RWS 1302/ENGL1312

Running Head: MONEY IS THE MOTIVE

Money is the Motive

Carlos Cavazos
University of Texas El Paso

RWS 1302/ENGL1312

Money is the Motive

In todays society, especially the sports world a big topic going around is if collegiate
athletes should receive money, for not only their efforts and work that they put in but also
because it has been proven that a full-ride scholarship does not cover all of the living expenses.
Which is a major issue and two genres which provide some valid information about the pay for
play issue provided by Marykate Edmunds The financial gap between athletic scholarships
and athlete expense, it elaborates on the actual numbers outlook on how much a full ride can
cover and the actual living cost of attending the school, the other genre was provided by a
youtube video, Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel: NCAA Athletes and Money (HBO) which
debates over the topic and gives some valid points that are being used over the issue. Both of
these genres will be analyzed and elaborated on more throughout this genre analyzis.
Audience and Purpose
In the first genre, Marykate Edmunds The financial gap between athletic scholarships
and athlete expenses is a article that gives examples and shows how much money a full ride
actually covers compared to how much it costs to actually attend the school. This article was
written towards more of a sports fan type of audience as well as student athletes, and was written
to change the view on what a student athlete is by giving examples of where student athletes
spend so much time with their sport where it is nearly impossible to work and make a income.
The second genre, Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel: NCAA Athletes and Money (HBO) is a
youtube video where they are debating over the topic of student athletes receiving pay. This
genre was really directed towards the same audience where it was put on youtube so anyone can
see it, but it would really catch the eyes of potential student athletes and also the NCAA board as

RWS 1302/ENGL1312

it was put on HBO. The video will also raise awareness of the the people who are against the
argument because it gives valid points where it is hard to still be against the topic.
The intended audience of Marykate Edmunds The financial gap between athletic
scholarships and athlete expense, is directed towards college student athletes, and people who
are interested in college athletics. The reason it is mostly directed towards this group of people
is because first of all its a pretty long article and if you spend the time reading the whole article
there must be some kind of interest in the topic. On the other hand the video Real Sports With
Bryant Gumbel: NCAA Athletes and Money (HBO), was probably seen by many different types
of audience because it was put on HBO, but was intended to student athletes as well as anyone
who is affiliated with college athletics.
The length on analyzing the two different genres were pretty different as where the article
was around twenty pages so as long as it takes to read the article is how long it would take the
audience to analyze the article, on average it seems to take around thirty minutes to analyze the
scholarly article. Where on the other hand the video takes just the length of the video which is
around two and a half minutes, where all it takes is to hear the debate over the topic.
Both genres purpose is to not necessarily sway the audiences view on the pay for play
topic but to give factual evidence and broaden the audiences view on what an actual student
athlete goes through and the financial struggles. In the scholarly article by Marykate Edmunds it
goes into details how there are video games out that have a student athletes exact characteristics
and numbers but are in no way compensating these student athletes that bring in a abundant
amount of money. The purpose of the video was to show both sides of the debate and to show
the audience that there are really major issues going on in the college sports industry. The
language of both genres were pretty formal, for example the video they are sitting in a room and

RWS 1302/ENGL1312

debating and have a very professional manner about them because they are all wearing suits and
have a very proper way of talking, whereas the article is a long article that stays giving examples
of where the athletes do not see much of the money and in one example was saying how athletes
would say they have to go to sleep hungry at times because of the financial struggles to provide
for their living. Also the appeals of both genres are not very strong, as the video is produced by
HBO, but throughout the whole video there are three professional looking people just discussing
the topic which dont get it wrong they provide valid points but is just very informative rather
than appealing. With that being said the article is also not as appealing where it is very
informative and provides graphs and factual data. So with that being said the audience of both
genres can fall under the same category but the message can be misinterpreted in the video
because of the debate.
Rhetorical Issues
The way Marykate came up with this article is mainly because it is a major issue going
on in todays college atmosphere. The same thing with the video it is a highly talked about
argument, where they even have had many lawsuits filed against the NCAA due to the amount of
money that is brought in because of the likeness of an athletes name or photo.
Ethos
In the first genre, the article by Marykate Edmunds it is not the most credible source as
where she is just also a college athlete, so there is not much credibility because of that but when
the article is read you see that there has been a lot of research done. What gives her credibility is
the graphs and how she is using actual numbers from major colleges across America. Now on
the second genre the credibility is there from the get go, where it has HBO on the bottom right

RWS 1302/ENGL1312

and if there is some familiarity in the sports society then the audience would quickly recognize
Bryant Gumbel who is a very well known sportscaster as he has been in the sports broadcasting
for over fifteen years. Both of these genres are different in the way of crediblity and although the
article may not be as professionally done as the video with all the evidence it supports many of
its major claims with factual evidence, whereas the video just has Bryant who is already credible
as well as being on HBO just stating information about the college athletics.
Pathos
In the video it utilizes the emotion by making you feel involved in the debate by asking
rhetorical questions, and also you can feel the tension in the debate by watching it where Bryant
Gumbel laughs at some of the things he hears, also while listening to Bryant you can hear his
emotion and his view on the argument. In the scholarly article there is not much emotion
involved as it is mostly facts and is not very biased because it just gives the evidence and graphs.
Logos
In the scholarly article logos is used through the evidence and examples given by the
financial gap that is apparent to the public. The article shows the actuality of the student athletes
and shows logical explanations for why and what the student athlete goes through. In the video
it gives evidence by its examples and is also shown how when Bryant Gumbel says this is a
multibillion dollar industry and we need to find a way to fairly compensate these studentathletes with that being said it makes the audience think about what is really going on in the
college athletics atmosphere. So although the article gives a lot of valuable information the
video can get the audience more emotionally stirred up whether they are for the cause or against
the pay for play issue.

RWS 1302/ENGL1312

Structure and Delivery

With the topic of student athletes receiving pay and the gap that is already been pointed
out that occurs within the student athlete population, the author had the article structured out very
nicely, where she has started off by saying the struggles of picking a school to further their
athletic and academic careers, to the struggles of knowing which school is financially right for
the individual. Although it was structured out nicely there was a lot of information that was
repetitive and prolonged throughout the whole article. The video on the other hand started off by
bringing up the major discussion that has been floating in the air, and Bryant did a very good job
of giving facts about what goes down throughout the industry. It is structured very well for a
debate where you have two people who give very common points that are provided by both
sides, and by the arguing style keeps the audience tuned in throughout the whole discussion.
Conclusion
In both genres the topic is discussed well, and both have very valid points that are proven
throughout the article and the video. The first genre was more of an informative article with the
examples given and the actual cost and numbers of exact amounts where the gap is between the
cost of attending school and the cost of living. The second genre gave more of debate feeling
and the audience could choose a side and feel for the points that are given regardless of their
views on the topic. Each genre showed valid points of the topic and show how it is a major issue
going on.