NCAA will allow athletes to profit from their likeness

[Cobra Mgr]

NCAA to let college athletes monetize their likeness

[Reed]

They had to since California passed their law and other states were getting ready to. I heard the Federal Government is also looking at a similar law so that the law would be the same across the nation instead of having slightly different laws in each state.

[CBeisbol]

Good for the NCAA. They rolled over in the face of the most obvious thing ever.

The NCAA is still terrible and should cease to exist

Edit
Oh yeah. Score one for the California Social Justice Warriors

[thehef]

Will be interesting to see how & when this rolls out, what will be allowed & not allowed, and what the unintended consequences will be. If it results in college athletes behaving more like (some) professional athletes (look at ME!!), that would not be a good thing, IMO.

[Reed]

Suppose to happen in 2021. Wonder if recruiters are starting to lineup advertisers, etc. now as they get ready to visit those 4 and 5 star high school players.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by thehef

If it results in college athletes behaving more like (some) professional athletes (look at ME!!), that would not be a good thing, IMO.

I mean, people looking at them is literally why the NCAA makes so much money.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Reed

Suppose to happen in 2021. Wonder if recruiters are starting to lineup advertisers, etc. now as they get ready to visit those 4 and 5 star high school players.

Since the recruiters used to do their jobs out of the goodness of their hearts and wanting to make sure these kids got the best education possible and not to keep advertising dollars flowing to their schools.

[monkeyman576]

Hearing taps for schools like Boise State and Loyola Chicago

[thehef]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

I mean, people looking at them is literally why the NCAA makes so much money.

Sure. But at least the perception between the NCAA and the NFL/NBA is that the players are more team-first in the former, and more me-first in the latter. I don't only mean in the ways that affect the team's performance, but in mostly benign, yet odious to some, displays like over-the-top endzone celebrations, all the tough-guy macho posing you see after hitting a big shot or making a big hit (rather than genuine displays of team-first enthusiasm). Now, when the top college players have the dollar-value of their likeness at stake, I'm guessing we're more-likely to see that sort of buffoonery in the college ranks, sometimes to the detriment of the team (if, say, a player decides it's worth it to get the 15-yard penalty for a self-promoting endzone display).

I say all of that while fully realizing that some of the most-popular NFL & NBA players are the ones who routinely display this type of buffoonery. I get that.

I just wonder - fairness & freedom aside (no small things, to be sure) - if this will be good for the games.

[dkgo]

That take is scorching

[Cobra Mgr]

The more team 1st attitude in college sports is a myth. How many players now skip their bowl game to get prepared for the draft? Players are now leaving their team midseason so that they can redshirt, save a year of eligibility, and transfer elsewhere. So all of that is a bunch of romanticized, sentimental you-know-what. It is when we do what is right despite the fear of how it will affect our future that allows us to define ourselves as courageous.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

The more team 1st attitude in college sports is a myth. How many players now skip their bowl game to get prepared for the draft? Players are now leaving their team midseason so that they can redshirt, save a year of eligibility, and transfer elsewhere. So all of that is a bunch of romanticized, sentimental you-know-what.

Pretty much agree. That's why I put the word "perception" in italics above. But still, that's the perception, regardless of the reality. And if that goes away, then, for some, the appeal of the some collegiate sports may wane.

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

It is when we do what is right despite the fear of how it will affect our future that allows us to define ourselves as courageous.

Speaking of romanticizing... At any rate, I would say that - without knowing the details - it's too soon to make the determination that the NCAA is "doing what's right."

I think it is all going to be about how it actually works. If the biggest stars are allowed to profit to where they become multi-millionaires, then that won't be good for the game, IMO. It will simply lead to college stars acting more like pro stars. If, however, it's a system that allows athletes to afford gas money, to take a girl (or guy) out on a date, to purchase books, then that would be a good thing...

Also, mentioned much earlier, is the question of if it will be a zero-sum game. If the money going to kids' pockets comes out of the budgets for other, lesser-earning sports, then I'm not sure that will go over well with those who support those lesser-earning sports... And, will some schools have advantages over others? I mean, certain schools already do have advantages. Will the implementation of the athletes' for-profit motive exacerbate that situation?

I suppose all of this falls under the category of too soon to tell. And that said, I don't think the NCAA is going to implement something that will fundamentally change the landscape. Rather, they are likely to implement something that will stem the tide, but not knock down the walls... A strategic move.

[Cobra Mgr]

When MLB integrated it meant the death knell for the Negro Leagues. Was it less right because of the unintended result? No. No matter what happens from here on out, this is the right thing to do. If people do bad things because of this change, that is on them. That doesn't make this the wrong move.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by thehef

If the money going to kids' pockets comes out of the budgets for other, lesser-earning sports, then I'm not sure that will go over well with those who support those lesser-earning sports...

I don't think money is coming out of the universities' budgets at all.

The rule, as I understand it, allows students to earn money from outside the school.

[David Watts]

Very stupid question time, but I'm guessing this means college athletes will be able to hire agents now?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Very stupid question time, but I'm guessing this means college athletes will be able to hire agents now?

From what I understand details are yet to be worked out. I'm sure the colleges are scheming on a way to control that aspect and get their cut.

[Cobra Mgr]

This is one of the main reasons why they this change was long past due. They are already getting paid and the NCAA is doing nothing about it. Bring everything above the table. And once more, this isn't going to make things unbalanced for smaller schools because things are already unbalanced. There is a reason why all the football blue chips end up at Bama, Clemson & Ohio State, while the 5 stars in b-ball go to dook, UNC & Kentucky. Let's end the charade. This is the social equivalent of ending prohibition. Nobody was obeying the law in the first place.

[Leo_The_Lip]

Will it be the conferences or the schools controlling the money? Scholarship offers will now come with a marketing deal from Nick Saban, et alius.

Will the money a player receives be linked directly to his (or sometimes her) image use, or will the payment be dependent on a 'pool'?

Once agents get involved--and how do you keep legal representation out, NCAA?--the end of amateur sports as we know them is over. Which is a good thing for young athletes, for sure.

Anyway, this is merely the beginning of a new era of major change.

[whifflebird]

This will probably have some unintended consequences.

The only two sports that are profitable for most schools is football and basketball, so if the NCAA is going to require all players be compensated that revenue has to come from somewhere, likely at the expense of other sports. Why keep Lacrosse running when you can use that money to pay for your basketball/football players who actually generate a profit for the school. Or women's volleyball, Or really anything.

Then there is the reality that 98% of NCAA athletes will never sniff the pros, and therefore they are getting more in return (in the form of tuition, housing etc) then they are generating for the school. If the schools need to reimburse them, again that money will need to come from somewhere.

For every Zion Williamson there are a hundred kids you never heard of and never will hear of, do they all get reimbursed the same? If not, who determines the scale for players reimbursement? Do the schools make the kids reimburse their tuition out of those payments up to a certain amount?

For companies like EA who pay a royalty to professional leagues unions such as MLBPA, will they have to negotiate separately with each school? There is no union of college athletes to evenly disburse royalty payments, so what do the logistics of that look like?

Do schools like Alabama negotiate higher royalties from the EA's of the world, and then turn around and use that as recruiting tool (we have higher payouts, come to Alabama)?

A lot of things to work out, should be interesting.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by whifflebird

if the NCAA is going to require all players be compensated

That's not at all what's happening