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

[xcrushx]

Quote: Originally Posted by bc21045

How is a free education the same as being "paid"? I've had several jobs that offer education benefits, none of them offer it in lieu of a salary. Also how can you on one hand realize that many athletes wouldn't be able to get into these colleges without an athletic scholarship but fail to realize that a college education means nothing if you're not prepared to take advantage of it? If the education is "payment" isn't it up to the school to make sure they're educating these kids? If you're just passing athletes without them going to class so they stay eligible you're cheating them out of their payment no? If it's about the education a kid who doesn't go to class and doesn't do the work shouldn't be allowed to stay at the school. People say take away their scholarship and make them pay for the school as if athletic scholarships aren't the school's way of getting unqualified athletes onto the football field and basketball court for no reason other than generating money for the school. The other thing i've always taken issue with is the idea that they should be grateful for getting a "free education" at all. The point of going to college is to prepare you for your chosen career. If my chosen career is professional football or basketball player why should I be grateful that you gave me a free education in something else? If you plan to be a lawyer how valuable is an education in art history?

For one, college extends way past preparing you for a career. That is part of the reason people go to college but you gain so much more out of college then just preparing you for a career in a specific field. In fact, a lot of people will end up in a field completely unrelated to the one they studied. Essentially, you go to college to learn how to think and solve problems. Those are two skills that you need in any profession or anything you do in life. It amazes me how people undervalue those two skills.

Being a professional athlete is a great aspiration but the overwhelming majority of Division 1 football players will not make it. If the only reason you're going to college is to make it the NFL, then you're setting yourself up for failure.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by ntmeangreen11

I haven't bought the game for several years. We'll agree to disagree. EA has ignored their fanbase for long enough on a game they knew would sell either way. I hope they get fisted by this lawsuit and never want to put their hands on a college game again.

Which fanbase are you referring to?

The sim fanbase, the casual fanbase, teambuilder fanbase, MUT fanbase, etc....? I get your point, but there is more than one fanbase.

[nova91]

Change the parameters of an athletic scholarship, cover only costs that are related to the athletes sport, make them come out of pocket for everything else(room & board, tuition and books and all those other little charges) and then agree to pay the players for the NCAAs use of their likeness on merchandise and then stop using their likeness on merchandise(numbers are ok), the athlete can deal with the school or any other company that uses their likeness without paying, themselves. If your grades are good enough you could also get an academic scholarship, they already get the Pell Grant and they could take out loans to pay for the rest of their costs.

[lookatmenow]

Quote: Originally Posted by BenGerman

One last thing I want to say on the subject -- and this is coming from someone who has argued over and over again that athletes should receive some kind of compensation... If O'Bannon thought it was so wrong that he wasn't being paid to play, than he should have never freaking played in the first place. He knows what he signed up for. And while I respect anyone who disagrees with the rule (hell, I disagree with the rule), rules are there until they aren't. And in this case, the rule is that student athletes can't be compensated for their likeness. Because this selfish jerk wanted a few extra dollars in his pocket after the fact, thousands of gamers lose out, and that sucks. Unless the NCAA starts paying players or allows them to make money off of their likeness, we will never see a college sports game again.

Sometime you have to take a stand for righteousness no matter what the rules are. Rules are made and can be change, defiantly when it is taking advantage of something or someone. It happens all the time. So O'Bannon is right and justifiable with his argument.
The fact that a lot of people think players shouldn't get paid are either jealous or ignorant to what is really going on. The players generate billions of dollars over the years and you think that somehow the trade is equal because their getting an education. Did you flunk math or did you even go to class? because that does not add up at all. The revenue of these big schools are tied to the players. A lot of people decision's to go to a certain school is tide to how rich the tradition is in sports. You can't be rich in sports tradition if you don't have great players. Players impact on the dollar the schools generates are effected in a lot of ways, from merchandise, ticket sales, booster clubs and on and on.
If a lot of you would think before you speak the world would be a better place

[C the Lyte]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sam Marlowe

Why shouldn't he get the same opportunity to profit from his name and likeness that the NCCA and his school do? And to be clear, we're talking profit in the same exact manner, money.

Once he receives any sort of payment, via endorsements, autographs, etc., he loses his amateur status. Is the exposure and opportunity to receive a higher education not enough?

While we're on the Clowney kick, let's say he gets drafted into the top 5 this year. Highly likely, no? Does he then owe SC compensation for giving him the exposure he gained from them? We talk like these guys are victims for not getting paid. They're student athletes privelaged with a lot of things the average college student is not.

Quote: Originally Posted by bc21045

How is a free education the same as being "paid"? I've had several jobs that offer education benefits, none of them offer it in lieu of a salary.

It's compensation.

Quote:

Also how can you on one hand realize that many athletes wouldn't be able to get into these colleges without an athletic scholarship but fail to realize that a college education means nothing if you're not prepared to take advantage of it?

So the institution offers the guy a chance for higher education and to better themselves in the real world, but the guy decides not to take full advantage of that chance? How is it the school's fault?

Quote:

If the education is "payment" isn't it up to the school to make sure they're educating these kids? If you're just passing athletes without them going to class so they stay eligible you're cheating them out of their payment no? If it's about the education a kid who doesn't go to class and doesn't do the work shouldn't be allowed to stay at the school. People say take away their scholarship and make them pay for the school as if athletic scholarships aren't the school's way of getting unqualified athletes onto the football field and basketball court for no reason other than generating money for the school.

