311_Ind2_S3

Name:

Instructions: You are to interview two people and record their responses on this form. You should state their name and their comments to your solution to the identified problem.

VI. I interviewed two individuals to see what their response would be to my (our) plan. Their responses are as follows.

Frank Danes-Father My father believes that the disparity between major college programs and minor programs around the country. This meaning that that schools such as Stanford, Texas, USC and Notre Dame will continue to recieve the best and more promient athletes from around the country while other minor division 1 schools will not even think of going. After reviewing my(our) solution with him of giving dividends to all athletes he gave some suggestions and repsonse. He believes that colliagte athletes deserve payment from their work. He agrees that there should be a set limit for all division 1 university programs around the country. The money should come from the revenue that is gernerated from the sports and dividended out to the athletes monthly. He believes that payment to athletes should not be optional, this will allow the range between top programs and minor programs from growing.

Annmarie Danes-Mother My mother believes that athletes who participate in college athletics already recieve the value of free education at an instition and should not recieve payment. She believes that the payment to athletes can be a catalyst for the decrease of educational drive and work ethic. Athletes should focus on graduating with a high degree setting them up for a good future in the workplace.

VII. My (our) answer, based on our research, to their objections and concerns are that athletes should indeed be payed to play. The official amount should differ between sports but for each specific sport around the country, the amount will be the same. This amount will be calculated by the NCAA. Making sure that the amount is the same throughout the country, this will keep the range between the top programs such as Stanford, USC, Notre Dame and Texas from always recieving the top athletes and allowing smaller, less promient programs the oppurtunity to recieve top athletes.

[]