"The NCAA would create a mechanism to evaluate potential deals for fair market value and spot possible corruption."
What could go wrong with this? Oh...and corruption???
it would be up to the individual schools to set standards, evaluate, and report deals on a frequent basis.
The fact so many people think everything is done in Indy is mindblowing.
What is mind blowing is the self reporting part. No wonder so many schools cheat.
Yes but they still need to "report deals on a frequent basis." To Indianapolis. For review. To spot "corruption."
This is great
https://www.bannersociety.com/2020/6/9/21285229/ncaa-athletic-directors-name-image-likeness-petard-hoisting-championships
This is great
https://www.bannersociety.com/2020/6/9/21285229/ncaa-athletic-directors-name-image-likeness-petard-hoisting-championships
"A smart organization would have been prepared for that possibility and built a plan for “if NIL becomes a thing, here’s how we can make it work.” Not out of moral obligation, necessarily, but as a matter of risk management. A smart organization might have started that plan after Ed O’Bannon filed a federal lawsuit against the NCAA related to his name, image, and likeness rights in 2009, or when EA Sports got out of the lawsuit in May 2014 by settling with the players for $40 million, or when the trial judge found in favor of the O’Bannon plaintiffs in August 2014. Even if every college president, athletic director, and conference commissioner thought athlete-controlled NIL rights would destroy the amateur athletic model, the smart thing to do would have been to plan for that possible future, right?
But instead of that, Kevin, y’all decided to hold the line in the media and threaten to bar California schools from NCAA events and ask Congress to fix your problems for you. Given years to prepare for what you and many of your colleagues see as a major challenge, you did ... well, nothing.
So now, yes, your job, and the NCAA’s, is very hard. And, again, I’m sorry. 2014 you should have made better choices."
That was petty, immature and poorly argued. There has to be better champions for NIL that some random blogger who clearly hates the NCAA and, more precisely, the member schools who make the rules.
That was petty, immature and poorly argued. There has to be better champions for NIL that some random blogger who clearly hates the NCAA and, more precisely, the member schools who make the rules.
I don't think its an argument for NIL. I think its an argument that even if you plan to fight against pending change, a smart organization will still plan for the possibility that the pending change becomes inevitable.
I know no one cares(specifically Rico who will chime in with his youthful, smart ass response), but I think it's important to note the concerns the student athletes themselves have..So if it's about the kids(which is what Rico and others constantly say they support), then don't these Student athletes voices deserve to be heard?? Or don't there's matter??
No one has ever accused the NCAA of being smartI trust university presidents more than fans (myself included) and the press.
I trust university presidents more than fans (myself included) and the press.
I'd concede that it's not perfect but the schools that make up the NCAA have done a damn good job of providing billions of dollars worth of education to young men and women for decades. Many of whom could not afford it or even get access to that education due to the socioeconomic situations they were born into.
So maybe NIL is the right thing to do, maybe schools like Louisville, Kansas, Arizona, etc. will not exploit it, but don't act like the schools of the NCAA have been these horrible institutions or run by idiots.
I will be happy to see players compensated for their extremely hard work.
I don't think its an argument for NIL. I think its an argument that even if you plan to fight against pending change, a smart organization will still plan for the possibility that the pending change becomes inevitable.
I honestly believe that this whole "push" for NIL and ending "amateurism" is more from outside forces than the student athletes themselves. I think people like Rico, MU82 etc care more about the athletes getting compensated then do the student athletes themselves. Just like the athletes themselves care less about the one time transfer rule, then people like Rico, MU82 etc do. I mean read the article in the athletic, several quotes from basketball players about it. Just weird that "fans" like Rico etc care more about these things than the SA's themselves do and they are the one's it benefits. That's what you get though from people like Rico and others on his side of the fence given the abhorrent things they believe in, and support
No, I shouldn’t have called them dumb. They’ve done an amazing job keeping all the money for themselves under the guise of amateurism. Luckily, the con is overOkay, now that is dumb. So college athletics run for free and the schools keep all the revenue? Your just being obtuse or have some huge ax to grind because of something personal.
I know no one cares(specifically Rico who will chime in with his youthful, smart ass response), but I think it's important to note the concerns the student athletes themselves have..So if it's about the kids(which is what Rico and others constantly say they support), then don't these Student athletes voices deserve to be heard?? Or don't there's matter??
Okay, now that is dumb. So college athletics run for free and the schools keep all the revenue? Your just being obtuse or have some huge ax to grind because of something personal.
Unless you have some proof that schools like UAB or Northern Iowa, Montana State, NJIT, etc. are pocketing huge (or any) amounts of money from athletics; then we'll agree to disagree on the ethics of American colleges and universities.
It’s abhorrent I believe in student athletes to be able to earn of their name, image and likeness?
