NCAA Football 14 News Post

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

05:23 PM - September 26, 2013 by FloorGeneral

Here is the official statement from EA Sports:

Quote:


	"Today I am sad to announce that we will not be publishing a new college football game next year, and we are evaluating our plan for the future of the franchise. This is as profoundly disappointing to the people who make this game as I expect it will be for the millions who enjoy playing it each year. I�d like to explain a couple of the factors that brought us to this decision. We have been stuck in the middle of a dispute between the NCAA and student-athletes who seek compensation for playing college football. Just like companies that broadcast college games and those that provide equipment and apparel, we follow rules that are set by the NCAA � but those rules are being challenged by some student-athletes. For our part, we are working to settle the lawsuits with the student-athletes. Meanwhile, the NCAA and a number of conferences have withdrawn their support of our game. The ongoing legal issues combined with increased questions surrounding schools and conferences have left us in a difficult position � one that challenges our ability to deliver an authentic sports experience, which is the very foundation of EA SPORTS games. At EA SPORTS, college football has always been a labor of love, and it is unfortunate that these business and legal issues have impacted our ability to make next year�s game. This franchise has been developed by a team that is deeply committed to the tradition and culture of this sport � that�s why fans have always loved it. We are working to retain the talented people who are part of the team by placing them elsewhere within the EA SPORTS organization. In the meantime, we will continue to be connected and engaged with our fans who are playing EA SPORTS NCAA Football. Our decision does not affect our commitment to NCAA Football 14 and the consumers who love playing the game."

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All

NCAA Football 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 361 nc0ffey @ 09/28/13 11:45 AM

"For starters, the scholarships don't actually cost the schools anything. You're talking about 90 additional students among tens of thousands. The schools aren't hiring extra professors or building extra lecture halls for a fraction of a percent of their student body. Simply having these kids enrolled makes zero difference to their bottom line as far as the scholarship is concerned. It doesn't matter if it's BC at $60K/yr or UF at $20K/yr for a normal student, giving a scholarship to 90 football players isn't really costing the school any money.

Room & board at somewhere around $10K-$15K/yr has some real costs involved, but it's also got a ton of markup involved. I'm not sure where you went to school, but I've never heard of a single school where it wasn't considerably cheaper to live off campus and buy real food from grocery stores.

So, real costs, maybe $7500/yr? That's really not a lot of money, especially when you consider the earning potential being denied by NCAA regs."

Tapatalk won't let me do a proper quote...

But this scenario is only taking 1 sport into account. Title IX wouldn't allow for just football players to get paid, it would have to be across all sports. Then you'll have non athletes looking for handouts too, think about those kids who's GPA brings up the overall GPA of the school...would it be wrong for them to get compensated outside of their scholarship.

I really could care less about college students/athletes getting paid. I'm definitely going to miss college sports games. Glad I have CH 2K8 and will keep NCAA 14 til something changes.

# 362 da ThRONe @ 09/28/13 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoDevils95


	Today's athletes are punks. They are more intent on destroying something instead of trying to build. This EA-NCAA-athletes lawsuit is just one little small example in our society. Feel free to drive off a cliff Sam Keller. You piece of trash.

I'll just focus on this part. At what point are we going to hold the people who actually made millions of dollars on these young men likeness accountable? There is a reason why EA settle this suit and it's not because EA just enjoy handing money out. They where well aware of what was taking place.

We should applaud the fact that this injustice has been corrected. At a point I loved EA's NCAA and was optimistic that moving over to next gen that EA would be able to get NCAA Football up to my standard. So I feel some sense of a loss, but IMO this settlement means more big picture than me enjoying a video game.

# 363 bkrich83 @ 09/28/13 11:57 AM

LOL injustice and exploitation. Talk about lack of perspective. Thanks for proving my point.

And who are all these guys making millions?

# 364 roadman @ 09/28/13 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by da ThRONe


	What are you talking about? I'm not happy anybody is losing their jobs. However I can't support the exploitation of human beings either.

As I stated in the other thread to you, the exploitation, (which is a very strong word to use) goes both ways.

The star player is being marketed by the NCAA and university to prepare the star player for the NFL. Also, it's all about college football and basketball. That's what drives people to the games. Seeing their favorite TEAM, not star player.

The star player will come and go, but the colleges will carry on without them and still fill the stadiums. Marquette lost Vander Blue to the NBA(wasn't even drafted) this season. Do you really think there will less sellouts at Marquette because Vander Blue left early?

If you don't agree, then it's time to agree to disagree and bow out, just like last year at this time with the "Fail Mary."