Can't really argue with any of this. Corrupt individuals all the way around. I'm not here to say the athletes are evil and the admins are good. Not at all. In fact, I'd argue the toher way around on that one.

Quote:

The other thing i've always taken issue with is the idea that they should be grateful for getting a "free education" at all. The point of going to college is to prepare you for your chosen career. If my chosen career is professional football or basketball player why should I be grateful that you gave me a free education in something else? If you plan to be a lawyer how valuable is an education in art history?

B/c there are no guarantees in life. Weall know of the players with the high dollar contract. But what about the career back-up making league minimum for 6 years? A lot of these guys get in trouble b/c they don't know how to handle money. A law degree can be useful other professions besides just practicing law. Obviously, if they were going to school for law, they wouldn't be studying art.

But what can a profesional football player, retired and 45 years old, offer without a degree? What job do you think he sufficiently qualifies for with those skills to make the kind of money he was making during his playing days?

Is a Plan B really that bad of an idea? It's what's wrong with a lot of people. They only see what is in front of them, not 5 or 10 years down the road.

[Peacefrog]

Quote: Originally Posted by lookatmenow

If a lot of you would think before you speak the world would be a better place

iro·ny noun \ˈī-rə-nē also ˈī(-ə)r-nē\

: the use of words that mean the opposite of what you really think especially in order to be funny

: a situation that is strange or funny because things happen in a way that seems to be the opposite of what you expected

[bc21045]

Quote: Originally Posted by xcrushx

For one, college extends way past preparing you for a career. That is part of the reason people go to college but you gain so much more out of college then just preparing you for a career in a specific field. In fact, a lot of people will end up in a field completely unrelated to the one they studied. Essentially, you go to college to learn how to think and solve problems. Those are two skills that you need in any profession or anything you do in life. It amazes me how people undervalue those two skills. Being a professional athlete is a great aspiration but the overwhelming majority of Division 1 football players will not make it. If the only reason you're going to college is to make it the NFL, then you're setting yourself up for failure.

You don't need to go to college to get educated, you don't need to go to college to learn how to solve problems or "think" and going to college doesn't guarantee that you'll gain those skills. The value of a college education is tied directly to the degree you get and the job you get because of it. The number of people who want to be professional athletes who don't make it is completely irrelevant. People wash out of every career field, that's not what we're talking about.

If an athlete doesn't make it to the pros then they have to figure out what to do with their life, that's on them just like every other student who doesn't make it in their chosen field. In no way does that change the fact that they're working and not being paid, you can't call the scholarship compensation when other students get the same benefits and none of the restrictions or responsibilities that apply to athletes.

More to the point, none of what you said addressed the fact that schools are admitting unqualified athletes and not educating them simply because those athletes can make money for the school. If you're not bringing them to the school to educate them then how is the education a payment?

[bc21045]

Quote: Originally Posted by C the Lyte

Once he receives any sort of payment, via endorsements, autographs, etc., he loses his amateur status. Is the exposure and opportunity to receive a higher education not enough? While we're on the Clowney kick, let's say he gets drafted into the top 5 this year. Highly likely, no? Does he then owe SC compensation for giving him the exposure he gained from them? We talk like these guys are victims for not getting paid. They're student athletes privelaged with a lot of things the average college student is not. It's compensation. So the institution offers the guy a chance for higher education and to better themselves in the real world, but the guy decides not to take full advantage of that chance? How is it the school's fault? Can't really argue with any of this. Corrupt individuals all the way around. I'm not here to say the athletes are evil and the admins are good. Not at all. In fact, I'd argue the toher way around on that one. B/c there are no guarantees in life. Weall know of the players with the high dollar contract. But what about the career back-up making league minimum for 6 years? A lot of these guys get in trouble b/c they don't know how to handle money. A law degree can be useful other professions besides just practicing law. Obviously, if they were going to school for law, they wouldn't be studying art. But what can a profesional football player, retired and 45 years old, offer without a degree? What job do you think he sufficiently qualifies for with those skills to make the kind of money he was making during his playing days? Is a Plan B really that bad of an idea? It's what's wrong with a lot of people. They only see what is in front of them, not 5 or 10 years down the road.

A plan B is a great idea for ANYONE, the point is you can't say "i'm offering you a chance at a plan B so I don't have to pay you for the work you're doing now" and if you're willling to call it compensation then the conversation turns to is it fair/equal compensation and it absolutely is not.

The point about them not being prepared is not that the athlete doesn't take advantage of it, it's that they're not capable of taking advantage. The best example is obviously dexter manley who left college illiterate. How was he going to take advantage of a college education? What value was the school providing to him?

What an athlete does with their money is of no concern to anyone just like what I do with my money is of no concern to anyone. Who cares if a guy made league minimum (around 300k I believe) for six years and couldn't handle his money?

The point about a law student being offered an education in art history is that you can't get a degree in being a pro athlete and the college coaches aren't there to prepare you for the pros. Preparation for an NFL or NBA career is a by product of that coach trying to win right now. So you're giving athletes an education in something they're not interested in and something that won't help them in their chosen career in most cases.
Also the athletes are not "privileged" they earned the scholarships.