NCAA Football 14 News Post

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

03:52 PM - January 15, 2016 by RaychelSnr

During the NCAA general convention, the issue of athlete's being able to monetize their likenesses -- even for non athletic ventures, was not voted on despite the Pac-12 Proposing the measure.

In effect, the NCAA tabled the measure and may pick it back up next January when the general convention meets again -- but there was no sign of real movement for the measure at this convention.

In fact, there wasn't much movement on any real issues of substance at the convention. It does call into question what the point was of having so much new authority given to Power Five conferences with no real movement in year two on issues that truly do matter to both student athletes, fans, and schools.

On the gaming side, this means that any hope of a college sports video game is put off another year as well. As we've written about in the past, to get a college sports video game in the future will almost certainly mean athletes will be able to monetize their likenesses and licensing for players will occur. No gaming company will risk anything short of a 100% guarantee of no legal liability when it comes to using college teams and marks in games at this point -- nor will schools.

It doesn't help things that EA had a poorly timed (and rather cruel) PR stunt last week, which appeared to signal there were signs of life with the franchise. However, it does seem that thanks to a lack of action from the NCAA -- the franchise appears more dead than ever. Given the time it'd take to get a game to market (likely at least 18-24 months from scratch), you are talking about a long wait for a new college football game indeed.

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

NCAA Football 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 61 newtonfb @ 01/19/16 10:08 PM

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.

# 62 itsbigmike @ 01/19/16 11:27 PM

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?

# 63 itsbigmike @ 01/19/16 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

And what is Texas A&M without Johnny Manziel? The third-best team in the state of Texas? I would say that the Aggies benefitted more from Manziel's skills and publicity more than he benefitted from Texas A&M. He WAS that program. A better example would be Alabama where they just continue to roll along, regardless of the players.

# 64 Junior Moe @ 01/19/16 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsbigmike


	And what is Texas A&M without Johnny Manziel? The third-best team in the state of Texas? I would say that the Aggies benefitted more from Manziel's skills and publicity more than he benefitted from Texas A&M. He WAS that program. A better example would be Alabama where they just continue to roll along, regardless of the players.

I said that it is mutually beneficial arrangement. And I just threw Johnny out there. Alabama is a good example, though. Without the NCAA and the schools, where else can the best football players in the country go if they don't want to agree to the NCAA's conditions? They have to wait 3 years before they can go pro. We all know the tragic tale of Maurice Clarette. My thing is that I think the NCAA, as shady as it is, is operating fairly in what they are doing with the TV contracts, jerseys and bowls. It just gets sketchy for me when they just try to hog every penny while the players are there. Let those kids make a few dollars while they can. Let them unionize and sell their likeness. Let them sign some autographs or shoot a commercial. Only the very best stand to make any real money and those guys are likely gonna be pros one day. 99% are not going to make millions as pros.

# 65 theoneandbigboi @ 01/20/16 04:45 PM

Feel better lol

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

# 66 Junior Moe @ 01/20/16 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BizDevConglomerate


	I freaky can't believe people disagree with these kids being paid. Lol I'd that's the case, why are teams in red states even viable? You think because most of their players like those states and those people? Please, there is no nick saban without the players, no bear Bryant no chip kelly. The coaches souks be the first to demand the players get paid. There will always be an athlete, buy the school itself is either relevant or not with their recruits. Look at Duke bball the year, not a great recruiting class and they look mediocre. Look at the same school last year, yout think coach k is that good? Or jahlil okafer and cast? #paythekids

I understand the argument for paying players. The NCAA, schools and conferences are raking in hundreds of millions of dollars. There's enough to go around. I just feel differently about the schools or conferences themselves paying players a salary. How do you even figure that number? Maybe they should just follow the Olympic model. That way the players good enough can get paid. It is still college. These schools have liabilities outside of just sports. And the vast majority don't make a profit off of sports. Players like Okafor are very valuable, and they (usually) capitalize on it eventually. But Duke is a brand itself. That brand has been built over 30 years. There's a reason the top players go to certain schools.

