Let the fun begin, CA Gov signs college athlete likeness pay bill

[BoiseMike19]

There are plenty of businesses in the Boise area that would love to have players from the Broncos representing their business.

Yes there are and many do after the kids graduate. Kellen Moore is still selling cars here.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Yes there are and many do after the kids graduate. Kellen Moore is still selling cars here.

So how is Boise the "have nots" if this comes to pass? There would be plenty of licensing opportunities.

 

[BoiseMike19]

So how is Boise the "have nots" if this comes to pass? There would be plenty of licensing opportunities.

Enough in the reserves to keep Nike U our bitches for the next decade, but it may hurt in the long run.

 

[LawDawg]

No one is forcing them to go to college?!? Hell, why bother with CFB at all? They can go from high school to starring in commercials and autograph sessions.

How dare the NCAA force them to take 6 figure scholarships to play a game?!? Give them state of the art facilities and coaching. Free equipment and apparel. Free room and board. The list goes on and on.

This is a door the NCAA DOES NOT want open, because it will be the end of amateur sports. Recruiting will consist of which school alums will give me the most money and the gap between teams will grow much bigger.

Way I see it — yank scholarships altogether. Make the football players pay their own way and allow them all to make money on the side. Give the scholarships to people who deserve it for academics.

Win/win for everyone. Only problem is 50% of college football players couldn’t afford to go to college, so the level of play will drop quite a bit. But a handful of players will make a few dollars!!!

I haven't thought too deep about it, but I think the NCAA would win this one. They may lose in the end though. Spitballing here, I am still trying to come up with the cause of action the states will use. A private organization wants to have rules to govern their sport. I can't see that anyone can tell them what to do. Now, the state legislatures can tell CA schools what they can and can't do. If that happens, then those schools in states that mandate allowing players to get paid for their likeness would have to leave the NCAA. Presumably they would then join with schools in other states and start their own organization. The problem the NCAA then has it that all the best kids would go to the schools in states where they get paid. Basically the NCAA loses for winning.

What will be interesting is if the NCAA can come up with a system that will satisfy all the states. Provide lifetime insurance, a pension fund for all athletes, some type or revenue share across the board.

For all you people saying, but we are a capitalist economic system, please realize that no major sports organizations is free market ... they all have some type of salary cap, tax, or some other control to ensure competitiveness. All the leagues have have exclusions from anti-trust laws. That's why it won't work for college football at the end of the day.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Enough in the reserves to keep Nike U our bitches for the next decade, but it may hurt in the long run.

You realize none of this money being paid to athletes is coming from the universities, right?

 

[ElTexan]

I haven't thought too deep about it, but I think the NCAA would win this one. They may lose in the end though. Spitballing here, I am still trying to come up with the cause of action the states will use. A private organization wants to have rules to govern their sport. I can't see that anyone can tell them what to do. Now, the state legislatures can tell CA schools what they can and can't do. If that happens, then those schools in states that mandate allowing players to get paid for their likeness would have to leave the NCAA. Presumably they would then join with schools in other states and start their own organization. The problem the NCAA then has it that all the best kids would go to the schools in states where they get paid. Basically the NCAA loses for winning.

What will be interesting is if the NCAA can come up with a system that will satisfy all the states. Provide lifetime insurance, a pension fund for all athletes, some type or revenue share across the board.

For all you people saying, but we are a capitalist economic system, please realize that no major sports organizations is free market ... they all have some type of salary cap, tax, or some other control to ensure competitiveness. All the leagues have have exclusions from anti-trust laws. That's why it won't work for college football at the end of the day.

There’s a difference between saying “some exemptions have to be made” because a sport can’t strictly follow open market forces, and having the monopoly collude to completely alienate the principals from negotiating their compensation (to the point that they can’t even have a happy meal with a future employer).
Your argument is obtuse to the point of being laughable. Sorry.
Saying “well there aren’t 29 different pro leagues for football players, and therefore it’s not a completely free market” isn’t a justification for monopolistic collusion to keep principals from making money.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I haven't thought too deep about it, but I think the NCAA would win this one. They may lose in the end though. Spitballing here, I am still trying to come up with the cause of action the states will use. A private organization wants to have rules to govern their sport. I can't see that anyone can tell them what to do. Now, the state legislatures can tell CA schools what they can and can't do. If that happens, then those schools in states that mandate allowing players to get paid for their likeness would have to leave the NCAA. Presumably they would then join with schools in other states and start their own organization. The problem the NCAA then has it that all the best kids would go to the schools in states where they get paid. Basically the NCAA loses for winning.

