NCAA Punts on Athlete Likeness Monetization, College Games Still Not Viable

[Caventer]

Quote: Originally Posted by DucksForever

In principle, I agree with this. I think that it's clear and obvious that most student-athletes receive, through scholarships, much less than they are "worth" if their value was monetized. As I said before, I am all for student-athletes getting more benefits, but it's the methodology that O'Bannon proposes which I disagree with. I do not think that student-athletes should be paid directly for playing collegiate sports. It is not a profession at this level, and the second salary begins to creep its head into college athletics, schools who are not on the same fiscal playing field as the "big boys" will slowly fade into obscurity thereby creating an even greater monopoly among the richest schools. I think that the ramifications of such a monopoly would be terrible for everyone involved as these poorer schools would be forced to drop certain sports thus creating less opportunities for student-athletes to attend school. However, I do believe that student-athletes should be afforded the right to profit independently off of their own likeness. This seems to be a self-explanatory right that the NCAA has taken away from student-athletes. These students are not employees of the NCAA, therefore, they should be able to earn income any way shape or form that they want to as long is it is within the parameters of the law. All of these NCAA restrictions as to what jobs student-athletes are and are not allowed to hold are absolutely ludicrous. The NCAA does not own these students and they do not employ them. If NCAA athletes in the Olympics can profit off of their likeness, then all student-athletes should be able to do the same. I think that, if this were allowed, then the cries for the NCAA to pay the players would quiet down, and the players would be able to earn some extra money. If the players want money from the NCAA directly, they should get it in the form of stipends which supplement additional meals, expenses, and maybe the occasional gift. I think it's playing with fire if the NCAA or the schools pay the students directly. I don't think people realize how the landscape of collegiate education as a whole would be changed if student-athletes become employees for the NCAA. Also, as to the point of injuries derailing scholarships, the NCAA recently established a rule which mandates that all scholarships must be honored despite injury or poor performance. I agree with you on the easy classes however; emphasis on education is a whole different conversation though.

Free market will equal less jobs in this case. Instead of 85 man rosters, you might see 40 man rosters like the NFL. I mean you are literally talking about eliminating 50% of college athletes if they pay only the best.... Because most of them never contribute..... And if I were a school I would certainly just start paying the highest salary I could for only the best players..... Screw the rest.... No more walk ons, no hardships, and maybe no education. Oh and I have to adhere to title 9 so I will make sure the ladies get paid an equal amount which will eliminate even more opportunity for lesser athletes. Paying college athletes and giving them scholarship money are inextricably linked. Or are we going to have to start paying Rhode scholars as well? How about the music scholarships? Mascots? Where does it end? Scholarships are for performance either in or outside of the classroom representing the school. That IS the pay.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[NKRDIBL]

Quote: Originally Posted by DucksForever

It is not a profession at this level, and the second salary begins to creep its head into college athletics, schools who are not on the same fiscal playing field as the "big boys" will slowly fade into obscurity thereby creating an even greater monopoly among the richest schools. I think that the ramifications of such a monopoly would be terrible for everyone involved as these poorer schools would be forced to drop certain sports thus creating less opportunities for student-athletes to attend school.

What do you think the power 5 is doing? BCS bowls, Playoffs that's all creating more money for the bigger schools. They are already trying to create it as a Monopoly.

http://fanbuzz.rare.us/story/the-sec...-ton-of-money/

[NKRDIBL]

for anyone who doesn't quite understand the business side of the NCAA, watch this, it's about 20 mins long. But a good video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX8BXH3SJn0

[Junior Moe]

I don't think that players should be paid directly by the universities or the NCAA. They are valuable, no doubt. But the NCAA also provides the stage and exposure for these guys to show their stuff and potentially go pro. Who is Johnny Football without Texas A&M? It's a mutually beneficial relationship. That in addition to an education, provided the athlete actually wants one. I think that's more than fair. Especially when you consider the fact that about 1% actually go on to play professionally. Plus you have Title 9 and all that red tape. And the fact that the vast majority of the schools aren't exactly printng money like a Texas or Ohio State.

