Yes,, understandably athletes do deserve a share of revenue they generate , especially college athletes, they mostly spend their times , doing their studies and trying to find their work around in life . And yet there they are committed to the sport, the game . There athletes. Correct me , they should get it, it should be a law.

You say that there's no fundamental right to a direct cut of someone else's revenue just because you contributed to it. But what if the person(s) are the centre of that enterprise, shouldn't they get a pice of the pie they made , & how should the person who just made the pie visible, to the market, get all the cut? He/she could have taken his/her talent else where . Therefore this no longer falls into a matter of entitlement/ rights, but shere dependency , & we all know, who depends on who , for the business to run!!

My opponent argues that shere commitment doesn't grant them a share of the revenue, but let's be clear here : college athletes are not just working hard, they are the literal engine that runs the multi-billion-million , enterprise. Without them, there sweat, talent & no-field performance, there's no product to sell. Millions of dollars in broadcast contracts , jerseys & ticket sales, don't just materialize out of thin air, the money comes in because there is the image , name of the college athlete they want to see. To deny them direct share of the revenue they generate, is ignoring economic reality. And when that athlete , generate massive financial returns , fairness dictates that they should get a pice of the pie. Thank you!