Just within the past week, California became the first state to require major financial reforms in college athletics. This means student-athletes will be able to receive endorsement deals, and overall receive payment for competing, even though the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) says this is unconstitutional. I was once a collegiate student-athlete; I played Division I college volleyball, and for various reasons, I do not believe that student-athletes should be paid. Unlike professional sports associations, such as the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, and Major League Baseball, college athletics is not a business, and will surely become one if we start paying our amateur athletes.

If you ask me, college student-athletes have it pretty good. Sure, they have a lot on their plates and must learn to manage their time wisely, but their situations are usually exceptional and envy-worthy. Many of them receive generous athletic scholarships to play at the institutions that they play for, which is a blessing in itself. Let's be real, college is expensive, and scholarships are hard to come by. In addition, most receive a plethora of amenities such as a wardrobe of gear, free room and board, etcetera, etcetera. The list goes on, especially for those big-time sports team members.

If we as a country were to start paying our student-athletes, there would be incentive to commit to the college or university offering said athlete the most amount of money. Say the following year, another school offers them more money. All too quickly and uncontrollably, the NCAA would become a business of sorts: one that in a sense trades and "sells" the athletes. This would lead to the imminent downfall of many other college programs, especially the ones that are not as well-off financially as the large and wealthy programs. These smaller programs would be cut left and right, and less and less hard-working, dedicated young people would have an opportunity to achieve their dream of playing a college sport.

Furthermore, getting into the logistics of the theory of paying student-athletes, taxes exist. That's right, the star quarterback of Alabama is not so special that he doesn't have to pay taxes. Depending on the income of the student-athlete, the taxes could be incredibly high, high enough to reduce what they earn to the point that they can barely pay their tuition. Chances are, the student-athlete would be spending their payments on wants rather than needs. Let's put it this way: you don't see high-paid athletes in this society driving a Toyota Camry or wearing clothes from Marshall's.

Many forget about the word that comes before athlete in the term "student-athlete". The primary purpose of attending college is to pursue higher education, to learn things that will help you to prepare for the rest of your life in the "real world". Although it may not seem like it, playing a sport at the college level is not a job, it is classified as an extracurricular activity that is supposed to be put after schoolwork. Paying student-athletes would entirely change the culture of being a student and an athlete, making academics almost obsolete on their list of priorities. We should be encouraging our college athletes to complete their education, not making it second-rate.

I don't know about you, but I adore college sports. I think they are a wonderful thing for our schools in multiple ways. College athletics have a way of bringing schools together, and increasing comradery and school pride as a whole. Paying student-athletes would entirely change college athletics as we know it, and not for the better. Let's leave the salaries to the professionals, not the students. (P.S. Go Badgers!)