Economist Reading Comprehension Challenge #3

Here is the third installment of the Economist Reading Comprehension Challenge.  Enjoy!

Here is a link to the article:


1. The supporter of not paying student athletes would most likely agree with which of the following statements?

A.  A university should maximize profit only if that profit is used to improve the quality of that university’s education

B.  A university can maximize profit derived from students and not be morally obliged to share the profit with the students

C.  There should be a limit imposed on the amount of profit that a university can make from student athletes

D.  Student athletes should not only be incentivized by a free education

E.  Although the current rules governing student athletes should be modified, student athletes should not receive more than a free education in compensation for their participation in university athletics.

2. If a the lawsuit referred to in the 6th paragraph is successful, it can be reasonably inferred that:

A.  Athletes who no longer participate in university athletics may benefit financially.

B.  The directors of several major university athletics programs may be forced to retire.

C.  The NCAA would be forced to revise all of the rules governing the compensation of student athletes

D.  Elite players would benefit more than the rest of the student athletes

E.  Current players would profit more than past players regardless of the length of time participating in the athletics program.

3. According to the passage, a university that chooses to pay its athletes would:

A.  provide a portion of the licensing profits related to a specific athlete to that athlete rather than pay the athletes based on seniority

B.  pay all the athletes equally regardless of each individual athletes marketability

C.  regardless of university policy be in violation of a policy of the NCAA

D.  be supported in that decision by most athletes

E.  most likely earn more total profit


1. B
2. A
3. C