Your constant slander of me is sad and says far more about you.
It's not slander Rico..your posts on things scream loud and clear about the things you believe in, what you think etc. I'm hoping that as you get older and learn more about the world around you, your mindset will change. You're continual smart ass ways WILL catch up to you at some point.
What's abhorrent are the things you believe in that have nothing to do with sports(which is obvious from posts on other boards), THOSE things are abhorrent and you're completely misguided and ill informed. I'm not saying that believing student athletes should be able to earn off name, image and likeness is ABHORRENT, but given the other things you stand for and believe in(non sports related) that are abhorrent, it doesn't surprise me that you would also support something like this.
Okay, now that is dumb. So college athletics run for free and the schools keep all the revenue? Your just being obtuse or have some huge ax to grind because of something personal.
Unless you have some proof that schools like UAB or Northern Iowa, Montana State, NJIT, etc. are pocketing huge (or any) amounts of money from athletics; then we'll agree to disagree on the ethics of American colleges and universities.
You are so out of your depth and wrong about everything you just posted.
Also, what other boards do I post on? That’s news to me
No I'm not, you post frequently on the Covid-19 board and have made your beliefs, and your agendas abundantly clear. If you want to try to say I'm wrong about everything I posted, that would be incorrect..the proof is in those posts. The things you believe in and support are all right there. You don't hide it that's for sure. It's not just you, many others support the same abhorrent things you do Rico. People have been influenced by the wrong people for many years, and are completely misguided. It honestly makes me sad.
I know no one cares(specifically Rico who will chime in with his youthful, smart ass response), but I think it's important to note the concerns the student athletes themselves have..So if it's about the kids(which is what Rico and others constantly say they support), then don't these Student athletes voices deserve to be heard?? Or don't there's matter??
If they don't want to monetize their name and likeness, they don'thave to.
I will ask the question again, are we certain that a vast majority of college athletes even want this?? I haven't seen any comments from any that suggest they do. I haven't seen any that suggest they don't either. but if this is such a big thing, and so many athletes want it, why hasn't there been any talk of it whatsoever by them??
Why does it have to be a vast majority? Why can't it be a few? My guess is that most of them don't really care because they aren't going to be able to monetize their image much anyway.
I mean, why are you against it? Why have you asked hundreds of questions with thousands of question marks, even though most of them have been repeatedly answered?
It's a mystery.
Well why do only those few opinions matter the most? This is the real problem we are having everywhere in this country right now. We are catering to the "few" at the expense of the majority. That's not the way it's supposed to work. Here's a novel idea..why don't they have a vote of the student athletes( in every sport), you know the one's that this is supposed to benefit. Majority rules, like how a democracy is supposed to work. If more vote for it, than implement it(and even then I would come around to it), if they vote against it, then it's dropped and doesn't get implemented. Easy peasy. If it's all about the kids that so many hypocritical people say it is, then let them decide. College campuses are making a push to get SA's to register to vote etc and learn about voting. This would be a perfect way to get them to learn more about democracy. And, this might be a lot more impartial and as opposed to the upcoming election, I'm sure with this, there wouldn't be Coaches, administrators, etc trying to influence them to vote a certain way. They'd let them think for themselves with this.
Well why do only those few opinions matter the most? This is the real problem we are having everywhere in this country right now. We are catering to the "few" at the expense of the majority. That's not the way it's supposed to work. Here's a novel idea..why don't they have a vote of the student athletes( in every sport), you know the one's that this is supposed to benefit. Majority rules, like how a democracy is supposed to work. If more vote for it, than implement it(and even then I would come around to it), if they vote against it, then it's dropped and doesn't get implemented. Easy peasy. If it's all about the kids that so many hypocritical people say it is, then let them decide. College campuses are making a push to get SA's to register to vote etc and learn about voting. This would be a perfect way to get them to learn more about democracy. And, this might be a lot more impartial and as opposed to the upcoming election, I'm sure with this, there wouldn't be Coaches, administrators, etc trying to influence them to vote a certain way. They'd let them think for themselves with this.
Majority rule is a good idea. Too bad it didn’t work for the presidency
Well why do only those few opinions matter the most? This is the real problem we are having everywhere in this country right now. We are catering to the "few" at the expense of the majority. That's not the way it's supposed to work. Here's a novel idea..why don't they have a vote of the student athletes( in every sport), you know the one's that this is supposed to benefit. Majority rules, like how a democracy is supposed to work. If more vote for it, than implement it(and even then I would come around to it), if they vote against it, then it's dropped and doesn't get implemented. Easy peasy. If it's all about the kids that so many hypocritical people say it is, then let them decide. College campuses are making a push to get SA's to register to vote etc and learn about voting. This would be a perfect way to get them to learn more about democracy. And, this might be a lot more impartial and as opposed to the upcoming election, I'm sure with this, there wouldn't be Coaches, administrators, etc trying to influence them to vote a certain way. They'd let them think for themselves with this.
