Hunter HartnettILP #57 March 2014Ethos ILPPre-Research:My goal in this ILP is to find a professional magazine article on the topic of “NCAA Player Benefits” and then explain the ethos of the article. I’m looking through the school’s databases to find an article on my topic. I’m looking for the article to discuss the debated topic of athlete benefits in college sports in America, especially involving the implementation of some form of payment for NCAA athletes. I’m looking for an article that will argue against my stance that NCAA athletes, especiallythose in money generating sports such as football, should be compensated for their time, effort, and health risk. I look to use this to strengthen my argument.Citation:Daugherty, Paul. "College Athletes Already Have Advantages And Shouldn't Be Paid." Sports Illustrated. ESPN, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 07 Mar. 2014.In his article, Paul Daugherty explains why he does not believe that college athletes should be further compensated for their participation in the NCAA, saying, “They receive enough benefits.” He continues on explaining that they receive many benefits that we don’t recognize, and that they don’t work much harder than normal students, and often have to do less work or are provided with tutors and help to accomplish what little work they have to do. He explains that a free education, aswell as free publicity to the professional leagues, are more than enough compensation, not to mention the trips, including basketball teams going to islands such as Hawaii. He, throughout his article, maintains this strong stance against additional player benefits.Post Research:In the article, Paul Daugherty definitely plays into the ethos of a writer or commentator. He is able to openly speak and criticize this topic with out having the duty of acting on his opinions, and this frees him to be honest with his feelings on the issue. He is not burdened with the duty of practicing what he portrays. His credentials as a writer for ESPN, and his reputation as a sports journalist further cement his ethos in this articleI think this text demonstrates his familiarity with the subject, and he supports this with his discussion and personal interaction with non-athlete college students. He supports his claim that non-scholarship students endure the same hardships athletes do, stating “These were not people who asked to be paid to attend college. These were folks who paid for the privilege”. However, throughout this article I couldn’t shake the feeling that he had a bias against these scholarship athletes he so aggressively denied deserved these benefits, almost as if they posed a threat to his purported path through