California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players

[Galway Eagle]

So here is a question for the board:  Who gets paid for a college jersey sales on a number a player made famous?  A Wade-Nike deal it is more straight-forward as they have a deal in place. I have a George Thompson jersey in my closet that I am sure he didn't get any royalties from.

And what happens when, let's say, MU sells a Nike #0. Does Marquette own the number, and would Markus own the one with his name on the back? And for how long after he leaves?

In my opinion it's only his if his name is on the back. Also not to nitpick but the brand is Jordan not Nike.

[cheebs09]

In my opinion it's only his if his name is on the back. Also not to nitpick but the brand is Jordan not Nike.

Jay Bilas did a search on the NCAA store once of the blank jerseys by putting in the players name. It came back with the jersey. I believe the NCAA took that down quickly after.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Nope.  Some allegations are just that, unproven allegations.  Other allegations come with a lot more.  As a Title IX investigator you should know this. Not all cases are equal...right?  Some have a lot of evidence, some have none.

I do know that. Im just curious because there's a lot more public evidence against manning than there is against the mu players. I happen to think that both allegations are credible,  I'm just curious why the Buzz allegations are the only ones you seem to find credible

[MU82]

The dichotomy between how chicos handles the allegations against Buzz' players and how handles allegations against anyone else is fascinating

Yes, if hypocritical liars who reject facts are "fascinating."

[Cheeks]

So here is a question for the board:  Who gets paid for a college jersey sales on a number a player made famous?  A Wade-Nike deal it is more straight-forward as they have a deal in place. I have a George Thompson jersey in my closet that I am sure he didn't get any royalties from.

And what happens when, let's say, MU sells a Nike #0. Does Marquette own the number, and would Markus own the one with his name on the back? And for how long after he leaves?

The amount of money made on jersey sales is really small.  This was reported with Johnny Manziel sales of his number.

I'm not aware of schools even putting names on the back of merchandise anymore.  It may be happening, but thought they were steering clear of it.

A&M revenue only $59k for Manziel jerseys.

http://espn.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/80530/manziel-jerseys-hardly-making-am-rich

[mu03eng]

I'd say, at a minimum, 50% of membership breaks some form of NCAA rules.  I'd guess closer to 90%.

Given the nebulous nature of NCAA rules and compliance it's actually 100% if the NCAA wanted to "prosecute" every violation but because the NCAA is a creation of the universities themselves the NCAA is underfunded for true compliance so all universities "cheat".

If we're talking about violations that would create public visibility if reported by media, I think 90% is about right. However a lot of it is action at a distance like using booster/donors/AAU/camps as the mechanism where it is much less provable.

Bottom line, the universities are leveraging the bejesus out of the student athletes that (IMO) far outstrips the value they get back as a student athlete....why shouldn't we let capitalism prevail and let those who can earn a wage on their likeness do so?

[Cheeks]

Yes, if hypocritical liars who reject facts are "fascinating."

What happened to your last signature....speaking of hypocritical liars.

[mu03eng]

Yes, if hypocritical liars who reject facts are "fascinating."

[Cheeks]

I'd say, at a minimum, 50% of membership breaks some form of NCAA rules.  I'd guess closer to 90%.

That's far different than corruptible intent.

The rule book is big, we were required as employees to understand the rules that pertained to our area.  Compliance had to know the entire thing.  Some rules are broken because folks didn't know it was a rule.  Just as laws are broken every day in this country in the same manner. 

Now let's go back to what you said...corruptible.  Purposely violating the rules, knowing what the rules were and doing it anyway.  That's a far different number than you portray based on my experience actually living, breathing, working in several athletic programs.  Maybe you worked in an athletic program....but based on on your responses you most certainly didn't and you continue to extrapolate to the utmost extremes to paint most or all depts the same way.  Doesn't make it so.

[Uncle Rico]

That's far different than corruptible intent.

The rule book is big, we were required as employees to understand the rules that pertained to our area.  Compliance had to know the entire thing.  Some rules are broken because folks didn't know it was a rule.  Just as laws are broken every day in this country in the same manner. 

Now let's go back to what you said...corruptible.  Purposely violating the rules, knowing what the rules were and doing it anyway.  That's a far different number than you portray based on my experience actually living, breathing, working in several athletic programs.  Maybe you worked in an athletic program....but based on on your responses you most certainly didn't and you continue to extrapolate to the utmost extremes to paint most or all depts the same way.  Doesn't make it so.