What will be interesting is if the NCAA can come up with a system that will satisfy all the states. Provide lifetime insurance, a pension fund for all athletes, some type or revenue share across the board.

For all you people saying, but we are a capitalist economic system, please realize that no major sports organizations is free market ... they all have some type of salary cap, tax, or some other control to ensure competitiveness. All the leagues have have exclusions from anti-trust laws. That's why it won't work for college football at the end of the day.

I can't really see a revenue share working. If college football was its own entity sure (along with hoops) but they float the other programs. The best middle ground is to allow players to do as California is proposing. The NCAA can still enforce any kind of benefits tied to recruiting/transfers.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

You realize none of this money being paid to athletes is coming from the universities, right?

It's only been said about a dozen times but apparently people are not grasping

 

[GNG]

The colleges have been making money off student athletics for years. Now the athletes want in on the action.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Nothing more absurd than a guy like AJ Green getting suspended for selling his own Jersey but players taking fake classes to maintain eligibility is ok.

That's the world the NCAA has created

 

[Goldbug]

I didn’t bring up profits vs revenues. I said it’s a multi multi billion dollar industry. We don’t allow monopolies and unpaid labor in those.
It’s not your summer softball league where you make a bit of money from the concession stands and T-shirt sales so you can pay the guy to cut the grass and repair the bleachers in the off-season. Its a MULTI MULTI BILLION DOLLAR industry where everyone is making millions except the actual principals doing it.
It’s illegal, unfair, immoral, and would be laughed and sued out of existence in any other field.
But solely because it’s the status quo, you fools argue in favor of it???

OK, I'll play along. Give me a list of the people at Texas who are making millions off the athletes. I'll even start the list for you.

1. Athletic Director
2. Coaches
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Maybe others:

 

[BoiseMike19]

You realize none of this money being paid to athletes is coming from the universities, right?

Yes. You do realize it will be coming directly from the donors that fund the universities. Cutting out the middle man is all that is happening. I mean gonna have to I9 some of these guys for the tax benefit, but they will figure that out. If this is allowed you are going to have 16 year olds with agents weighing who is willing to pay more wash a few cars.

 

[ElTexan]

OK, I'll play along. Give me a list of the people at Texas who are making millions off the athletes. I'll even start the list for you.

1. Athletic Director
2. Coaches
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Maybe others:

Industry agents making and spending millions:
Coaches, ADs, Nike, Adidas, Coca Cola, Pepsi, McDonalds, ABC, nbc, Fox, espn, every national advertiser, construction companies, athletic wear suppliers, insurance companies, etc etc etc

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

I haven't thought too deep about it, but I think the NCAA would win this one. They may lose in the end though. Spitballing here, I am still trying to come up with the cause of action the states will use. A private organization wants to have rules to govern their sport. I can't see that anyone can tell them what to do. Now, the state legislatures can tell CA schools what they can and can't do. If that happens, then those schools in states that mandate allowing players to get paid for their likeness would have to leave the NCAA. Presumably they would then join with schools in other states and start their own organization. The problem the NCAA then has it that all the best kids would go to the schools in states where they get paid. Basically the NCAA loses for winning.

What will be interesting is if the NCAA can come up with a system that will satisfy all the states. Provide lifetime insurance, a pension fund for all athletes, some type or revenue share across the board.

For all you people saying, but we are a capitalist economic system, please realize that no major sports organizations is free market ... they all have some type of salary cap, tax, or some other control to ensure competitiveness. All the leagues have have exclusions from anti-trust laws. That's why it won't work for college football at the end of the day.

The NCAA can make it a violation to use the likeness of any player for commercial purposes.

 

[TigerBait1971]

Correct. You can’t get to maximize your enjoyment of an entertainment monopoly on the backs of indentured servants. That’s correct.
We don’t allow that in America because it is unfair, immoral, etc.

Oh wells

 

[LawDawg]

The NCAA can make it a violation to use the likeness of any player for commercial purposes.

It already is, and as my post said, I can't see the states being able to control that. But, the states, like CA, can say that CA schools must allow their players to use their likeness. NCAA tells CA to take a hike, can't participate. Now, what do you do when the other 17 states considering this pass the same law? That's what my post said. The schools from the 17 states are out of the NCAA, they start their own organization, NCAA$GetPaid. Which teams do you think kids will go to? Especially the good ones who can get paid? Like I clearly stated, the NCCA loses for winning.