Here’s an idea - Those who can profit off their likeness can and will do so and those who can’t still get a pretty sweet deal in a scholarship to play d1 athletics.
What’s wrong with that?
Majority rule is a good idea. Too bad it didn’t work for the presidencyYep we are not a real democracy
:) Triggered. It did work though, EXACTLY the way it's supposed to..the electoral college determines the winner and loser of elections in this country. Now go rail against that too because "it's dumb" and shouldn't be that way, simply because you aren't getting your way.
Here’s an idea - Those who can profit off their likeness can and will do so and those who can’t still get a pretty sweet deal in a scholarship to play d1 athletics.
What’s wrong with that?
Well...but wait a minute now..all we have been hearing about on TV and social media lately is that we are supposed to treat people equally(which is common sense), and so now you're pushing something that doesn't treat everyone equally. Hmmm..isn't that incredibly hypocritical?? Answer: yes. You and Rico and everyone else on this side are going to have to take the "L" here panda.
:) Triggered. It did work though, EXACTLY the way it's supposed to..the electoral college determines the winner and loser of elections in this country. Now go rail against that too because "it's dumb" and shouldn't be that way, simply because you aren't getting your way.That is not one man one vote which is democracy. Electoral college was done to apease certain states but I'll leave it at that.
It's not slander Rico..your posts on things scream loud and clear about the things you believe in, what you think etc. I'm hoping that as you get older and learn more about the world around you, your mindset will change. You're continual smart ass ways WILL catch up to you at some point.Definition of irony
What's abhorrent are the things you believe in that have nothing to do with sports(which is obvious from posts on other boards), THOSE things are abhorrent and you're completely misguided and ill informed. I'm not saying that believing student athletes should be able to earn off name, image and likeness is ABHORRENT, but given the other things you stand for and believe in(non sports related) that are abhorrent, it doesn't surprise me that you would also support something like this.
Well...but wait a minute now..all we have been hearing about on TV and social media lately is that we are supposed to treat people equally(which is common sense), and so now you're pushing something that doesn't treat everyone equally. Hmmm..isn't that incredibly hypocritical?? Answer: yes. You and Rico and everyone else on this side are going to have to take the "L" here panda.
Well...but wait a minute now..all we have been hearing about on TV and social media lately is that we are supposed to treat people equally(which is common sense), and so now you're pushing something that doesn't treat everyone equally. Hmmm..isn't that incredibly hypocritical?? Answer: yes. You and Rico and everyone else on this side are going to have to take the "L" here panda.
How is this rule "at the expense" of the many? How are those "many" harmed?
And again, you are offering no proof at all that a significant number of student athletes are against this. So your entire premise is might be faulty to begin with.
But I guess this going to be your new reason not to be for something because you simply don't like change.
So, the majority doesn’t rule?
And “it’s dumb” and shouldn’t be that way is an argument, huh?
That’s a lot of self-owning
Now those are YOUR arguments for things..it's all you have really given for a reason as to why you hate the NCAA and why you want NIL etc. You have given no other well thought out explanation...because you don't have one, or you would have done so by now. So the "it's dumb and shouldn't be that way" are your typical arguments. Those are your posts Rico, not mine.
Allowing people to earn what they are worth is treating them fairly.
You're also not offering any proof at all that a significant number are for it either, you'll agree with that right?? Just because fans want it doesn't mean the student athletes do..all I'm asking in all seriousness is, what if the vast majority don't?? Isn't it supposed to be about the kids? Why isn't anyone seemingly not caring what they might think or want?? I mean there is at least some proof that not as many SA's want this as some may think, given the Student Athlete Advisory committee(who are the voice of student athletes) have many concerns about it. Shouldn't that at least warrant some pause and concern amongst the rank and file?? Look, I can and will get on board with NIL IF I was convinced or had proof a majority of SA's were for it. Right now, I'm not convinced(and haven't seen anything to change my mind yet) that this is the case. THEY should be the one's deciding on this, don't you think??
We have seen too many instances in this country in the last decade or so of "change" being made by people because they THINK it's best for everyone (when actually they are changing things because of some loud voices(and fear of those particular voices) and ignoring the even louder voices against it). Many times, it isn't for the best, and the people that make the decisions are deciding on change for some that want it, but ignoring the one's that don't. I can handle change, what I cannot handle, and shouldn't have to is being told how I HAVE to think or feel about said change and having it "crammed" down my throat. Change is not always for the best and as the last decade or so has shown, it's actually been bad in a lot of instances, and should have never been changed.
