4. The Pacific-12 athletic conference, which includes four California universities, said the law would “lead to the professionalization of college sports and many unintended consequences.” How might the measure hurt colleges and universities, as well as the players themselves? What are some possible unintended consequences?

5. How are some college and professional athletes reacting to the news, according to the article?

6. Why did Gov. Newsom sign the law even though he is likely to face legal challenges? How might the California bill affect college athletics in other states?

7. What do you think will happen next? Will the N.C.C.A. challenge the law? Will it amend its own charter to allow for student-athletes to be compensated? How will the California bill change the world of college sports?

Going Further

Last year, following an injury to Duke University basketball star Zion Williamson (who this summer was the No. 1 player selected in the N.B.A. draft), we asked students about whether college athletes should be paid. The question became one of the most commented-on Student Opinion questions of the year.

Responses were split down the middle, with students on both sides of the debate arguing their cases persuasively, using a compelling combination of logic, ethics, emotion and statistics to support their claims.

Among those who argued against the idea of athletes getting paid:

Brian wrote: “I think they really already are getting paid. When we talk about college athletes getting paid we’re usually talking about the best of the best. The ones who have full scholarships to their colleges, many times these colleges would cost in the tens of thousands some even in the hundred thousand, but college athletes don’t need to pay anything.”

Zoe wrote: “Yes, their games are televised, but this doesn’t just bring profit to companies and colleges. It publicizes players and gives them an opportunity to be scouted by professional coaches."