Is college football near the end as we know it.

[JorgeJonas]

There are a lot of reasons to care, even for those of us who support the idea in theory. There's a lot to work through.

How does this work with agreements the schools have? What happens when a RB endorsed by Nike refuses to take the field in an Adidas jersey? Or perhaps more importantly, how much influence will the shoe companies gain beyond what they already have in recruiting?

What about non-competes? Can I pay a monster middle linebacker to hawk my cleaning products but only if he agrees not to transfer to UGA in the next three years?

Will there be a place for incentives-based contracts? Will that implicate gambling laws? Will players have standing to sue for tortuous interference with a contract if a coach doesn't play them for arbitrary reasons?

Michael McCann at SI is putting out some great stuff on this topic for those interested: https://www.si.com/college-football/2019/09/30/fair-pay-to-play-act-law-ncaa-california-pac-12

I dunno. I’m an attorney, and I am quite certain those things can be worked through. I do think it’s odd, though, that none of these issues appear to limit professional athletes.

 

[stech81]

Nope.

And this doesn’t even affect the schools as they are not paying them

I just found it comical that in capitalistic society, folks have issues with this

You don't think some schools can get alumni to fork out money to paid top recruits to advertise their business? Pay them 10 to 25k a year and that will not change college football. May cut back on money they would donate to the school.

 

[Vespidae]

Honestly, who cares?

If a kid can get McDonalds to pay him 20,000 to endorse cheeseburgers, fine. But ... he should also pay back the school for the tuition waiver. Fair is fair.

Otherwise, go for it.

 

[BonafideJacket]

Let’s say that happens. Who’s being harmed?

Off the top of my head:

1) Fans of college football as an amatuer sport (I know, I know).
2) Non-revenue sports.
3) Mid-majors.
4) Existing sponsors of college programs.
5) Athletic department budgets.

Not saying it is illegal or shouldn't happen, but its naive to think this won't have far-reaching implications.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

I am confused... It doesn't say the school can pay players, right? It just says they can make their own money. Get endorsement deals, etc.

If Georgia Tech has the best running back in the country, he is free to pursue an endorsement deal with Nike or whatever.. Be in commercials. That isn't the school paying them directly. It's just allowing them to make money outside of the school. Autographs... Local car lots... Be in commercials... etc.

Is that not accurate?

 

[slugboy]

I am confused... It doesn't say the school can pay players, right? It just says they can make their own money. Get endorsement deals, etc.

If Georgia Tech has the best running back in the country, he is free to pursue an endorsement deal with Nike or whatever.. Be in commercials. That isn't the school paying them directly. It's just allowing them to make money outside of the school. Autographs... Local car lots... Be in commercials... etc.

Is that not accurate?

Yes, but NCAA says they can’t. So, impass for now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonafideJacket]

I dunno. I’m an attorney, and I am quite certain those things can be worked through. I do think it’s odd, though, that none of these issues appear to limit professional athletes.

That's because a lot of these issues are addressed by players unions and collective bargaining agreements. Setting up something similar for the enormous number of college athletes potentially eligible for this is a monstrous undertaking.

Again, I'm not arguing against it. I think it's the proper idea in theory. Just trying to point out the major issues with implementation that most people (including the media) are glossing over.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

I am not questioning the right or wrong of this (although the fact that the most liberally lost state in the Union was the first to legislate, so probably not a smart thing to do). If you want to hear something funny, google Coach Leach’s reaction to this in a recent presser.

With that said, I do think any notion of student athletes has gone by the wayside in so many schools already, & this will facilitate even more kids wanting to go where they are going to be seen the most - increases their marketing value - which will be factories & particularly the SEC. It will hurt the GTs of the world, but we are aleady rowing uphill with no paddles & a hole in the canoe.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

Ok, so we can establish that as true. So how does this help Alabama? They can't pay the player. The player has to be marketable and get his own endorsement deals, etc.

Also, this notion that it will help blue blood schools seems weird to me as well. The same schools compete for the national championship every year right now... It's barely changed in the last 20 years in what is now the current "modern era", which starts in 2000. I think I saw an article that said it's the same 6-8 schools every single year.

 

[stech81]

I am confused... It doesn't say the school can pay players, right? It just says they can make their own money. Get endorsement deals, etc.

If Georgia Tech has the best running back in the country, he is free to pursue an endorsement deal with Nike or whatever.. Be in commercials. That isn't the school paying them directly. It's just allowing them to make money outside of the school. Autographs... Local car lots... Be in commercials... etc.

Is that not accurate?

