I think everyone here should recall the fake no show jobs of the past. You have boosters and companies with athletes on retainer. It will open college sports to the booster with most money and or desire.
This will be epic within a decade if it goes through. The fraud abuse and amount of scandle will be fun to read about at least.
There's fraud and scandal now! At least if Joe Booster is "hiring" an athlete to advertise his car dealership for $50,000, it will be legal - thus, no fraud or scandal. Better than some player being kicked out because he took $500 for his practice jersey. Capitalism at work. I wonder how much these college athletes will really be worth on the open market? It is really kind of mind-boggling.
Like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
There are about 3 groups that will be impacted here. Football & Basketball players. Olympic athletes primarily in individual sports like swimming and maybe a few regional things like UCONN women's basketball.
What everyone is missing here is the shoe money. How much could Zion have commanded from Adidas? But suppose he is at a Nike school? Whose shoe does he wear? Would he have stayed in college for another year or two with $100 million in his pocket? If that happened it would be the best thing to happen in college basketball in 40 years since they brought the dunk back.
This might hasten the time where we finally get rid of the student athlete and treat football and basketball for what they are - professional sports. I have said for years that players should have a choice of getting paid or free school. I also think they should have 5 or 6 years of eligibility. The pay can be scaled with a base. Say $50k base with 25K incentive for all conference and another $50k for all American.
Scholarships cost the school $0. Room and board are about $20k. For a big time football program 85 paid players would be about $5mm. A home game with 75,000 at $25 per seat is almost $2 Million. So 3 home games pays the freight with money to burn. That still leaves TV, Shoe, jersey's etc. for the school to get fat on.
Basketball math is 15 paid players or $750k. A 14,000 seat area at $15 per seat means 4 home games cover it.
It could create a separate tier where the top 60 football schools (Power 5) break off the rest of Div I and basketball gets DI cut down to 100. DII and DIII won't have too many issues from this. All those mid majors will either drop to D1AA or form their own alliance with less cash sloshing around or they maintain the old model. The bowls die and a 16 team football playoff results.
The non revenue sports won't be impacted significantly. Schools will fund them for conference TV content and to keep the Feds at bay for Title IX etc. There is plenty of cheese to go around and if the players get a bite the world will stay on its axis.
old_school posted:collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:At least they are standing up to the NCAA, it’s more than anyone else has done. They can alway decide not to enact it if the NCAA takes acceptable steps to change its policy to favor the student athlete, I think this is the real goal here. I guess I am one of those jackasses in California who thinks they know the best way to do everything.
How would you like the NCAA to address this and make the legislation of CA happy? you want to pay every water polo player? There are Title IX issues that prevent that, there is the problem that 90% or whatever schools aren't raking in huge profits from any of this. Yes I know that some of the P5's are making big money and all of them are probably making some money but that is 50ish of 350ish...what about the rest.
Again is your goal is to change the landscape of college sports, deliver a blow to NCAA (not sure that is terrible by the way) and be able to feel good about righting years of oppression of poor kids (that argument is a joke by the way) I guess it is great. However if you want thousands of kids to have a chance to make an opportunity for themselves this isn't going to help them.
This is about FB and BB dollars and nothing else. I mean baseball has 11.7 scholarships and 2 coaches how much demand do think there is for the likeness of players...it will be twisted, distorted, abused and bad for the whole of D1 athletics.
And for the record I hate the NCAA but this is still just a stupid idea. Now please go clean up some of the tent cities before you start another plague out there.
Dude, chill out.
CTbballDad posted:Ha, this is so hypocritical to the typical CA legislator. The only one's benefitting from this will be the elite athlete, who will end up making millions as a professional anyhow. 99% of college athletes, will reap 0% benefit from this.
And 99% of college athletes will never go pro, which is why a system is needed to address this. I think it’s starting a conversation, getting the ball rolling. These are the same pains that MLBPA went through (with strikes) to get changes for their members through the recent history of baseball. Change hurts sometimes. Nobody on this forum would gripe if their kid was drafted and got the big contract/signing bonus. If we can work through this reasonably and responsibly, guys like old school will have to find another reason to hate California...like the weather.
old_school posted:I think everyone here should recall the fake no show jobs of the past. You have boosters and companies with athletes on retainer. It will open college sports to the booster with most money and or desire.
This will be epic within a decade if it goes through. The fraud abuse and amount of scandle will be fun to read about at least.
So you are saying we are doomed to making the same mistakes and cannot learn from them? Your cup seems always 1/2 fool...I mean full.
