专题05 阅读理解之议论文10篇（第一期）-2023高考英语名校模拟真题速递（全国卷专用）

2023高考英语名校模拟真题速递（全国卷专用） 第一期 专题05 阅读理解之议论文10篇 （2022·广西·统考一模）Tune in to a college football match in America, and you might think that you are watching a professional rather than an amateur sport. The biggest stadiums routinely fill over 100,000 seats. Corporate sponsorships are common. Television broadcasts are filled with ads for expensive pick-up trucks and beers. In all, America’s college athletic departments brought in a combined $18.1bn of revenue (收益) in 2017, up from $9.8bn in 2007. Despite the popularity of their output, college athletes receive no salary. The National College Athletic Association (NCAA), which governs college sports, has long forbidden its players to receive any reward. The ordinance has caused public discussion and disagreement. After years of legal challenges and intense public scrutiny(监督), the NCAA’s restriction on paying student athletes is at last starting to crack. On September 10th, California passed a bill which would allow athletes at colleges in the state with profitable sports programs to hire agents and earn money on the side through sponsorship deals or autograph(签名) sales. The bill still needs to be signed by the governor, and would not come into effect until 2023. Some lawmakers would like to go one step further. Senator Bernie Sanders put it plainly on Twitter: “College athletes are workers. Pay them.” Yet treating athletes as employees could make things more complicated. Would this mean that colleges would pay their female players as much as males, for example, even if the men bring in more revenue? Richard Borghesi, an economist at the University of South Florida-Sarasota, has written a pair of papers looking at how much top athletes would make if they were paid according to their ability to generate revenue for their colleges. Mr Borghesi estimates that the top 10% of football and 16% of basketball players would be paid around $400,000 and $250,000 a year respectively. The NCAA opposes California’s efforts. The associatio