Yes but you don't think schools like Ohio state , Alabama , and a few others won't have deals worked out ahead of time.

 

[GT_05]

NCAA needs to take all games that are currently scheduled to be played in California off of everyone’s schedule and any games played in California would be considered non-sanctioned. And before someone says it...to heck with the Rose Bowl.

I don’t watch pro ball because I got sick of the big salaries and the big attitudes and I’m not interested in watching semipro (formerly known as college) football. High school next? Probably not. Ugh.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonafideJacket]

Yes but you don't think schools like Ohio state , Alabama , and a few others won't have deals worked out ahead of time.

That's right, athletic departments will quickly take on the role of middle man, facilitating deals between boosters and prospective players. I could even see some departments requiring participation in a coordinated NIL program for certain perks like those currently available to high-level donors. Maybe even endowed endorsements?

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

NCAA needs to take all games that are currently scheduled to be played in California off of everyone’s schedule and any games played in California would be considered non-sanctioned. And before someone says it...to heck with the Rose Bowl.

I don’t watch pro ball because I got sick of the big salaries and the big attitudes and I’m not interested in watching semipro (formerly known as college) football. High school next? Probably not. Ugh.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with you wholeheartedly, but in a lot of cases, we are already watching semi-pro FB. I wish players actually had that option if they don’t want a college education.

 

[bobongo]

I am not questioning the right or wrong of this (although the fact that the most liberally lost state in the Union was the first to legislate, so probably not a smart thing to do).

I can't help pointing out the "irony" of California standing up for individual rights and freedoms against the Nanny Collegiate Athletic Association.

 

[stech81]

Hey It worked found a way for people to stop talking about the coach, and did it without bring up uniforms . Tomorrow we can talk about my wife's cooking.

 

[MWBATL]

I am confused... It doesn't say the school can pay players, right? It just says they can make their own money. Get endorsement deals, etc.

If Georgia Tech has the best running back in the country, he is free to pursue an endorsement deal with Nike or whatever.. Be in commercials. That isn't the school paying them directly. It's just allowing them to make money outside of the school. Autographs... Local car lots... Be in commercials... etc.

Is that not accurate?

Yes.

But even if the NCAA allows it, then it can easily become a "pay for play" gambit as others in this thread have pointed out. The simplest example is the booster who decides to pay an athlete money for an autograph as long as he attends X College (cough, UGa, cough).

 

[chris975d]

Ok, so we can establish that as true. So how does this help Alabama? They can't pay the player. The player has to be marketable and get his own endorsement deals, etc.

Also, this notion that it will help blue blood schools seems weird to me as well. The same schools compete for the national championship every year right now... It's barely changed in the last 20 years in what is now the current "modern era", which starts in 2000. I think I saw an article that said it's the same 6-8 schools every single year.

Typically the blue blood schools are the ones with the most money...aka donors. This is potentially cutting those big money donors loose to pay those players directly. You don’t think that a big money donor(s) at Bama, or even my example above, Nike/Oregon would come at that GT running back with more money than he’s getting here? And on top of that, we have the transfer portal now where players can go after the money any time they want.

 

[jacket_fan]

Seems another nail in the coffin of what was once call "amateur sports".

The next step is for California to pass a law allowing high school athletes to get paid for their likenesses as well. It's a slippery slope once you start down.

 

[BonafideJacket]

I am confused... It doesn't say the school can pay players, right? It just says they can make their own money. Get endorsement deals, etc.

If Georgia Tech has the best running back in the country, he is free to pursue an endorsement deal with Nike or whatever.. Be in commercials. That isn't the school paying them directly. It's just allowing them to make money outside of the school. Autographs... Local car lots... Be in commercials... etc.

Is that not accurate?

I hate to be the king of hypotheticals, but what happens the first time that the University of Michigan strikes a deal with Ypsilanti Ford to be the official Ford dealer of UM basketball. As part of that agreement, UM agrees to purchase all fleet vehicles from them. Shortly thereafter, Roger Stockton, the phenom UM PG, gets $150,000 to appear in a series of five commercials for Ypsilanti Ford. Don't tell me those deals won't happen and I guarantee you the Feds will be sniffing around for Title IX issues then.

 

[Ibeeballin]

NCAA needs to take all games that are currently scheduled to be played in California off of everyone’s schedule and any games played in California would be considered non-sanctioned. And before someone says it...to heck with the Rose Bowl.

I don’t watch pro ball because I got sick of the big salaries and the big attitudes and I’m not interested in watching semipro (formerly known as college) football. High school next? Probably not. Ugh.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I’m certain a breach of contract with the TV deals would follow