# 365 da ThRONe @ 09/28/13 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	As I stated in the other thread to you, the exploitation, (which is a very strong word to use) goes both ways. The star player is being marketed by the NCAA and university to prepare the star player for the NFL. Also, it's all about college football and basketball. That's what drives people to the games. Seeing their favorite TEAM, not star player. The star player will come and go, but the colleges will carry on without them and still fill the stadiums. Marquette lost Vander Blue to the NBA(wasn't even drafted) this season. Do you really think there will less sellouts at Marquette because Vander Blue left early? If you don't agree, then it's time to agree to disagree and bow out, just like last year at this time with the "Fail Mary."

That's like saying because Microsoft will go on whether I work there are not, I shouldn't get paid. That's nonsense. If I generate revenue for a source I should get some of it. At the very least that group shouldn't be able to block my ability to make money from a 3rd party.

# 366 ACardAttack @ 09/28/13 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lord_mike


	Couldn't have said it better myself. And yes, for the reasons you mentioned, the university system is about as likely to pay players as the Catholic Church is likely to endorse abortion. The other day, the Big 10 Commissioner Tom Delaney pretty much said as much. If the Big 10 is willing to cut off their cash cow, so will all the others (except for maybe the SEC, since they care little about academics). They simply CAN'T pay players, and they won't. If they have to shut it all down, they will. They aren't bluffing.

Not to mention, most athletic departments do not operate in the black already

# 367 bkrich83 @ 09/28/13 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACardAttack


	Not to mention, most athletic departments do not operate in the black already

To further that people aren't factoring in things like Title IX. So if you're going to start paying players, it's not going to be football players only .

Not to mention the labor/Tax/Benefits laws that now come in to affect since the players would be actual employees of the school.

Any notion that players are somehow going to get paid, is simply fantasy.

# 368 roadman @ 09/28/13 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by da ThRONe


	That's like saying because Microsoft will go on whether I work there are not, I shouldn't get paid. That's nonsense. If I generate revenue for a source I should get some of it. At the very least that group shouldn't be able to block my ability to make money from a 3rd party.

I've never disagreed with your last sentence, makes much more sense.

If you don't work at MS, why would you get paid, unless you were a temp employee or a consultant?

That's true with any company. Once you leave, you can be replaced.

# 369 Gronk4M13 @ 09/28/13 12:32 PM

I considered trading in NCAA 14 last month, but decided not to. Looks like I made the right choice.

# 370 bkrich83 @ 09/28/13 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7


	Absolutely none of this matters in the context of video games. If the NCAA would lift their asinine restriction on athletes making money, the kids could license their likeness directly to EA and we'd have new games. No Title IX, no school employees, no changes in federal funding of schools, no changes in tax law, nothing along these lines. The only significant change that might occur is players having licensing deals with their own schools so the schools can sell player merch.

I agree, if it could be controlled. The problem is once you start allowing kids to accept money they become open to outside influences. That's a major concern imo. Also how do the schools and the programs protect their IP's in the process as well? Who regulates this?

I am not opposed to this in theory, but the logistics and the possible repercussions of outside influences would make me nervous.

Also with the added complexity and where NCAA games fall in the profit tier, I doubt EA would even think it worth the added effort that would come with an added complexity of individual player licensing.

# 371 KyyMon87 @ 09/28/13 12:39 PM

Lucky you who can get this game, i was having high hopes to finally get to play NCAA Football in the future, XBox One being region free and all. No reason for me to buy new box then. Damn you EA, why you didn't release 14 in Europe :/

# 372 coogrfan @ 09/28/13 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7


	Like I said, none of that matters if the schools aren't paying the kids. None of this matters if the NCAA simply allows the kids to get paid through endorsements, licensing, autograph signings, etc.

So I'm clear: you're advocating junking the current structure of college athletics for a system that will only benefit the top 1-2% of players?

No offense, but that's ridiculous. Either every player needs to receive some form of compensation or none should.

# 373 EMbow513 @ 09/28/13 12:42 PM

Good the game sucks anyways

# 374 stoncold32 @ 09/28/13 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerseySuave4


	Not surprised by this 1 bit. Didn't buy the game the past 2 years because I was tired of buying a mediocre game and I wasn't expecting much for this on Next Gen with all the teams & conferences backing out of licensing deals but maybe once college players start getting paid we'll see a return of this. I'm disappointed a little because of how much I used to play NCAA and how I grew up playing it but honestly i'm not really that upset because of how mediocre the game was on the current gen and how bad the developing team was. I'm glad i'll never have to watch Ben sell us on a mediocre game again that's for sure.

Pretty much the way I feel.

EA has been stealing money for the majority of this gen with a sub par product.

I'm a fan of this series since the 90s, but I gave up on buying this game last year.

# 375 lord_mike @ 09/28/13 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coogrfan


	So I'm clear: you're advocating junking the current structure of college athletics for a system that will only benefit the top 1-2% of players? No offense, but that's ridiculous. Either every player needs to receive some form of compensation or none should.