They "earned" scholarships, didn't they? But wait Sultan..we want people to earn what they are worth, okay, let's go with that for a minute..so then how come "your side" loathes "rich white men" and coaches etc, that have only done the exact same thing you are advocating...earning what they are worth? Again, I'm honestly trying hard to see it the way you are, but when you want it one way but not the other, I just can't get on board with that. Even you have to see the hypocrisy in that, right??
I’ve listed reasons plenty of time. You just choose to ignore them.
No hypocrisy here. I don’t have a problem with coaches salaries at all. I don’t care how much “rich white men” make either.
It’s happening, so the discussion is moot. The NCAA not being prepared is on them. They could have taken the lead but instead state legislatures and the federal government have. It has widespread bipartisan support.
Then eliminate athletic scholarships and adopt the Ivy League model if ethics is your concernThat is not in-line with Catholic morals. Jesuit and most other schools have afforded higher education to the less fortunate vía athletic scholarships. Plus most Ivy League athletes get academic scholarships.
Now please...I'm going to try one last time to see if I can get a non smart ass answer out of you, and I'm being sincere with this..You have said repeatedly, you're on the side of the student athlete, I honestly have no problem with that to be perfectly honest. But, that being said if that's the case, why are you okay with other people(state legislators, feds) making this decision for them. Shouldn't they have the say in this more than anyone else?? It's about them, right?? Let them decide then.
No you haven't Rico, now well thought out reasons...I have heard things like "I don't like the athletes being treated like cattle", or "I don't like people profiting off of people doing all the work". Those aren't reasons...those are simply things you don't like. There's a difference. I'm just waiting for a well thought out, reasoned response and answer as to why you hate the NCAA so much, what did they do to you?? What made you hate them so much instead of your typical short, canned answers.
That is not in-line with Catholic morals. Jesuit and most other schools have afforded higher education to the less fortunate vía athletic scholarships. Plus most Ivy League athletes get academic scholarships.Ivy's don't give academic scholarships they give on need base only. Real Ivy schools I mean
I guess you'd like college sports to be for the wealthy only.
That is not in-line with Catholic morals. Jesuit and most other schools have afforded higher education to the less fortunate vía athletic scholarships. Plus most Ivy League athletes get academic scholarships.
I guess you'd like college sports to be for the wealthy only.
Why would they vote no?
If it’s a question of morality, then winning doesn’t matter.Okay, we've reached the height of ignorance.
Also, then Jesuit and Catholic schools would have open arms to the less fortunate having an opportunity to help provide for their communities and families by earning off NIL.
1. Many college athletes across all sports can maximize their earning potential as athletes while being college athletes.
2. Draconian NCAA rules prohibit these athletes from silly things such as free meals or even borrowing a car from a friend.
3. The major conferences pay universities anywhere between $20-$50 in TV revenue. That revenue would be non-existent without the student athlete.
4. Without the players, there is no NCAA. Universities long ago decided amateurism was something to profit from. The players are the faces of these universities
Maybe they wouldn't..but all I want to see is for them to decide. It's an issue FOR them, they should be the one's to decide. Just like I'm not convinced that basketball players and football players would be overwhelmingly supportive for the one time transfer rule. Now granted it was a small sample size, but the article in the athletic really made me wonder just how many would.
Also, I think you might be surprised at how a vote would really go..You have to remember, in all likelihood only the top athletes would vote for it, a vast majority of the non revenue athletes would oppose it I'd think, as would the football and basketball players that know they wouldn't benefit much from it. There'd be jealousy because of it(if it passed), from the one's that wouldn't benefit from it.
Okay, we've reached the height of ignorance.
NIL will NOT increase the amount of revenue to college athletics. It will redistribute it.
The money has to come from somewhere. Nike will not suddenly become richer and fund both athletes and general athletic funds.
The fact that universities don't want that because they can use that money for non-revenue sports does not make them fundimentaly bad. NLI is also not fundamentaly bad, it just moves resources from lesser sports.
What are those who don’t stand to profit off of their likeness losing that they wouldn’t have before the decision?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-money-could-student-athletes-make-as-social-media-influencers/amp/
Lots of non revenue athletes on the list who stand to make the most....
The non-revenue sports argument is a red herring.
Nike isn’t going to stop sponsoring schools. It’ll sponsor both. Nike kids already go to Nike schools a good amount of the time. Same with other apparel and school affiliations.Never said Nike would. Be rational. If Nike spends a $1MM at a school but then they are going to find a pot of gold to suddenly spend $1.5 MM to for a school and basketball players?
Okay, we've reached the height of ignorance.
NIL will NOT increase the amount of revenue to college athletics. It will redistribute it.
The money has to come from somewhere. Nike will not suddenly become richer and fund both athletes and general athletic funds.
