EA Sports Will Not Publish College Football Game Next Year, Future Plans in Doubt

[xcrushx]

It's definitely sad to see the series likely be over. As a kid, NCAA Football is what got me into gaming. At the same time, the way the series had been going, it almost needed to die. It's just a little sad that we never got the playoff or full 85-man rosters. There was a lot of potential there for the next-gen games to be very good. At the same time, I don't feel bad at all for EA Sports the way they treated the series in the current gen. NCAA Football 14 was actually a decent game but it took them till the end of the current gen to produce a good game.

I'm just hoping this means Madden will get much better. I'd love to see coaching carousel, the ability to be an offensive and defensive coordinator, in-game updates, etc from NCAA make their way over to Madden. What I'm hoping comes out of this is that we good one really good football video game as opposed to two mediocre games like we have been getting. Unfortunately, I fear we'll end up getting one mediocre game.

[JLoco11]

The problem was never with EA and the game... the problem was always with NCAA and the rules of amateurism.

Sure EA pinches a pretty penny on what they spend money on, but they've had no issue with licensing. They rarely skimped on licensing in games, and you can tell from the music, to logos, to players in ALL their games (not just NCAA, not just sports, but every genre under the EA umbrella).

The issue is that EA wants player likeness, but NCAA rules forbid the players from making money off it. The settlement of the lawsuit isn't so much coming from EA (they know they would have to pay eventually), it's coming from pressure from the NCAA.

The NCAA knows their rules on amateurism are under fire, and they didn't want a lawsuit to drag on and have their policies under a microscope again in a courtroom.

Those who pay attention to the NCAA know change is coming. Conference Commissioners say it, big name coaches say it, Presidents are now saying it. It's just a matter of time before the NCAA changes their rules regarding player representation.

When that happens, college football will be free to return with player licensing. But until the NCAA changes, there won't be a football or basketball game.

[xcrushx]

Quote: Originally Posted by tarheelguy4736

This is an excerpt from the ESPN article: "EA Sports provided athletic departments with more licensing royalties than any other non-apparel licensee, according to data released by CLC." Yes, I believe the student-athletes should have a right to make money while in school (either by having a job, signing with a marketing agency, etc) but the NCAA doesn't allow that which I dont see as being fair as you are taking someone's right away of trying to make money.

Actually, the NCAA does allow players to have jobs. There are a lot of players that work during the summer to make money. NCAA has no rule not allowing athletes to work. There are limitations to what they can do (mostly around not being paid a ridiculous amount for their work) to try and keep things fair but there is nothing that says they can't have a job. Now, they can't do marketing and stuff like that but that's certainly understandable in my opinion.

I really don't care if players get paid or not but I'm not too big into this idea that players are victims. They get to go to school for free, get free food, get somewhere to live for free, and some even get free publicity and fame that will give them a leg up once they leave college. Nothing is stopping these guys from getting a summer job and making money to support themselves while school is in. I get that they make these schools a lot of money but these schools also give them a great opportunity. The money they get in form of scholarships, food, housing, etc is probably more (and in some cases considerably more) then they would make if the NFL had a development league and the teams were paying them. Look at all the developmental leagues around the world, those guys aren't making much money at all.

If guys really wanted to, they could send their tape up to CFL teams and go that route instead of college. The reason they don't is it's much harder for them to get a job in the CFL than a college scholarship at a Division 1 school and the CFL won't pay them much of anything. And they also won't get the exposure they will in college. College offers a lot more than just scholarship money. It's not a bad deal at all for the players.