PABaseball posted:If this were to stick it is going to become a problem. Are schools going to have to pay their athletes to hang a billboard or show up on a schedule with the team picture on it? What about the school website? Can ESPN cut a promo of Clemson vs Alabama without paying Tua and Lawrence? What about unreported taxes? Wait until your star RB is under investigation for tax evasion. I don't see this sticking, but CA is trying to turn the opportunity for athletes to receive a free education into a bidding war. For those who think athletes will flock to UCLA and USC - who is cutting them the check when they're not playing other NCAA teams? When they can't play in March Madness? They lose value without the NCAA unless the NCAA were to dissolve altogether.
Good questions, not gonna lie. But there are 3 years to develope a framework to figure this our. California will not be the only state to enact these laws, many others are already proposing similar legislation. I think the NCAA will end up caving, but not without key states like California, Florida and New York passing these laws. And don’t forget the power of the protest. If athletes in other states see their peers being able to make $$$, there will be pressure to get them on par. Certainly not perfect now, but when you see how much $$$ the NCAA and gambling make on college sports, I don’t have a problem with these kids getting a piece of the action.
Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
Yea because we know that when a state government that operates in a bubble where they believe they are the only group that matters create garbage legislation without any real thought or knowledge that there would be unintended consequences...outside of the intent. I am shocked.
Keep up the good work.
collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
I can imagine an endorsement deal that included some provisions about avoiding career-ending injury, so yes I could imagine this scenario. Athletes with multiple revenue streams (and hopes of future earnings) inevitably run some risk of divided loyalties. But I haven't heard of NBA players malingering to avoid messing up their endorsement arrangements, and they have had shoe contracts for decades. (And something similar to this essentially happens now when football players decide to skip bowl games rather than risk injuring themselves. Also, recall the speculation about whether Zion should just have ended his season after he hurt his knee when his shoe blew out vs. UNC.)
old_school posted:collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
Yea because we know that when a state government that operates in a bubble where they believe they are the only group that matters create garbage legislation without any real thought or knowledge that there would be unintended consequences...outside of the intent. I am shocked.
Keep up the good work.
I can understand why you might think the legislation is a bad idea. I'm not sure I think it is a good idea myself. But there are plenty of folks who are knowledgable about college sports and support this (see the link below, for example). That doesn't mean you are wrong; but I do think you are wrong to assume the folks supporting this legislation didn't give it some serious thought.
collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
Ah. I see what you are saying. Allow me to expand my fact pattern. Zion Williamson commits to attend Duke University. Nike and Addidas get into a bidding war, for the ability to use his likeness in a large poster and print advertisements showing a picture of Zion wearing their shoe that says "Zion Williamson wears Nike (or Addidas)." He is not making an endorsement or a commercial. They see he is valuable NOT really as a college player, but as the pro player he is going to become after one year in college. They see him as the next LeBron/Jordan/Durant/Curry and want to get him locked up. Zion goes with Nike who pays him $20 million so they can use his likeness in college - banking that creating this relationship will give them an edge when he goes pro. Zion then twists his ankle and is out several games. The injury, it is widely seen, could have been much worse. Nike sees its $20 million and the future hundreds of millions it was going to make off his endorsements and commercials and five different "Z Dubs" shoes flash before its eyes and nearly go down the tubes and up in smoke, respectively.
My fact pattern then continues on as above. We have already seen college athletes, like McCaffery, skip football bowl games to protect their professional future. Is it so hard to believe that athletes might do the same in this scenario? True, they can do it NOW, but NOW it is all speculation - they can't be communicating (I think). They probably rightly BELIEVE they will make millions on graduation, but with this legislation a perfectly legal business relationship can be created between the player and corporation - who primarily cares about its investment in the player - BEFORE graduation and DURING the competition season.
Is this not a possible interpretation of the legislation?
NorCalBBDad posted:collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Ah. I see what you are saying. Allow me to expand my fact pattern. Zion Williamson commits to attend Duke University. Nike and Addidas get into a bidding war, for the ability to use his likeness in a large poster and print advertisements showing a picture of Zion wearing their shoe that says "Zion Williamson wears Nike (or Addidas)." He is not making an endorsement or a commercial. They see he is valuable NOT really as a college player, but as the pro player he is going to become after one year in college. They see him as the next LeBron/Jordan/Durant/Curry and want to get him locked up. Zion goes with Nike who pays him $20 million so they can use his likeness in college - banking that creating this relationship will give them an edge when he goes pro. Zion then twists his ankle and is out several games. The injury, it is widely seen, could have been much worse. Nike sees its $20 million and the future hundreds of millions it was going to make off his endorsements and commercials and five different "Z Dubs" shoes flash before its eyes and nearly go down the tubes and up in smoke, respectively.
