Thursday, August 24, 2006

Paying Little Leaguers?

Why is it that everyone always thinks that because they are watching a fun sports contest that they feel like the athletes should be paid? Back in the good old days players played because they loved the games. Pro ball players in most every sport took jobs in the off season. Now they are millionaires.

In an article by Dan Wetzel of Yahoo! Sports, he offers up the idea that Little League baseball players that are shown on ESPN should be paid. I guess it would be alright, but I think that it would ultimately change the game. The reason that Little League baseball is so appealing is because its players are there for the pure love of the game.

Every year someone brings up paying college athletes as if a free education that costs most all other students $30,000 or more isn't enough.

Just because a kid is fairly decent at a sport doesn't mean they should be paid for it.
How about we let amatuer sports be amatuer sports, let college athletes get free educations, college players get free educations and 13 year-olds play baseball because it's friggin' fun.

1 comment:

Travis said...

This is a democratic idea. The kids "generate" the money, so they should receive a portion of it.

Here's something Dan Wetzel failed to consider. There are ways to reward people that have nothing to do with money.

It's like people like Wetzel think that money is the only reward in life. The joy of the game, the chance to play on television, the opportunity of winning a championship, etc. Those things are all better than a few bucks.