06:27 PM ET  09.14 | Just heard some interesting arguments on the paying of NCAA students (lol) or athletes as they are called now. Here they are:

On the one hand we have the obvious direction that the "super 64 teams" are heading. That being ditching the NCAA all together (they don't need it/them), forming 4 super conferences, and selling themselves to the best players in the country by offering the BIG bucks. The best H.S. students will get paid not only free tuition, but per diem on the side. As Steve Spurrier suggests...$124,000 worth of per diem.

Now on the other hand we have the purists of the game who believe if this were to happen, God forbid, your going to have problems. Congress will stick it's 2 cents worth into it, and you will essentially drive the other schools out all together, thus damaging the education system (show me the money!!!) of those schools due too a loss of income. Not to mention if paying students becomes the norm, then EVERY student athlete will need to get paid! From the Football/Basketball player right down to the fencer and chess player! YIKES!

Some are saying the paying of players is just around the corner (Tony Kornheiser, ESPN) so forget about it, and others are saying it would destroy the NCAA so forget about it (Dan Shaughnessy, Boston Globe), as they debated the question during a session of PTI today. Personally, I believe you go to school to earn a degree. If those student athletes are going to get paid BOTH ways, I find it absurd. Drop the tuition, and make them use their money they will now earn for playing to pay for their schooling if they want it. At least the schools will recoup some of the money back. Obviously this will apply only to the star athletes. The poor slobs who won't get the big bucks, will need tuition assistance. Call it a pay as you play scale.......