I think it would be easier to exploit. Now you wouldn't question if a high profile player has a really nice car because he'd have a valid stream of income from his likeness. Boosters could then "legally" pay him $500 for his autograph. And you know the rich would only get richer with more opportunities to pay athletes.
Thank you Ed Obannon
- Thread starter tyler24
- Start date
I think it would be easier to exploit. Now you wouldn't question if a high profile player has a really nice car because he'd have a valid stream of income from his likeness. Boosters could then "legally" pay him $500 for his autograph. And you know the rich would only get richer with more opportunities to pay athletes.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,016
- 34,526
- 113
Who questions it now, though?
If you haven't already, read "Meet the Bag Man". It's eye opening.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview
No consequence of allowing players to profit from their own likeness would result in anything that isn't already happening with great regularity.
For what was essentially the same game. EA was notoriously bad for not doing much to update the game from year to year other than the rosters.
NEW for NCAA 12: Life like looking referees and double the Lee Corso audio lines!