The fact that universities don't want that because they can use that money for non-revenue sports does not make them fundimentaly bad. NLI is also not fundamentaly bad, it just moves resources from lesser sports.
What are those who don’t stand to profit off of their likeness losing that they wouldn’t have before the decision?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-money-could-student-athletes-make-as-social-media-influencers/amp/
Lots of non revenue athletes on the list who stand to make the most....
Okay here's my question...if this proves true that one of the biggest avenue of money making will be basically running ads/promotions on athletes social media, how many followers will these athletes lose because people get tired of checking that athletes social media and seeing ads run all the time?? I'm asking because I don't know that answer, but i would think they would lose many. I can tell you me personally, there is nothing I hate more than pop ups and banner ads etc on websites I visit, that's why I have several ad blockers that pretty much block every ad on every website I ever go to. It's annoying. I would think that many others would feel the same way in regards to visiting someone's social media and seeing an ad or promotion. I see no ads on twitter now, the last thing I want to do is see an ad from an athlete I follow on twitter. That's not why I visit their page. I know I'm only one person but if this is what started happening, I would simply un follow that person. I'm just not interested in seeing them promote some product I'd likely never have any interest in buying anyway.My guess, is the schools will act as master agents and enter into licensing deals with the sponsors and the student athletes will get paid out of the pool of revenues. Some opt out provision will be created for the kids who think they can do better on their own. Schools with deep pocketed supporters will be able to legally pay the opt out kids directly and also pay for the support type players through the master license. Should actually work pretty smoothly and going rates should be established.
When I think of NIL and the kinds of deals SA's can get I think of the one's that can sign autographs and actually make a lot doing that(non revenue athletes aren't going to make much doing this) or a car dealership offering a six figure deal to the star QB to promote their dealership, they aren't going to do that for a women's soccer player. That's where the top athletes will benefit the most.
Okay here's my question...if this proves true that one of the biggest avenue of money making will be basically running ads/promotions on athletes social media, how many followers will these athletes lose because people get tired of checking that athletes social media and seeing ads run all the time?? I'm asking because I don't know that answer, but i would think they would lose many. I can tell you me personally, there is nothing I hate more than pop ups and banner ads etc on websites I visit, that's why I have several ad blockers that pretty much block every ad on every website I ever go to. It's annoying. I would think that many others would feel the same way in regards to visiting someone's social media and seeing an ad or promotion. I see no ads on twitter now, the last thing I want to do is see an ad from an athlete I follow on twitter. That's not why I visit their page. I know I'm only one person but if this is what started happening, I would simply un follow that person. I'm just not interested in seeing them promote some product I'd likely never have any interest in buying anyway.
When I think of NIL and the kinds of deals SA's can get I think of the one's that can sign autographs and actually make a lot doing that(non revenue athletes aren't going to make much doing this) or a car dealership offering a six figure deal to the star QB to promote their dealership, they aren't going to do that for a women's soccer player. That's where the top athletes will benefit the most.
None. They will probably lose no followers. Are you on Instagram?
And your other point about non revenue sports, do you know any D1 athletes? Ones I know, have known are a pretty tight group. I don’t see jealousy being an issue if another athlete makes money from a sponsorship. They probably would use the extra cash to buy booze for everyone.
My guess, is the schools will act as master agents and enter into licensing deals with the sponsors and the student athletes will get paid out of the pool of revenues. Some opt out provision will be created for the kids who think they can do better on their own. Schools with deep pocketed supporters will be able to legally pay the opt out kids directly and also pay for the support type players through the master license. Should actually work pretty smoothly and going rates should be established.What happens if an Adidas kid wants to go to a Nike School?
Okay here's my question...if this proves true that one of the biggest avenue of money making will be basically running ads/promotions on athletes social media, how many followers will these athletes lose because people get tired of checking that athletes social media and seeing ads run all the time?? I'm asking because I don't know that answer, but i would think they would lose many. I can tell you me personally, there is nothing I hate more than pop ups and banner ads etc on websites I visit, that's why I have several ad blockers that pretty much block every ad on every website I ever go to. It's annoying. I would think that many others would feel the same way in regards to visiting someone's social media and seeing an ad or promotion. I see no ads on twitter now, the last thing I want to do is see an ad from an athlete I follow on twitter. That's not why I visit their page. I know I'm only one person but if this is what started happening, I would simply un follow that person. I'm just not interested in seeing them promote some product I'd likely never have any interest in buying anyway.
When I think of NIL and the kinds of deals SA's can get I think of the one's that can sign autographs and actually make a lot doing that(non revenue athletes aren't going to make much doing this) or a car dealership offering a six figure deal to the star QB to promote their dealership, they aren't going to do that for a women's soccer player. That's where the top athletes will benefit the most.