You mean even the ones who not only don't make money for the schools, but lost money for them, too? Are you saying that the cross country runner should make money on top of their scholarship, even though they don't make a dime for the school and the school sacrifices to let them play?

# 376 bkrich83 @ 09/28/13 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lord_mike


	You mean even the ones who not only don't make money for the schools, but lost money for them, too? Are you saying that the cross country runner should make money on top of their scholarship, even though they don't make a dime for the school and the school sacrifices to let them play?

That is the way it will have to go down. Or at least that lady cross country runner. See Title IX.

# 377 lord_mike @ 09/28/13 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	I agree, if it could be controlled. The problem is once you start allowing kids to accept money they become open to outside influences. That's a major concern imo. Also how do the schools and the programs protect their IP's in the process as well? Who regulates this? I am not opposed to this in theory, but the logistics and the possible repercussions of outside influences would make me nervous. Also with the added complexity and where NCAA games fall in the profit tier, I doubt EA would even think it worth the added effort that would come with an added complexity of individual player licensing.

There would have to be a "players union" of sorts that would negotiate collectively for something like that to happen. I think a players union for Divison I college athletics would be a good idea to stem some of the abuses of the system by implementing work rules, but that raises a whole other set of issues--are college students employees?

As for your other concerns, they are more than valid. The whole reason why the NCAA limits outside payments to athletes is to avoid the inevitable corruption and even possible crime that goes with it and the schools they associate with. It's bad enough as it is right now with all of the stuff going on under the table. Can you imagine how bad the money thing would be if billionaires could essentially buy college athletic programs and players on a whim? Look at what unlimited money has done to politics. It has destroyed the political system at the expense of the citizens. The university system is already corrupted by too much money. It would only get much, much worse if there were no more restrictions.

I think it's irrelevant. The university presidents are pretty much onboard with the idea that no player should get paid. If they courts force them to pay players, then they will shut athletics down if they have to. Part of this might be out of spite, but a lot of it is the recognition that professionalization of college athletics would be so disruptive and potentially destructive to the university's academic mission, that it wouldn't be worth keeping. The big 10 commissioner said as much the other day, and I don't think they are bluffing. the reason why athletics bring in so much money is that it costs a lot of money to do athletics. If they shut it down or scale it back, the universities don't lose anything, and gain more control against corrupt outside influences. Yeah, it might hurt to have Ohio State go Division III with no scholarships, but I wouldn't count on the Big 10 not to do something like that, sinc ethey do really believe that academics do come first.

# 378 lord_mike @ 09/28/13 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	That is the way it will have to go down. Or at least that lady cross country runner. See Title IX.

So, the non-student athlete who has no scholarship, and is already paying an activity fee to subsidize the athletic program, will now have to pay more to subsidize those players more...

who's being exploited now? It sure isn't the college athlete.

# 379 ainokmw @ 09/28/13 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	I agree, if it could be controlled. The problem is once you start allowing kids to accept money they become open to outside influences. That's a major concern imo. Also how do the schools and the programs protect their IP's in the process as well? Who regulates this? I am not opposed to this in theory, but the logistics and the possible repercussions of outside influences would make me nervous. Also with the added complexity and where NCAA games fall in the profit tier, I doubt EA would even think it worth the added effort that would come with an added complexity of individual player licensing.

The more I think about it, the less I think it's even an issue. So some oil baron from Texas wants to drop 10k and a new car on some kid for him to play for UT. So what? Who actually gets hurt by this?

"Amateurism" as a sports concept is a 19th century invention by the upper classes to preclude the poor from competing in sports they cherished. The reason we hold onto it so dearly is because of the sanctity of history and our support for the status quo. In many ways, amateur athletics is antithetical to the American ideals of hard work and profit.

Allow them to make money however they want. Forbid the schools from paying them directly, freeing them from any liability or Title IX issues, and stipulate/reinforce that the students have to report all money gained as income.

If the NCAA suspects shady, unregulated dealings, they can try to get the Feds to come down on the suspects for tax evasion.

Obviously there will be issues, but it's not like NCAA football has been a paragon of virtue for the last 30 years.

As for the game, once the legal hassles are tied up, someone will make a game. They're not just going to leave money on the table. Someone will pick up the license. Quite possibly someone like Sports Interactive who will make a simulation (similar to Football Manager or Out of the Park Baseball).

# 380 nc0ffey @ 09/28/13 01:21 PM

If you knowingly allow boosters to pay players then the programs with the most money will get the top recruits and it will hurt football as a whole as far as competition is concerned.

« Previous 1 2…17 181920 21 22 23 24 25 Next »

More Links

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