Home
NCAA Football 14 News Post



In case you've been living under a rock (or you just don't care), the NCAA and Ed O'Bannon have been in a legal war for a few years now. This has effectively ended the NCAA Football and NCAA Basketball franchises for the time being as the case works its way up the courts. Today, we're one step closer to the case going to the Supreme Court, as the 9th Court Circuit of Appeals ruled on the case.

Quote:
"We conclude that the plaintiffs have shown that they are injured in fact as a result of the NCAA’s rules having foreclosed the market for their NILs in video games. We therefore do not reach the thornier questions of whether participants in live TV broadcasts of college sporting events have enforceable rights of publicity or whether the plaintiffs are injured by the NCAA’s current licensing arrangement for archival footage"

Indeed, the 'number one factor holding back NCAA video game growth' as described by EA was the inability to use college athlete's actual likenesses in their games.

In the ruling, the court upheld the original ruling by Judge Claudia Wilken in saying:

Quote:
"The district court found that it is entirely possible that the NCAA will resume its support for college sports video games at some point in the future, given that the NCAA found such games to be profitable in the past, and that finding of fact was not clearly erroneous. Given the NCAA’s previous, lengthy relationship with EA and the other evidence presented, it was reasonable for the district court to conclude that the NCAA may well begin working with EA or another video game company in the future."

It would seem the crux of the matter at this point for the return of NCAA video games is the NCAA allowing a few things. First, allowing video games to be made again -- as the NCAA currently has a policy in place which doesn't allow for that. Second, the rules on athletes NILs being used would have to be changed. Third, compensation rules would have to be finalized.

What is more likely is that the NCAA will take this matter all the way to the Supreme Court as they have alluded to. A Supreme Court ruling could jeopardize the entire system of amateurism the NCAA has built, although there is no real beat on how the Supreme Court might rule since the case hasn't been argued.

As far as a return of NCAA Football goes, this case continues to hold up any possibility of that because it is preventing any of the three questions above from being definitively answered. Not only does this case need a final resolution, but systems will need to be put in place for the games to have a chance at returning. At this point, you are easily 24-36 months away from that becoming a reality on any fast-tracked solution sans a miracle, which puts the arrival date of any future game years into the future.

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All
NCAA Football 14 Videos
Member Comments
# 41 canes21 @ 10/01/15 09:51 PM
Unless EA didn't tie the roster to a profile which is very wishful thinking.
 
# 42 lbrown531 @ 10/02/15 11:59 AM
All I have to say is Thank You Sam keller and the other so called players who think they resemble video game characters. I hope everything was worth ruining people's lives.
 
# 43 ODogg @ 10/02/15 12:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lbrown531
All I have to say is Thank You Sam keller and the other so called players who think they resemble video game characters. I hope everything was worth ruining people's lives.
I agree, hope they are spit on wherever they go...I really hate those guys with a passion.
 
# 44 goillini03 @ 10/02/15 12:40 PM
Sam Keller, lol.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
 
# 45 DaSmerg @ 10/02/15 02:04 PM
Interesting comments. Interesting twist in this case. US law is so fascinating sometimes.

On the issue many have raised in this topic...amateur/amateurism, the NCAA, TV money, paid players, value of education. I think the one thing I fail to see in anyone who has brought up '...NCAA makes a gagillion dollars...' is that for every big name D1 school that you feel is making a gagillion dollars is that there are something like 10 small schools that might break even or that have a successful program (say men's basketball) that pays for the rest of their sport programs (for men & women). Yeah, ESPN's college deal was a giant number at the top line, but divide that number by conferences, then by teams and then by years. How much is it now?

I also fail to see addressed how paying young men to play football and/or basketball (let's face it, the two big money sports) and how that would be squared with Title IX...paying an equal amount to an equivalent amount of young women to play sports most of us would never bother to watch.

Nor do I see addressed what was brought up early on in this thread...the cost of a full ride scholarship, not including unmeasurables like connections you can make through booster & alumini clubs to a bigger/brighter life after college ball. On the value of scholarship, a measurable, my mother was advising a client a couple years ago who's daughter, in New York state, desperately wanted to go to Michigan. Out of state tution alone was 30 grand a year. How exactly would you measure the value of the coaching and athletic training that each student-athlete recieves? Do paid players give up a portion of their "salary" to pay for coaches too? Do red shirt roster hangars get volunteer trainer services? How about their medical care? Do only big name players get a true "full ride" now? Where's the bottom in this what's paid, and not paid?

IMO the stupid BCS system totally distorted many people's perception of the NCAA making it seem like every school is big and making money.
 
# 46 redsox4evur @ 10/02/15 08:49 PM
DaSmerg you are so right....Title IX definitely would have to come into play. Also you are right about the big time schools and the money issues. I am one of those people that at some point thought, most of the big time athletic departments make a ton of money for their schools. And boy was I wrong. I took some sports management classes in college and I learned that only 12-15 DEPARTMENTS made a profit. That surprised me to say the least. Passing a new rule like this could really hurt the smaller schools like Akron, Miami OH, etc.
 
# 47 RedHawk24 @ 10/04/15 06:11 PM
Why not just take the PES approach to not having the licenses for the schools? Call the schools something generic (think "Columbus College" for Ohio State, etc) and then allow players to import school imagery, uniforms, and change the names? Just call the game "College Football 2017" and avoid any mention of the NCAA.
 
# 48 redsox4evur @ 10/04/15 06:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHawk24
Why not just take the PES approach to not having the licenses for the schools? Call the schools something generic (think "Columbus College" for Ohio State, etc) and then allow players to import school imagery, uniforms, and change the names? Just call the game "College Football 2017" and avoid any mention of the NCAA.
Because not a lot of people will buy it ala. All-Pro Football by 2K.
 