[Sam Marlowe]

Quote: Originally Posted by JLoco11

The problem was never with EA and the game... the problem was always with NCAA and the rules of amateurism. Sure EA pinches a pretty penny on what they spend money on, but they've had no issue with licensing. They rarely skimped on licensing in games, and you can tell from the music, to logos, to players in ALL their games (not just NCAA, not just sports, but every genre under the EA umbrella). The issue is that EA wants player likeness, but NCAA rules forbid the players from making money off it. The settlement of the lawsuit isn't so much coming from EA (they know they would have to pay eventually), it's coming from pressure from the NCAA. The NCAA knows their rules on amateurism are under fire, and they didn't want a lawsuit to drag on and have their policies under a microscope again in a courtroom. Those who pay attention to the NCAA know change is coming. Conference Commissioners say it, big name coaches say it, Presidents are now saying it. It's just a matter of time before the NCAA changes their rules regarding player representation. When that happens, college football will be free to return with player licensing. But until the NCAA changes, there won't be a football or basketball game.

Excellent post man.

[C the Lyte]

Quote: Originally Posted by ainokmw

Yes, it's the students who are being selfish. It's not like FBS college coaches have seen their salaries increase 81% over a five year span. 30 years ago, the highest paid coach was Jackie Sherrill at Texas A&M, who was making the controversial sum of $285,000 per year. Now, Nick Saban makes $5,650,000 per year. 52 college coaches make more than $2 million per year, and 15 college coaches make more than $3 million per year. What did students get in 1983? A free education. What do students get in 2013? A free education. Meanwhile the revenues blow up and everyone gets rich around them. But you're right, it's the kids, it's the "I gotta get mine" generation that is causing all of this downfall. So what choice do they have? Everyone on here says they "choose" to go to college. Nonsense. An 18 year old can't join the NFL. Jadaveon Clowney has no desire to stay in South Carolina, but the NFL's esoteric rules (bolstered by their untouchable anti-trust exemption) means he's stuck working for free in South Carolina. Oh he gets a free education? He's not going to graduate because he's going to leave as soon the rules allow him to, thus he has very limited choice. He's worth millions on the open market so long as he performs upkeep on his skills, but in order to maintain the millions that he's worth he has to work for no money so that South Carolina and the SEC can make millions. I'm not saying students should get paid. I don't think they should. I think the NCAA and the government needs to pressure the NFL into opening a developmental league for 18-21 year olds so young players actually have a choice, which will end most of these lawsuits.

Clowney isn't working for free. He is getting compensated via scholarship. To say "free education" like it's just getting paid in peanuts is asinine IMO. It costs $ to go to most of these schools, $ that most of these guys don't have. I never went to a university b/c of money. Some are getting opportunities that, if not for their athletic talents and luck, they couldn't get into a community college.

You ever see Twitter? I saw the phrase "sorry to half to report that my injury will require surgery"!!! HALF!!! ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME!!!! Does that seem like he is college educated?

[Sam Marlowe]

Debating the ins and outs of players being payed by schools is a waste of time. Any fix along those lines would be convoluted. The questions for the NCAA are simple:

What good reason is there to deny a player the right to profit from their name or likeness? Why shouldn't a player have access to the same possibility for revenue that their school does?

[JLoco11]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sam Marlowe

Debating the ins and outs of players being payed by schools is a waste of time. Any fix along those lines would be convoluted. The questions for the NCAA are simple: What good reason is there to deny a player the right to profit from their name or likeness? Why shouldn't a player have access to the same possibility for revenue that their school does?

Sadly, most of the issues they NCAA has with this, would be removed if the NFL and NBA created a minor league system (D-league expansion for the NBA's case).

Players would have the option like baseball and hockey to turn pro without being required to attend college to improve their prospects. Sure the NCAA would lose money and appeal, but if things don't go their way, they will be losing money to players as opposed to keeping all their reduced revenue & profits for themselves.

[BenGerman]

I guess it isn't quite as big of a deal to me as I thought it would be. It probably is because of the fact that I figured a few games weren't going to make the cross over to next-gen, and thought NCAA might have been one of them. I doubt this means we will never see a college football game again, but until the likeness stuff has been settled, publishers will probably want to stay away.

Again though, as long as college football is as big of a sport as it is, publishers will stay interested. Let's all just root for this likeness stuff to be settled and cross our fingers that does the trick.