:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/19882849/20120830_ajw_ad1_326.0.jpg)
It's Friday and there's nothing for the media to talk about, so they put the chicken on the wheel and found this gem of a story.
This time the chicken with its head cut off just barely missed landing on "Tebow", "What Is LeBron James Doing This Offseason?" and miraculously fell on "Should College Athletes Be Paid?". Today's controversy took the form of Arian Foster admitting he was getting paid on the side during his Volunteer days at the University of Tennessee. He claimed he did so because he didn't have money to buy food. The revelation came via a recent interview for the upcoming documentary Schooled: The Price of College Sports. Sports Illustrated was lucky enough to gain a sample preview of the upcoming film showing Foster admitting to his sins of receiving money and tacos.
He now joins the illustrious list of hundreds of thousands of other athletes, known or unknown, who have gotten prohibited benefits from playing college football. To be paid or not to be paid is the question everyone is trying to answer, even though the NCAA has remained firm they are "student" athletes and a college education is a large enough exchange for the millions of dollars the old fat people make off of them.
It's a bummer Arian Foster is going to be suspended this Sunday against the Ravens because of something he did in college. Oh wait, they can't do that. They can only hurt the current players and coaches at Tennessee. Add all of this hoopla and you get reason #1,234,897 why I don't watch college football.
The real question is what do you think? Should college athletes be paid in addition to their scholarships?