# 49 RedHawk24 @ 10/04/15 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox4evur
Because not a lot of people will buy it ala. All-Pro Football by 2K.
That's not a fair comparison. All-Pro was competing with Madden, so people just stuck with the known brand which had the licenses. Given the amount of work that people already are willing to do for a great college game with roster shares/edits, I'm confident there would be a market for this style of college football game, especially since right now, it would be the only one on the market. 2K needs to get back in the football game anyway, so why not have them come back with "All-American Football 2K17"?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
 
# 50 Beefmaster @ 10/04/15 08:02 PM
At the moment, there is parody in college football. If the NCAA allowed players to be paid for their likeness/image/autographs, that would go away. As soon as a player can get paid, a booster from Texas/Alabama/Ohio State would have $250k for some player(s) on the team. Then it would be "Who has the best team money can buy?" I believe this is part of what the NCAA is trying to avoid. The other part being the loss of their cash cow.

On a side note, do any of you donate to The Goodwill Store? That is a business as well. But, the owner sells products he never has to pay for. Sound familiar?
 
# 51 Junior Moe @ 10/04/15 09:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefmaster
At the moment, there is parody in college football. If the NCAA allowed players to be paid for their likeness/image/autographs, that would go away. As soon as a player can get paid, a booster from Texas/Alabama/Ohio State would have $250k for some player(s) on the team. Then it would be "Who has the best team money can buy?" I believe this is part of what the NCAA is trying to avoid. The other part being the loss of their cash cow.

On a side note, do any of you donate to The Goodwill Store? That is a business as well. But, the owner sells products he never has to pay for. Sound familiar?
True. But I think boosters paying player should continue to be strictly prohibited for the reasons you just said. Ohio State, Texas and Alabama would never lose...

The issue, as I see it, is the NCAA getting in the way of the players' free market value.

The NCAA is profiting off the players, and I think that's fair considering what they are offered in return like a free education, stage to show off talent, and chance to change their lives. Remember, about 1% actually go pro and an even smaller number those few get the "set for life money". So they, and the rest benefit tremendously from the education and connections they make in college.

The NCAA prohibits players from doing exactly what they are doing, though. And I think that's wrong. Now I get schools/NCAA not paying players; Title IX, most schools not being as profitable as they seem, how much, etc... But to frown on a Johnny Football getting a few hundred dollars for his autograph just strikes me as greedy. Of the thousands of scholarship athletes there's only a few players who could make decent money off themselves. Most of them are going pro anyway. Just let them if they can. That's all.
 
# 52 real1 @ 10/06/15 12:14 AM
College Hoops & Football 2K17 otw!!
 
# 53 scooterterp05 @ 10/06/15 07:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLO
Fair point. To counter, then let them take the money they get paid from their image and use that to pay for their education. (just like the rest of us that had to work full or part time jobs to get through college). I understand it's a fine line argument either way, the thing that bothers me is how often this discussion is framed in the (false) context of these student-athletes not having any money for food or other things. I am also an educator and have known plenty of student athletes that are doing more than fine with all the "extras" that come along with being a high profile college athlete.

As it stands right now the education is "payment" in the form of a scholarship. If they want to make the millions that a coach or college executive make then let them work hard and earn it over time just like those adults did. There is nowhere in the work force where 18, 19 or 20 year old kids can come into an organization and demand to be paid as much as the CEO or top execs, no matter how "famous" they are. (other than Hollywood and I doubt anyone would argue that Hollywood is the structure we should follow for work-force compensation?)

I'm fine with the change to pay the players, but if that happens then remove the scholarships and give them to kids who can't make millions from endorsement deals. If an 18 year old kid gets a 2 million dollar contract from Nike, the $25k tuition shouldn't be a problem.

By arguing that they need to get paid and also keep the scholarships you are de-value-ing the education that the scholarship is paying for. There's no way around it.

Truth is there probably isn't a neat and clean answer for this....
You're missing the point, sadly. [emoji53]

Sent from my SM-N915T using Tapatalk
 
# 54 jvalverde88 @ 10/06/15 07:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lbrown531
All I have to say is Thank You Sam keller and the other so called players who think they resemble video game characters. I hope everything was worth ruining people's lives.
Quite the hyperbole there.
 
# 55 buckeyezombie @ 10/08/15 02:26 AM
College sports video games aren't coming back. College Hoops 2K8 was my favorite game, but it's best to let it go.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
# 56 ODogg @ 10/08/15 12:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyezombie
College sports video games aren't coming back. College Hoops 2K8 was my favorite game, but it's best to let it go.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
I will never let it go. From my cold, dead hands NCAA 14!!
 
# 57 ODogg @ 10/08/15 12:15 PM
In all seriousness though, college games WILL come back because there's way too much money to be made in them in this day and age..especially with the NCAA playoffs now for football making it more popular than ever before.
 
# 58 redsox4evur @ 10/08/15 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODogg
In all seriousness though, college games WILL come back because there's way too much money to be made in them in this day and age..especially with the NCAA playoffs now for football making it more popular than ever before.
I can agree with you about a football game. But idk about basketball because that game stopped being developed because it didn't sell well.
 
# 59 canes21 @ 10/08/15 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox4evur
I can agree with you about a football game. But idk about basketball because that game stopped being developed because it didn't sell well.
And the license was ridiculously priced IIRC.
 
# 60 redsox4evur @ 10/08/15 11:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by canes21
And the license was ridiculously priced IIRC.
Licenses are usually ridiculously priced, I would have to guess.
 


Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.