Nike (and Adidas, Under Armor, etc.) is already paying athletic programs and college athletes. The height of ignorance would be pretending shoe companies have to decide between paying the school or the student athletes when they already pay both. They’d just be able to do so legally.A FBI investigation turned up a relative handful of schools cheating with payments to players. You seem to believe that this is happening everywhere. If MU and most or every school is cheating then your argument holds water.
What happens if an Adidas kid wants to go to a Nike School?All of that Shoe Company Hijinx goes away in this Scenario,because everything is transparent .
All of that Shoe Company Hijinx goes away in this Scenario,because everything is transparent .Do shoe companies sponsor NBA teams? NFL teams? If not, then the $$$ may go away from NCAA teams.
Do shoe companies sponsor NBA teams? NFL teams? If not, then the $$$ may go away from NCAA teams.Shoe companies will still sponsor equipment for colleges and will be able to make other investments in a more transparent way. No more under the table, with all the associates handlers involved. Everyone should be better off.
Are you on Instagram? Ads all over the place.
Are you on Facebook? Everyone I know seems to be trying to sell me something.
Etc
Social media has accepted/embraced/normalized marketing/ads
That's why there are ad blockers...I never see any ad's anywhere and it's glorious
No. You don't understand how this works.
Are you on Instagram?
Shoe companies will still sponsor equipment for colleges and will be able to make other investments in a more transparent way. No more under the table, with all the associates handlers involved. Everyone should be better off.Will they? Will Nike sponsor Bowling Green for example, if they have a sure fire first rounder decked out in Converse gear?
Will they? Will Nike sponsor Bowling Green for example, if they have a sure fire first rounder decked out in Converse gear?The shoe companies make equipment sponsorship deals with the schools presently. Nothing about that will change. There will be hot competition among the shoe companies to enter into some kind of master image licensing deals with certain schools and likely the two different forms of sponsorship will end up being bundled. I think this is all a positive in that it is fully disclosed and the market will determine the values . As I speculated earlier in this thread, I think there will be some kind of individual opt out provision on the master image licensing. However, given the nature of college sports, those athletes will be few and far between.
Will they? Will Nike sponsor Bowling Green for example, if they have a sure fire first rounder decked out in Converse gear?
"Tom McMillen's fear-mongering statements are wrong. The NCAA made over one billion dollars last year. They will likely make even more next year. Why are they so concerned with a college softball player earning a few hundred dollars by hosting a skills clinic in their hometown?The NCAA made a billion dollars? That is so far from the truth it is laughable. I guess the US government makes a trillion dollars a year and puts it in the bank also.
"In every aspect of their lives, (college athletes) are told what to do and when. Then they find out they have no rights to their name or image. No right to earn even modest income for work or talent.
"Their system is wrong. The NCAA and their athletic directors need to understand that their monopoly is falling and they would be better served by coming to the table to develop solutions, rather than trying to die on a hill attempting to restrict the basic rights of young men and women."
After White and Cunningham cried about how NIL compensation for athletes would wound college sports, Wiley Nickel, a Democratic NC state senator, said White "makes over $1.45 million per year off the backs of an unpaid student workforce, and is defending the system that makes him rich."
He then added:
"The NCAA will never change unless legislatures across the country step in to force the issue. The old system where the athletes had to play for 'the love of the game' while the NCAA and universities reap huge profits off their hard work is quickly coming to an end."
Congratulations, to White, Cunningham and McMillen. Unity at last!
ADs Mike White of Duke and Bubba Cunningham of UNC, along with former player and current lobbyist Tom McMillen, have accomplished something seemingly impossible:I completely agree that the imaging issue is about carving up the pie. I think the whole notion of amateurism needs to be re-evaluated. So I am definitely a proponent of the students getting an income stream from use of their images etc .
They have gotten lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to agree on something.
Last week, McMillen came right out and admitted that opposition to NIL compensation was based on "losing income because it goes to the athlete."
That led U.S. Rep. Mark Walker, a Republican, to blast McMillen and the ADs, who also have made recent comments against compensating athletes for NIL:
"Tom McMillen's fear-mongering statements are wrong. The NCAA made over one billion dollars last year. They will likely make even more next year. Why are they so concerned with a college softball player earning a few hundred dollars by hosting a skills clinic in their hometown?
"In every aspect of their lives, (college athletes) are told what to do and when. Then they find out they have no rights to their name or image. No right to earn even modest income for work or talent.
"Their system is wrong. The NCAA and their athletic directors need to understand that their monopoly is falling and they would be better served by coming to the table to develop solutions, rather than trying to die on a hill attempting to restrict the basic rights of young men and women."
After White and Cunningham cried about how NIL compensation for athletes would wound college sports, Wiley Nickel, a Democratic NC state senator, said White "makes over $1.45 million per year off the backs of an unpaid student workforce, and is defending the system that makes him rich."
