And the end of college football begins..

At one of my previous employers, I was essentially banned from making certain types of online videos or any appearance related to the industry that I worked in. The brand was very popular and widely known, and they had strict rules to prevent any appearance of endorsement or speaking on behalf of the company. If you did, and they didn't approve of it in advance, you could be reprimanded or terminated. Just the rules of employment there.

I suppose I would be fine with them earning money for the likeness thing so long as they don't make any appearance that references the school, their playing for the school, or any implication of endorsement from the school. That means no school colored apparel, no logos, no mention of "starting linebacker for the Michigan Wolverines." Their name and likeness must be their own, not their identity as a player for the team. If they can adhere to the rules for that, then I suppose it could be explored. I do wonder what people would do when Phil Knight signs every future Oregon commitment to a 50,000 dollar "name and likeness" program though. Or if someone gave the starting QB at Southern Cal 100,000 dollars to appear at a car dealership. I'm curious to know how people think that would impact college sports.

The irony of course is that if the kids weren't playing for the school their name and likeness would be worth as much as the next person's- at least to those fans who would pay for their name and likeness at the college level. That plucks at the very messy relationship between the schools and the players. It cannot be ignored that the schools have created the vehicle through which the players improve their own personal brand value. You may be a star wide receiver in high school and be worth something regionally (how many former high school stars end up in businesses trading on their name? A few I think), but it's catching 20 touchdowns for Alabama or running for 1500 yards in an Ohio State jersey that gets you into the big money. You tap into the fans of the program, built by the college, to earn a lot of that money. So. It's a curious relationship to dissect and quantify.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
At one of my previous employers, I was essentially banned from making certain types of online videos or any appearance related to the industry that I worked in. The brand was very popular and widely known, and they had strict rules to prevent any appearance of endorsement or speaking on behalf of the company. If you did, and they didn't approve of it in advance, you could be reprimanded or terminated. Just the rules of employment there.

I suppose I would be fine with them earning money for the likeness thing so long as they don't make any appearance that references the school, their playing for the school, or any implication of endorsement from the school. That means no school colored apparel, no logos, no mention of "starting linebacker for the Michigan Wolverines." Their name and likeness must be their own, not their identity as a player for the team. If they can adhere to the rules for that, then I suppose it could be explored. I do wonder what people would do when Phil Knight signs every future Oregon commitment to a 50,000 dollar "name and likeness" program though. Or if someone gave the starting QB at Southern Cal 100,000 dollars to appear at a car dealership. I'm curious to know how people think that would impact college sports.

The irony of course is that if the kids weren't playing for the school their name and likeness would be worth as much as the next person's- at least to those fans who would pay for their name and likeness at the college level. That plucks at the very messy relationship between the schools and the players. It cannot be ignored that the schools have created the vehicle through which the players improve their own personal brand value. You may be a star wide receiver in high school and be worth something regionally (how many former high school stars end up in businesses trading on their name? A few I think), but it's catching 20 touchdowns for Alabama or running for 1500 yards in an Ohio State jersey that gets you into the big money. You tap into the fans of the program, built by the college, to earn a lot of that money. So. It's a curious relationship to dissect and quantify.
Some good points in there. I wonder what coach’s contracts say regarding outside endorsements. Is Alabama mentioned in the one million Aflac commercials that have aired with Nick Saban? Seems like most pro athletes don’t mention their team or leagues they play for. Think it would be the same for the players.
I think allowing outside money in would be the school‘s best bet. They wouldn’t have to lose revenue by paying players themselves or have them be labeled as employees and the issues that brings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia
Some good points in there. I wonder what coach’s contracts say regarding outside endorsements. Is Alabama mentioned in the one million Aflac commercials that have aired with Nick Saban? Seems like most pro athletes don’t mention their team or leagues they play for. Think it would be the same for the players.
I think allowing outside money in would be the school‘s best bet. They wouldn’t have to lose revenue by paying players themselves or have them be labeled as employees and the issues that brings.

I agree, and the athletes would have to be very strictly monitored for this.

I think the outside money _might_ be the best thing as well, but I'm not sure? As others have pointed out here and elsewhere, that will quickly plunge college football into a naked pay system where players at the big schools will be getting ridiculous amounts of money in comparison to kids in Division II, etc. I wonder how that would influence the decline of football at the lower level? Careers counselors and the like always trot out that "only 0.00whatever percent" of football players make it to the NFL stat to discourage making the NFL a career goal ... but if you can get your degree and possibly another 100,000-200,000 dollars as a big time star at the college level, all of a sudden you might see a change in interest. And a lot more transfers.
 

"I feel like the federal government has a role and responsibility that we've been shirking in terms of protecting athletes and ensuring their safety. I just really believe there is an urgency here that has not been met for decades and decades. We need to step up and do something about it."
Cory Booker

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help."
Ronald Reagan
 
Seems to me like they are. Tuition, advisors, room and board, worth 10s of thousands of $ - and for some, exposure to the NFL.