Ignorance isn't an excuse. 

I know a certain saintly coach in local circles who wasn't afraid to stretch the expense account to the benefit of his players

[Cheeks]

Given the nebulous nature of NCAA rules and compliance it's actually 100% if the NCAA wanted to "prosecute" every violation but because the NCAA is a creation of the universities themselves the NCAA is underfunded for true compliance so all universities "cheat".

If we're talking about violations that would create public visibility if reported by media, I think 90% is about right. However a lot of it is action at a distance like using booster/donors/AAU/camps as the mechanism where it is much less provable.

Bottom line, the universities are leveraging the bejesus out of the student athletes that (IMO) far outstrips the value they get back as a student athlete....why shouldn't we let capitalism prevail and let those who can earn a wage on their likeness do so?

Far outweighs the value they receive?  This is a grossly absurd statement.

Shelter
Food
Scholarship worth $200k today's dollars and $2M lifetime earnings
Clothing
Instruction by world class instructors
Tutoring
Travel
Auditions to employers for rev sports


Now do the same thing for non revenue....please, the value they receive far outweighs what they provide.  Are you telling me the men's soccer players are bringing in massive revenue and publicity for MU?  Come on.

[Cheeks]

Ignorance isn't an excuse. 

I know a certain saintly coach in local circles who wasn't afraid to stretch the expense account to the benefit of his players

Corruptible has a meaning to it....you went there.  Now back it up.

Your second charge, that is corruptible and has nothing to do with ignorance. 

What you are doing is leveling charges against the women and men in college athletic departments that bust their arse on small salaries to make sure these student athletes stay the course academically, athletically, etc.  They are bound to do things ethically. I am not naive to think there are not bad apples, they exist in all walks of life.  But when you say corruptible, that means intent and knowingly acting a certain way.  I hate to break it to you, but most depts and most employees in those depts do not act in that fashion. 

[StillAWarrior]

The amount of money made on jersey sales is really small.  This was reported with Johnny Manziel sales of his number.

I'm not aware of schools even putting names on the back of merchandise anymore.  It may be happening, but thought they were steering clear of it.

A&M revenue only $59k for Manziel jerseys.

http://espn.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/80530/manziel-jerseys-hardly-making-am-rich

Actually, according to the article, that was just $59k for all jersey sales across all sports in that year...not Manziel.

[Cheeks]

Actually, according to the article, that was just $59k for all jersey sales across all sports in that year...not Manziel.

Yes, thank you.  $59k includes Manziel and every other jersey sale for the dept.  I've read some articles where the authors make outlandish claims of millions are made by schools selling merchandise....just not true.

[Uncle Rico]

Yes, thank you.  $59k includes Manziel and every other jersey sale for the dept.  I've read some articles where the authors make outlandish claims of millions are made by schools selling merchandise....just not true.

Then it shouldn't be an issue for players to earn off their name on merchandise.  Sounds like small potatoes

[Dr. Blackheart]

The amount of money made on jersey sales is really small.  This was reported with Johnny Manziel sales of his number.

I'm not aware of schools even putting names on the back of merchandise anymore.  It may be happening, but thought they were steering clear of it.

A&M revenue only $59k for Manziel jerseys.

http://espn.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/80530/manziel-jerseys-hardly-making-am-rich

Interesting...considering he was the star player, one has to deduce his jersey would be the top seller.  All this makes one wonder why a school even bothers to sell jerseys for that little scratch?

[The Sultan]

Yes, thank you.  $59k includes Manziel and every other jersey sale for the dept.  I've read some articles where the authors make outlandish claims of millions are made by schools selling merchandise....just not true.

UW-Madison made $4.4 million a couple years ago. Source? UW-Madison

https://news.wisc.edu/athletics-financial-aid-reap-rewards-from-record-uw-merchandise-sales/

Outlandish and just not true huh?

[StillAWarrior]

Interesting...considering he was the star player, one has to deduce his jersey would be the top seller.  All this makes one wonder why a school even bothers to sell jerseys for that little scratch?

The schools don't really "bother."  They just cash the licensing checks.  No bother at all.

[Cheeks]

Then it shouldn't be an issue for players to earn off their name on merchandise.  Sounds like small potatoes

But but but they are driving millions of dollars in value.

