it wide open. We've already seen that with NIL deals turning into bidding wars. The spirit of college sports is supposed to be about growth, not contracts. Scholarships are already compensation. They're just not cash in hand. For athletes who genuinely can't afford basics, we should improve support systems instead of paying them like employees. That keeps the focus on education.

[No submission - Time expired]