He then added:
"The NCAA will never change unless legislatures across the country step in to force the issue. The old system where the athletes had to play for 'the love of the game' while the NCAA and universities reap huge profits off their hard work is quickly coming to an end."
Congratulations, to White, Cunningham and McMillen. Unity at last!
At the end of the day the big dollars in college sports are in media rights. Endorsements and image likeness will be worth something, but to have value , will have to be a supplement to the existing model rather than a replacement .
If we start with a rule that the university president - and not a coach - must be each university’s highest-paid employee, it would leave a ton of money left over to fund an entire athletic program and also make sure athletes are compensated for their NILs.
If/When the NBA allows high school players to enter the draft will shoe companies be looking to sign high schoolers as the next Lebron? Will they be restricted the way college players currently are?
It honestly may be time for colleges to get out of sports all together. Scholarships for athletes (white or black) were intended to give a great opportunity to those who received it. Whether anyone likes it or not or sees it or not that is of huge value to individuals and entire populations (generations) who take advantage of it. The little money college players will make with NIL will not make racism go away nor will it level the playing field. However, education can eventually level the playing field.Yep, people need to be careful about what they wish. Change is not always beneficial and sometimes brings about unintended consequences.
In order to be truly fair to college athletes (who play in revenue sharing sports) you would have to have some type of revenue split with university and student athlete. At that point it just may not be worth it for Universities to continue offering sports. This will lead to less scholarships for people who need it.
Tearing down current college models of student athletes could actually back fire on those who need the help the most. We’ll know more soon enough.
Yep, people need to be careful about what they wish. Change is not always beneficial and sometimes brings about unintended consequences.
Or maybe fighting and slow-rolling the change, thinking that the status quo was going to remain no matter how much the world around them was changing, is the problem.
Or maybe fighting and slow-rolling the change, thinking that the status quo was going to remain no matter how much the world around them was changing, is the problem.
....or we can continue to offer athletic scholarships, not pay players, and allow outside entities to pay them for their NIL if they are good enough to earn it. This really isn't a doomsday scenario like some seem to think it is.
....or we can continue to offer athletic scholarships, not pay players, and allow outside entities to pay them for their NIL if they are good enough to earn it. This really isn't a doomsday scenario like some seem to think it is.
....or we can continue to offer athletic scholarships, not pay players, and allow outside entities to pay them for their NIL if they are good enough to earn it. This really isn't a doomsday scenario like some seem to think it is.
I was merely commenting on the article above. I just don’t think NIL has anything to do with uplifting society. Temporary fairness for the college athlete, maybe.
....or we can continue to offer athletic scholarships, not pay players, and allow outside entities to pay them for their NIL if they are good enough to earn it. This really isn't a doomsday scenario like some seem to think it is.Where does the money come from to pay the players? Same advertising pool that pays athletic departments? NIL will not create new revenues for State Farm or the local Ford dealership.
Where does the money come from to pay the players? Same advertising pool that pays athletic departments? NIL will not create new revenues for State Farm or the local Ford dealership.
Maybe we cut coaches and AD's salaries or maybe non-revenue sports.
NIL maybe the right to do but it is simply moving money from one pocket to the other.
Don’t disagree about that part of it all. But, we are where we are.
Or maybe fighting and slow-rolling the change, thinking that the status quo was going to remain no matter how much the world around them was changing, is the problem.
Where does the money come from to pay the players? Same advertising pool that pays athletic departments? NIL will not create new revenues for State Farm or the local Ford dealership.
Maybe we cut coaches and AD's salaries or maybe non-revenue sports.
NIL maybe the right to do but it is simply moving money from one pocket to the other.
Outside advertisers? This isn’t complicated people, it’s happening in literally every other major sport across the world.Of course advertisers. This isn't that complicated people, NIL doesn't create more money, it just moves it to the players and thus away from the athletic departments.
Of course advertisers. This isn't that complicated people, NIL doesn't create more money, it just moves it to the players and thus away from the athletic departments.
Of course advertisers. This isn't that complicated people, NIL doesn't create more money, it just moves it to the players and thus away from the athletic departments.
I'm not sure I said otherwise.You make some good points in the last paragraph, I was focused on the big money corporate advertisers. (Ford & State Farm were random names). That money will move from the schools to the players. (Be it lower direct advertising at a school or lower advertising funds to the broadcasters, which will have a trickle down effect to the schools).
That being said, I'm not sure why your examples are Start Farm and Ford. Apparel companies I understand some money will shift from the schools to the athletes, though I don't think it will be as much as you seem to be implying. But I'm not sure what advertising money schools are currently receiving from State Farm or Ford. Are you saying that rather than donating to schools they will instead pay athletes to advertise for them?