What % do they get?  Is it a % off the revenues or off the margin?  I assume the latter.  And then how does it work, is the book store forced to sell a jersey of every single possible combination so we aren't suppressing the value of the 3rd string punter or the 2nd string libero on the women's team?  Ah yes, those pesky unintended consequence questions no one wants to answer or be bothered with.

[StillAWarrior]

UW-Madison made $4.4 million a couple years ago. Source? UW-Madison

https://news.wisc.edu/athletics-financial-aid-reap-rewards-from-record-uw-merchandise-sales/

Outlandish and just not true huh?

Merchandise =/= jerseys.  According to the initial linked article, A&M jersey sales (all sports) accounted for about 1.5% of merchandise sales.  It also mentions that the number was 1.23% for Wisconsin.

[Uncle Rico]

But but but they are driving millions of dollars in value.

What % do they get?  Is it a % off the revenues or off the margin?  I assume the latter.  And then how does it work, is the book store forced to sell a jersey of every single possible combination so we aren't suppressing the value of the 3rd string punter or the 2nd string libero on the women's team?  Ah yes, those pesky unintended consequence questions no one wants to answer or be bothered with.

They do drive millions into athletic departments via tv deals, etc, you'd have to be obtuse or dishonest to think otherwise.

What % is a good question.  After players start earning on their likeness, happening whether you like or not, the NCAA will probably wish they had come up with a plan to answer that. 

[Cheeks]

UW-Madison made $4.4 million a couple years ago. Source? UW-Madison

https://news.wisc.edu/athletics-financial-aid-reap-rewards-from-record-uw-merchandise-sales/

Outlandish and just not true huh?

Sigh

Uhm, they are including all merchandise with the school logo.  Lots of people buy Wisconsin sweatshirts, doesn't mean they are tied to the football team or athletics...let alone a jersey tied to a specific player. 

Athletes get credit for someone who hates the athletic department, but loves the school and wants to buy a Wisconsin sweatshirt with the school logo on it?  UW-Madison extension has set it up that is where the proceeds go.  Each school does it differently and is usually handled by the staff that does the licensing for the school, but you are lumping in all sales of all merch and implying it is derived value because of athletics.  That is grossly overstated.

Incidentally, at MU the athletic dept did not benefit from sales in the bookstore and that was not unusual among other schools.  That may have changed since, but when someone is buying a MU shot glass or a Grandma Loves MU t-Shirt it doesn't mean they are a huge MU track and field fan.

[The Sultan]

Sigh

Uhm, they are including all merchandise with the school logo.  Lots of people buy Wisconsin sweatshirts, doesn't mean they are tied to the football team or athletics...let alone a jersey tied to a specific player. 

Athletes get credit for someone who hates the athletic department, but loves the school and wants to buy a Wisconsin sweatshirt with the school logo on it?  UW-Madison extension has set it up that is where the proceeds go.  Each school does it differently and is usually handled by the staff that does the licensing for the school, but you are lumping in all sales of all merch and implying it is derived value because of athletics.  That is grossly overstated.

You said "merchandise."  They are intentionally not selling jerseys to prevent controversy anyway. Very simple reason.

[Cheeks]

They do drive millions into athletic departments via tv deals, etc, you'd have to be obtuse or dishonest to think otherwise.

What % is a good question.  After players start earning on their likeness, happening whether you like or not, the NCAA will probably wish they had come up with a plan to answer that.

And those millions go back for scholarships, improvements to facilities to help those players, etc, etc. 

I'm just sad what this is going to do to college athletics, in particular small schools and many young men and women who will now be left on the sideline....but you don't seem to care.

[Pakuni]

Why did she change her story?  Why did she verbally attack his mother leaving threatening voicemails for her? 
He said she said.  As has been stated, we will never know. 

It's interesting how someone coming forward to defend 20 years later is out of bounds for you, but someone coming forward to level a charge in a highly politicized confirmation is A OK.  Interesting.  Weird.  Hmmm.

I don't know that she changed her story.
Maybe because his family has done their best to drag her through the mud for 20 years?
No, it's not he said, she said. There are other eyewitnesses who support her account.
I've never written anything here about a highly politicized confirmation, so I'm at loss to understand what you're talking about or what it has to do with Peyton Manning.