My fact pattern then continues on as above. We have already seen college athletes, like McCaffery, skip football bowl games to protect their professional future. Is it so hard to believe that athletes might do the same in this scenario? True, they can do it NOW, but NOW it is all speculation - they can't be communicating (I think). They probably rightly BELIEVE they will make millions on graduation, but with this legislation a perfectly legal business relationship can be created between the player and corporation - who primarily cares about its investment in the player - BEFORE graduation and DURING the competition season.
Is this not a possible interpretation of the legislation?
I haven't read the CA legislation, but what you describe is an "endorsement" under any standard definition I know. (If Nike or Adidas tried to issue your hyptothetical poster without Zion's permission, he could sue them for misappropriating his image. And he would win, assuming he controls those rights rather than his school.)
What you describe is capitalism at work. And it is why people write contracts. Schools have lawyers, as does the NCAA. If the CA law sticks, there will be adjustments by all parties via contracts, rule changes, etc. All the risks you are concerned about exist for current pro athletes who don't want to jeopardize their earnings by getting hurt. Sometimes they get into disputes with their teams about their health, about what treatment to pursue. It all gets figured out (in court, if need be). It may not be easy, pretty or inexpensive; but with the billions at stake, the deals will get papered.
Also, remember these kids stock will not be nearly as high as what many on here are imagining. At best, a handful of players will have national name recognition. Most will be regional (at best) which does not equate to as much $$$ as everyone thinks will be thrown around.
old_school posted:collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
Yea because we know that when a state government that operates in a bubble where they believe they are the only group that matters create garbage legislation without any real thought or knowledge that there would be unintended consequences...outside of the intent. I am shocked.
Keep up the good work.
What is your general problem, man? Did mommy and daddy not tell you they love you ever?
collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:Also, remember these kids stock will not be nearly as high as what many on here are imagining. At best, a handful of players will have national name recognition. Most will be regional (at best) which does not equate to as much $$$ as everyone thinks will be thrown around.
And even the rare phenom like Zion has a calculation to make: Is his image worth more in a Duke jersey with Duke's name involved? And if so, what does he give Duke for permission to use it (a cut of profits? just agreeing to play for them? a promise to play in postseason tournaments?). If you look carefully, in most of the ads you see on TV for Gatorade, Nike, etc. athletes are wearing uniforms that look sort of like their teams', but that have no names, logos, etc. If a player is in his team's kit, then the team either was compensated or the player included a provision in his contract allowing him to use it. Schools and players will have to work this out, too.
collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:old_school posted:collegebaseballrecruitingguide posted:NorCalBBDad posted:Looking forward to seeing how this turns out. The players' allegiance will turn from the school to the sponsor. Imagine if Nike said to Zion "Wow Zion, that was close. Listen, we have too much money invested in you to take a chance on anything happening to you. We want you to take the rest of the season off - no ACC tournament or NCAA - and we'll give you another $20 million when you are drafted into the pros." The Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.
Does that sound like making money from their image, likeness or name? No, that sounds like something different, and therefore outside the intent of what they are doing.
Yea because we know that when a state government that operates in a bubble where they believe they are the only group that matters create garbage legislation without any real thought or knowledge that there would be unintended consequences...outside of the intent. I am shocked.
Keep up the good work.
What is your general problem, man? Did mommy and daddy not tell you they love you ever?
My problem is not what government should be doing. We have enough problems without some bunch of yahoos in any state capital write ting some B S legislation that is going to have many unintended consequences and destroy college sports as we know them.
I hate the NCAA but this law is ridiculous and will crush the games as we know them. You seem to have some pie in the sky fanatsy about this, fair enough but you are wrong and by the time folks like you figure it out it will be gone.
It will crush mid majors and all small schools / non major conferences. I don’t particularly want watch 17 yr old freshman millionaires who will hold tremendous power. They are barely able to get to class, they need tremendous support they are children.
To support this is delusional to the world and how business will get done.
How many guys actually get their educations prior to turning pro? Look, I get it, virtually every decision anyone makes has an unintended consequence. You suss out as many of those as you can before the law goes live, and hopefully it’s 90% tight. After that, you make adjustments to close loopholes that are cause for abuse. Nobody is perfect, but what you seem to be trying to say, with a good dose of piss and vinegar, is that the status quo is just fine, we can’t do better than that. We can, and we will. I think enough states will join the march to make the NCAA change their philosophy on this. I do t think anyone really expects California to screw over their top educational universities for the benefit of a few athletes, but the idea that anyone else on that college campus can earn income from their name image or likeness except an athlete simply because they are an athlete is ridiculous. You watch 18 year old millionaires every time you watch a 1st and sometimes 2nd rd draft pick play in the minor leagues. Again, I really dont think the value of these endorsement deals, on average, will be anywhere close to making too many millionaires. Zion is a generational talent and not the norm.