Where the NCAA errs, in my opinion, is how they try to cap the players's earning potential otherwise. And how they try to be greedy with everything. Let the free market speak and don't take their eligibility for utilizing it. The NCAA does. And I think that's a fair trade off for proving the platform and education. Everything over that though should be on the players. If the starting QB for Ohio State can make a few thousand signing autographs, let him. The NCAA and schools can sign an agreement with EA sports and be paid. Let the players unionize and have the money that they could make go into an account and evenly distribute it to the players part of said union. There's enough money to go around. The NCAA could monitor the whole thing. I actually think that this would led to fewer violations and under the table shenanigans as the players would be making a little something themselves.

[Agentghost81]

Quote: Originally Posted by NKRDIBL

I wonder if Golden boy Kirk allowed for the NCAA to use his likeness for free as a commentator? I didn't see that anywhere in the article. Easy to point fingers at someone when you are one of the only guys being paid by the franchise.

They used it for free when he was a player.

[NKRDIBL]

Quote: Originally Posted by Agentghost81

They used it for free when he was a player.

Edited. Thanks I get he wasn't getting paid as a player in the game. But being someone, Who has turned profit from the game. Him saying everyone wants it back is kind of nullified. If ed o Bannon came out and said it. Or someone else who carried on doing something not related to sports. Then there would be some ground to stand on the "all players want is a free copy" that he is spouting off about.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

[newtonfb]

Half you are missing the point. Personally I found the fun in the NCAA games finding 3 star recruitss and building them up a little. I didnt care one bit about their names. I played seasons so fast that I only knew the currents names for a couple weeks anyway.
All we want is a game with the college school, stadiums, chants and then randomize the rosters. The game did that for every recruiting season anyway. It just boggles my mind that people buy a game because of the guy on the cover.

[itsbigmike]

Quote: Originally Posted by DucksForever

In principle, I agree with this. I think that it's clear and obvious that most student-athletes receive, through scholarships, much less than they are "worth" if their value was monetized. As I said before, I am all for student-athletes getting more benefits, but it's the methodology that O'Bannon proposes which I disagree with. I do not think that student-athletes should be paid directly for playing collegiate sports. It is not a profession at this level, and the second salary begins to creep its head into college athletics, schools who are not on the same fiscal playing field as the "big boys" will slowly fade into obscurity thereby creating an even greater monopoly among the richest schools. I think that the ramifications of such a monopoly would be terrible for everyone involved as these poorer schools would be forced to drop certain sports thus creating less opportunities for student-athletes to attend school. However, I do believe that student-athletes should be afforded the right to profit independently off of their own likeness. This seems to be a self-explanatory right that the NCAA has taken away from student-athletes. These students are not employees of the NCAA, therefore, they should be able to earn income any way shape or form that they want to as long is it is within the parameters of the law. All of these NCAA restrictions as to what jobs student-athletes are and are not allowed to hold are absolutely ludicrous. The NCAA does not own these students and they do not employ them. If NCAA athletes in the Olympics can profit off of their likeness, then all student-athletes should be able to do the same. I think that, if this were allowed, then the cries for the NCAA to pay the players would quiet down, and the players would be able to earn some extra money. If the players want money from the NCAA directly, they should get it in the form of stipends which supplement additional meals, expenses, and maybe the occasional gift. I think it's playing with fire if the NCAA or the schools pay the students directly. I don't think people realize how the landscape of collegiate education as a whole would be changed if student-athletes become employees for the NCAA. Also, as to the point of injuries derailing scholarships, the NCAA recently established a rule which mandates that all scholarships must be honored despite injury or poor performance. I agree with you on the easy classes however; emphasis on education is a whole different conversation though.

The Power 5 are already creating that gap between the less fiscally stable teams anyways. It's only a matter of time before the majority of the Power 5 break away from the rest of the pack.

By-and-large we are on the same page. I think once you start letting them be paid for their likeness and jersey sales and autographs, you're basically a step from them being paid, which is basically what is going to happen at some point and I firmly believe that. College football and basketball is the minor leagues to the NFL and NBA, why not start treating it as one?