 

[LawDawg]

I can't really see a revenue share working. If college football was its own entity sure (along with hoops) but they float the other programs. The best middle ground is to allow players to do as California is proposing. The NCAA can still enforce any kind of benefits tied to recruiting/transfers.

Can they? If the state laws say you can't punish a player for profiting from his likeness (CA does), how can they control what is based on recruiting or not. Serious question from me ... how do you write that rule so that it doesn't restrict a player.

Two examples:

So, 1000 of us that are on a UGa sports board all donate $100 and create an annual $100,000 marketing budget. We will create an LLC. We will then tell Kirby that UGa Badass Sports Board LLC is ready and prepared to provide $10,000 payments to 10 student athletes for (1) signing 1000 jerseys we will provide, and then dropping by a bar of our choice after each game for a half hour to sign autographs and take pictures. Now, think that through with people who have real money, or teams with huge fanbases.

Or, T. Boone Pickens' estate could say, ole T. Boone loved him some OSU - he gave them over a half billion in his lifetime, $165 million to athletics alone. Now, with this new law (assuming OK comes along for the ride) we can put 100 Million into an endowment for marketing OSU athletes. At 5% per year, that give's "T. Boone OSU Football is the Best LLC" 5 million to divide how they want among the 85 scholarship football players. $60,00 for each player, without touching the principal which will continue to to grow. Remember, he already gave $500 million, what's another $100 million? Or, maybe we give $250,000 to the four best players, $100,000 to the next 20, and the the final 51 get $40,000 each. That should put together a hell of a team. Oh, yeah, all they have to do is a few parties each year, sign some jerseys.

None of that is tied to recruiting or transfers. Just the good old open market at work. How do you legislate that? I'm serious, not arguing with you. The problem is that the devil is in the details and CA didn't provide any. Those are two very likely scenarios. I assure you I am putting my 100 million up, I mean my $100 into UGa Badass Sports Board LLC. Most of you would, too.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Can they? If the state laws say you can't punish a player for profiting from his likeness (CA does), how can they control what is based on recruiting or not. Serious question from me ... how do you write that rule so that it doesn't restrict a player.

Two examples:

So, 1000 of us that are on a UGa sports board all donate $100 and create an annual $100,000 marketing budget. We will create an LLC. We will then tell Kirby that UGa Badass Sports Board LLC is ready and prepared to provide $10,000 payments to 10 student athletes for (1) signing 1000 jerseys we will provide, and then dropping by a bar of our choice after each game for a half hour to sign autographs and take pictures. Now, think that through with people who have real money, or teams with huge fanbases.

Or, T. Boone Pickens' estate could say, ole T. Boone loved him some OSU - he gave them over a half billion in his lifetime, $165 million to athletics alone. Now, with this new law (assuming OK comes along for the ride) we can put 100 Million into an endowment for marketing OSU athletes. At 5% per year, that give's "T. Boone OSU Football is the Best LLC" 5 million to divide how they want among the 85 scholarship football players. $60,00 for each player, without touching the principal which will continue to to grow. Remember, he already gave $500 million, what's another $100 million? Or, maybe we give $250,000 to the four best players, $100,000 to the next 20, and the the final 51 get $40,000 each. That should put together a hell of a team. Oh, yeah, all they have to do is a few parties each year, sign some jerseys.

None of that is tied to recruiting or transfers. Just the good old open market at work. How do you legislate that? I'm serious, not arguing with you. The problem is that the devil is in the details and CA didn't provide any. Those are two very likely scenarios. I assure you I am putting my 100 million up, I mean my $100 into UGa Badass Sports Board LLC. Most of you would, too.

Because the law specifically states schools cannot pay the player

 

[TigerBait1971]

Because the law specifically states schools cannot pay the player

This guy has this shit figured out.

Done.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

This guy has this shit figured out.

Done.

All this other shit already exists..The AAU circuit? It's a huge black market as we've already seen. I don't for a second think OSU hasn't had boosters throwing cash around (see Pryor). If anything the fact the players can now do it themselves on the up and up may actually lend to comparatively less of it happening.

Will it still happen? Of course.

Do I think this will be a cataclysmic event for college football? No I don't