# 67 Caventer @ 01/20/16 06:54 PM

Go ahead, pay them.... Good luck to the kids that are just ok athletes. Good luck to the small schools. Good luck to the less than marginal performers in the big leagues who are living off of the big schools. A small few could make a little bit of money based on their worth that might be able to be calculated by their third year.... But again, take away any education scholarship money because that is indeed an extra benefit. There will be less football teams and more of a NFL development team..... Then comes free agency..... On and on....

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

# 68 IlluminatusUIUC @ 01/21/16 05:03 PM

No school should ever be paying a player directly. Period. But it is ridiculous to prevent them from earning money on the side. If some goofball booster wants to put cash in Reggie Bush's pocket to come play for USC, let him. They are both consenting adults.

And don't play the "parity" card, after the National Championship trophy spends it's 7th year of the last 10 sitting in the same conference's trophy case.

# 69 biletnikoff @ 01/22/16 12:20 AM

players are getting paid whether we know it or not.
and EA is obviously already working on something or they wouldnt be teasing with KH or the facebook page.

Something else should be leaked before summer I would imagine

# 70 KSUowls @ 01/23/16 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsbigmike


	Tuition is excessive for college, there is no doubt about that. I know that first hand, as well. However, the fact that they are getting an athletic scholarship doesn't mean that they don't also deserve compensation for people using their likeness in video games. Would it be miniscule? Yeah, probably. However, it's still money that they deserve. Companies simply cannot use you for something like a video game without your consent. I feel the same way when schools sell the starting quarterback's jersey in their book stores, but they don't put a name on it, thus skirting the issue that they're continuing to profit directly on the back of their players without having to pay them for it. Athletes aren't by definition an employee, but kids on Power 5 teams are very, very valuable to the universities. College football, and to a much lesser extent, college basketball, help pay for the entire athletic budget and then some for schools. Even a school like Western Michigan would not be able to have other sports without their football program bringing in revenue -- even if it's still not enough to cover the athletic budget -- and the players should be compensated for that, too, above and beyond the scholarship to school. This also says nothing of the fact that many athletes are pushed into easy classes that don't really prepare them for anything after college, should professional sports not work out. We need only look at UNC for that sort of thing, but it goes on at schools both large and small. Or the kids who have injuries that leave them unable to perform on the field, costing them their scholarships. Or the kids that can't eat because the amateur status doesn't allow them to make enough money to pay for meals -- as Kemba Walker described when he was still playing basketball for the University of Connecticut. Yes, scholarships are fantastic for getting kids out of the inner-city and they're also fantastic for kids whose families could feasibly afford their kid's tuitions. But to just want to stop the compensation there, when these universities are pulling in millions upon millions of dollars -- or in the case of the NCAA, billions -- to me feels short-sighted . Especially when athletic directors are giving themselves raises on top of raises, it feels unfair for the kids that are actually, you know, sacrificing their physical well being in both the immediate and distant future. Whether people want to consider them employees or not, they bring value to their schools beyond their scholarship costs. And, I admit, figuring out what that value would be on a per-player basis is a nightmare to try to suss out. Obviously some players are worth more than others, some schools worth more than others, and some sports worth more than others. I don't have all the answers on that. Still, I'd rather they try to figure that out, instead of just saying that it's too hard to figure out and then throwing up their hands and asserting that the current system is the most fair. I disagree with that notion.

This logic lacks consistency in my opinion, or maybe it just ignores the part where in order for a person to receive compensation from another party then that party has to get something in return. I believe that you agree these athletes are receiving compensation for their likeness. So, why are they able to receive compensation equivalent to hundreds of thousands in compensation? Obviously it's because they provide their universities a product to sell and profit on. In exchange for that compensation the university is selling the athlete's work/likeness every Saturday in the fall with ticket sales and TV contracts.

You mentioned that you would want compensation if someone used your likeness to make a profit. Lets assume that you work for an employer who uses your likeness for profit. You are valuable to that employer because of your likeness and they compensate you for that. Well, at that point it doesn't matter what the company does with your likeness, it's what they are paying you for. Even if they decide to license out that license to another company you are still being compensated for use of your likeness.

I often see the argument that these universities are making millions/billions. You're right the level of compensation from university to athlete isn't 1:1. It isn't 1:1 for any other working person in the world either so I don't see why we should treat college athletes any different. Even in the NFL the most lucrative contract does not compare to the income received by the team owner.

« Previous 1 2 34Next »

More Links

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