And when did it switch from a game to a job in amateur athletics, and bidding wars where some kids roll up on campus like drug lords in Hummers while others don't. This is part of the SJW campaign where they feel like this will favor minorities.
 
I think schools/conferences with nice media contracts would get all the best players. Heck, this might hurt the other power 5 conferences compared to the SEC. Vanderbilt could tell recruits they could make a lot more playing for Vandy than they could make playing for Clemson or Ohio State. Think about that. Smaller schools/conferences are the ones that would really suffer. Schools like Chattanooga don't make a profit. All the decent recruits will go to where the money is and if a player does develope at a small school, a larger school will quickly poach them
 
Why shouldn't they get a share of the revenue they make for the university or be able to make money from sponsorships?

Yes, they are among us. Sad but true.

The cost for tuition, books, R&B, academic support, athletic training, medical treatment & rehab (how many kids show up at college with lingering injuries from hs each year), facilities, travel, recruiting to get them there, etc has to be well over $50,000 a year at a state school like UT. Probably closer to $100,000. All for a 20 hour a week job.

No mention of Title IX requirements in this great piece of legislation is there?

Imagine you work at Walmart 20 hours a week. Do ees deserve 50% of the profits after salaries & expenses are paid for that store?
 
Imagine you work at Walmart 20 hours a week. Do ees deserve 50% of the profits after salaries & expenses are paid for that store?
It wouldn’t take anything close to 50%. They literally could hand every scholarship athlete on campus a $10,000 check every year and that would equate to 3% of total revenue.
 
Yes, they are among us. Sad but true.

The cost for tuition, books, R&B, academic support, athletic training, medical treatment & rehab (how many kids show up at college with lingering injuries from hs each year), facilities, travel, recruiting to get them there, etc has to be well over $50,000 a year at a state school like UT. Probably closer to $100,000. All for a 20 hour a week job.

No mention of Title IX requirements in this great piece of legislation is there?

Imagine you work at Walmart 20 hours a week. Do ees deserve 50% of the profits after salaries & expenses are paid for that store?

Fancy hotels, expense team only catered meals, team gear, etc....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Duckyvol59
It wouldn’t take anything close to 50%. They literally could hand every scholarship athlete on campus a $10,000 check every year and that would equate to 3% of total revenue.

Right because even people in non revenue sports deserve football money.
 
And when did it switch from a game to a job in amateur athletics, and bidding wars where some kids roll up on campus like drug lords in Hummers while others don't. This is part of the SJW campaign where they feel like this will favor minorities.

Yet you’re perfectly fine with Jimbo Fisher getting guaranteed $70M to coach. Talk about amateur sports all right.

Say what you really feel. You really just want minorities to shut up and play ball and be grateful for what they have.
 
Yes, they are among us. Sad but true.

The cost for tuition, books, R&B, academic support, athletic training, medical treatment & rehab (how many kids show up at college with lingering injuries from hs each year), facilities, travel, recruiting to get them there, etc has to be well over $50,000 a year at a state school like UT. Probably closer to $100,000. All for a 20 hour a week job.

No mention of Title IX requirements in this great piece of legislation is there?

Imagine you work at Walmart 20 hours a week. Do ees deserve 50% of the profits after salaries & expenses are paid for that store?

20 hour a week job LMAO, this is so dense. They can practice for 20 hours a week, that doesn’t include their conditioning...doesn’t include their film study on their other times...doesn’t include their studies. They put in more hours than almost everyone on this board.
 
I think schools/conferences with nice media contracts would get all the best players. Heck, this might hurt the other power 5 conferences compared to the SEC. Vanderbilt could tell recruits they could make a lot more playing for Vandy than they could make playing for Clemson or Ohio State. Think about that. Smaller schools/conferences are the ones that would really suffer. Schools like Chattanooga don't make a profit. All the decent recruits will go to where the money is and if a player does develope at a small school, a larger school will quickly poach them

So.....exactly like it's been for decades now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zjcvols
Lol... then you stopped watching in the 1970s because there are unsavory recruiting stories everywhere.

Perhaps I should have stated that the day they start paying them "legally" is the day I stop watching. As has been stated here before, no one is forcing these athletes to accept a full scholarship worth thousands of dollars. They have the option of not participating. The world needs ditch diggers as well as college football players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PulaskiVolFan
Yet you’re perfectly fine with Jimbo Fisher getting guaranteed $70M to coach. Talk about amateur sports all right.

Say what you really feel. You really just want minorities to shut up and play ball and be grateful for what they have.

That's not it at all. This is another liberal idea to tinker with amateur athletics and create even more corruption and government control. They are going after more and more whether you realize it or not but you probably like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PulaskiVolFan
That's not it at all. This is another liberal idea to tinker with amateur athletics and create even more corruption and government control. They are going after more and more whether you realize it or not but you probably like it.

How can you call this amateur athletics when the SEC is gonna rake in over $300M PER YEAR for their television rights?

Also, again...the NCAA did this to themselves. Their inability to adapt with the times and change their view has caused this. They have no one to blame themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vol66 and MaTaLa

VN Store



Back
Top