Also, while a lot of this will be "moving money from one pocket to another" it will also open up previously closed avenues for athletes to make money. Athletes can use their name to become influencers on social media, they can use their experience to teach skills camps or give private coaching during the summer, this could open the door for video games based on college sports. These are a few examples of potential benefits that won't move money away from the schools. The video games could even make money for the schools as the producers will still need to pay the schools for the right to include them in the games.
....or we can continue to offer athletic scholarships, not pay players, and allow outside entities to pay them for their NIL if they are good enough to earn it. This really isn't a doomsday scenario like some seem to think it is.
Agreed TAMU but for eventual racial inequality to end 99.9 percent of the emphasis needs to be the educational opportunity being given not NIL opportunities that schools and fan bases can offer.
Like I said I don’t mind athletes getting paid but if that is the players and parents motivation and not education I think it may hurt racial inequality more than help it.
I was merely commenting on the article above. I just don’t think NIL has anything to do with uplifting society. Temporary fairness for the college athlete, maybe.
New lawsuit against the NCAA and the Power 5. This is major, major shyte.They aren't the only ones who need to stop whining.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2020/06/15/ncaa-lawsuit-over-athletes-images-likeness-puts-big-money-stake/3189283001/
Between this kind of stuff, and the new legislation passed in Florida that compensates athletes for NIL starting only 13 months from now, NCAA leaders need to stop whining, posing and pretending, and start crafting a plan that will pass the muster.
NCAA basketball and football without Florida and California schools would be quite a product to try to market to the networks, and numerous other states also are ready to rock and roll with NIL plans.
New lawsuit against the NCAA and the Power 5. This is major, major shyte.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2020/06/15/ncaa-lawsuit-over-athletes-images-likeness-puts-big-money-stake/3189283001/
Between this kind of stuff, and the new legislation passed in Florida that compensates athletes for NIL starting only 13 months from now, NCAA leaders need to stop whining, posing and pretending, and start crafting a plan that will pass the muster.
NCAA basketball and football without Florida and California schools would be quite a product to try to market to the networks, and numerous other states also are ready to rock and roll with NIL plans.
They aren't the only ones who need to stop whining.
Pot meet kettle.
Yup, this is over
Please provide evidence of me "whining" about this NIL issue.University presidents would ask the exact same question of you.
University presidents would ask the exact same question of you.
Except several of us have provided evidence of university officials whining.Well, you are smarter, more educated and significantly more accomplished than university presidents.
Less whining from them, and more solving the problem ... or the politicians will solve it in ways they will not like.
Well, you are smarter, more educated and significantly more accomplished than university presidents.
Let it play out and move on.
I am a realist.I've listened to others. I've moved on. Good luck.
I hadn't even addressed you in this thread. Do you like it when fellow Scoopers tell you what to do? If so ... move on.
I've listened to others. I've moved on. Good luck.
Really? You literally called out another poster for whining. How have you moved on?
So, has calling out other posters become your Raison d'être to be on Scoop? Doing it pretty often lately. Might want to put in your application to be a mod.
The thing is, while NIL may hit the colleges' coffers a bit, it will also lead to the ability to retain more players. It will give them the financial ability to provide offers to keep the RJ Hampton, Lamelo Ball, Jalen Green types. But also to retain any fringe NBA or Europe types like Vander Blue or Brendan Bailey.
NIL will almost certainly increase the talent level and player retention ability.
Ooo...someone's a little sensitive!!!
The thing is, while NIL may hit the colleges' coffers a bit, it will also lead to the ability to retain more players. It will give them the financial ability to provide offers to keep the RJ Hampton, Lamelo Ball, Jalen Green types. But also to retain any fringe NBA or Europe types like Vander Blue or Brendan Bailey.
NIL will almost certainly increase the talent level and player retention ability.
So apparently the NCAA lobbying efforts were so effective that Marco Rubio has introduced a bill telling the NCAA to get going on NIL. ::)
I guess they will get their uniform standard instead of a patchwork of state bills, but they can't stall any longer.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2020/06/18/sen-marco-rubio-introduce-bill-addressing-name-image-likeness/3210488001/
"Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said he is planning to introduce a bill Thursday that would require the NCAA to make rule changes regarding college athletes’ ability to make money from their name, image and likeness and give the association protection from legal challenges to the new regulations.
The NCAA has said it plans to loosen its rules pertaining to athletes’ name, image and likeness, with the changes to be voted on at its annual convention in January 2021 and become effective at the start of the 2021-22 academic year.
According to a copy of the bill provided to USA TODAY Sports, Rubio’s measure would force the NCAA to establish a new setup no later than June 30, 2021."
Yeah, the more I read about it the more it's a bullsh*t law.
UnderArmour trying to get out of deal with UCLA. Coincidence?