NCAA rules in favor of profit for athlete's "likeness"

[MeowingCows]

If it’s a once in a generation player I’d gladly have Iowa state pause facility upgrades for 4 years and funnel all that money to the said recruit thorough donors.

Again, you're assuming that once said money is used for recruits, it'll eventually stop being used for that purpose and come back to facilities donations. That still seems short-sighted/wishful to me.

I guess I can't says it's impossible, but it sure seems unlikely.

 

[moores2]

When discussing this on NPR today they brought up a "minor sport" athlete example of a NCAA tennis player giving youth lessons to make money. That seems an example of a positive outcome from this change.

I heard of a case of a DIII golfer who won a car at a non-NCAA golf tournament that either had to forfeit the car, or quit his collegiate career. I would hope that it would fix something like this as well.

 

[DeereClone]

Again, you're assuming that once said money is used for recruits, it'll eventually stop being used for that purpose and come back to facilities donations. That still seems short-sighted/wishful to me.

I guess I can't says it's impossible, but it sure seems unlikely.

It’s already happened with Cam Newton and I’m sure many many others.

 

[MeowingCows]

It’s already happened with Cam Newton and I’m sure many many others.

To the tune of millions? And the way I see it, under the table is a bit different than out in the open in terms of recouping that money.

 

[Rick]

Why would that happen, though? Those companies are paying for the exposure they get from schools wearing their gear.
Gatorade has endorsements with plenty of pro players but still sponsors teams as well.

And the conflict of interest that some have brought up is a non starter as well. Brock Purdy might sign with Adidas, but he's not going to be allowed to wear their gear on game day. He's going to have to wear the gear that the school is contractually obligated to wear. It's as simple as that. This is something that comes up in the pros, and it's not really a problem.

All these companies have advertising budgets. Currently that budget is spread among all the athletes. If it comes down to paying a certain individual that leaves less for guys that are not focus athletes. I just think the money is going to come in to play here.

 

[06_CY]

The non-revenue sport athletes will probably make some money via lessons and camps. It won't be a lot and it may not be all of them, but a little here and there will at least be something.

 

[Chitowncy]

Well let's see how this goes.

By the way, I'm hopeful this helps athletes profit and allow more of them to benefit from all the revenue they generate and I generally am in favor of this move. That said, there's a lot of ramifications and the law of unintended consequences is interesting to ponder.

 

[CTTB78]

I just saw that Mitt Romney is all over this. No worries now.

 

[DeereClone]

To the tune of millions? And the way I see it, under the table is a bit different than out in the open in terms of recouping that money.

Dollar amount doesn’t matter - a donor already chose to donate to an athlete vs the athletics dept...with it being illegal....imagine what it will look like when it’s legal.

 

[MeowingCows]

Dollar amount doesn’t matter - a donor already chose to donate to an athlete vs the athletics dept...with it being illegal....imagine what it will look like when it’s legal.

...isn't that making my argument, not yours? That's what I'm saying -- the ability to donate to players will reduce department donations, thus harming future AD projects, ...

 

[DeereClone]

...isn't that making my argument, not yours? That's what I'm saying -- the ability to donate to players will reduce department donations, thus harming future AD projects, ...

Auburn’s athletic department was/is financially harmed and and projects aren’t getting done because they decided to pay Cam Newton instead?

 

[MeowingCows]

Auburn’s athletic department was/is financially harmed and and projects aren’t getting done because they decided to pay Cam Newton instead?

Again: that money came back because it was an illegal payment, not a 'forever' thing. Does it come back in similar volume if the payments are legal and spread around multiple other players?

 

[BryceC]

Why would they do that? Schools kinda need that money to build facilities and stadiums and stuff... Players aren't gonna do that.

TV contracts can do that. Plus, I think the players would rather get the money rather than have these absurd facilities.

 

[MeowingCows]

TV contracts can do that. Plus, I think the players would rather get the money rather than have these absurd facilities.

TV will do some of it, but they still rely heavily on boosters/big donors to finance a lot of this stuff. Having comparatively-bad facilities still places a school at a disadvantage in recruiting, though, both for paid and non-paid players.