Bio not provided
The best argument in this post was made in the comment section by teamrobhogg pretty much. The leading point for compensation is the whole 'I understand that no one is forcing them to play and there are willing participants to take their place, but the fact remains that money is being made off of the work that they are putting in and they are not seeing a dime of it.'. Is it fair that this happens? I don't think so. But you can argue, as teamroghogg does, that they are being compensated monetarily through brand value. On that note we should probably be realistic about the Olympics as well, as players are more than likely pressured by their endorsement deals to display their talents on the big(gest) stage.
Either way I wouldn't be surprised if in the following years owners start objecting to their players competing during the summer, because of injury concerns. Mark Cuban's already lead the charge on this in the NBA, and it has happened in other international sports like soccer. At the end of the day people will want to protect their investments, be it their investment as a player, or as an owner.
On a sidenote, I don't know if Conrad is entirely serious in this exchange, but I hope not. Trying to argue a point with him seems like a fun exercise in futility.
3 years ago on You're Wrong: Olympians Getting Paid?