Started By
Message
re: NCAA policy- johnny football and more
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:13 pm to TrueSon2014
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:13 pm to TrueSon2014
I think the NCAA either needs to stop using players' likenesses to make money or give said players money.
I don't think they should pay each student-athlete because there are so many athletes and it would open up a whole new can of worms in itself. But I think if the school sells a certain player's jersey then they need to give that player a portion of the profits.
I don't think they should pay each student-athlete because there are so many athletes and it would open up a whole new can of worms in itself. But I think if the school sells a certain player's jersey then they need to give that player a portion of the profits.
This post was edited on 8/21/13 at 11:14 pm
2
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:16 pm to TrueSon2014
quote:
Many of these cases came to a close after the damage had already been done and teams were given the chance to compete.
At least if they get tagged with the cost of the investigation, it will follow them even after they're done playing in college. Right now, hardly anything follows them after college, other than maybe having to give a trophy back.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:19 pm to reedus23
Good point sir very good point but they aren't breaking any laws in the usa. They aren't even breaking laws in ncaa if they just sign autographs for free. It would have to be added to the rule book to ensure that the case would not get thrown out.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:20 pm to reedus23
It does not follow them because there are no "real" laws being broken.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:24 pm to svb
quote:
I think the NCAA either needs to stop using players' likenesses to make money or give said players money.
Something absolutely wrong with the fact that someone else is making millions and not having to pay anyone to do so. CFB is like the NFL with hardly the same overhead. No player salaries and don't have to share the revenue from jersey sales etc...
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:27 pm to TrueSon2014
quote:
It would have to be added to the rule book to ensure that the case would not get thrown out.
Yes, it would have to be written in. Then it is just like any other contract where you have clauses that set out different remedies for a breach of the contract. In this case, the player signs the contract when they sign to play at a school. Just need to have the NCAA rules re-written to include such a "fine" or "penalty" in the event of a breach of that contract.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:29 pm to svb
quote:
I think the NCAA either needs to stop using players' likenesses to make money or give said players money.
So sell jerseys without any numbers worn by any player? Cause if there is a jersey with a number of a current player that is in their likeness. How would the NCAA make up the money lost then?
I think a revision of my point #2 to say maybe a small amount of the players earnings would go back to NCAA maybe like 10-20 percent
quote:
But I think if the school sells a certain player's jersey then they need to give that player a portion of the profits.
But then who makes the decision which jersey numbers are sold and this might make a title 9 issue baised that more football jerseys are sold meaning male athletes make more than female
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:31 pm to reedus23
quote:
Yes, it would have to be written in. Then it is just like any other contract where you have clauses that set out different remedies for a breach of the contract. In this case, the player signs the contract when they sign to play at a school. Just need to have the NCAA rules re-written to include such a "fine" or "penalty" in the event of a breach of that contract.
Then I agree with this statement
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:35 pm to TrueSon2014
Now that we have solved all of the NCAA's problems, I'm out.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:38 pm to reedus23
quote:
Something absolutely wrong with the fact that someone else is making millions and not having to pay anyone to do so.
You could argue they are paid with a free tuition and a chance to play college sports against the most competitive student athletes in the world. Does not seem like a totally awful deal to me.
Maybe have a system where players could make money off their own image but give a majority of it back to the NCAA and then let the player get to keep some of it?
This post was edited on 8/21/13 at 11:43 pm
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:39 pm to reedus23
At least the NCAA has said they will no longer sell jerseys. That's a start.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:54 pm to reedus23
My dad frequently got letters from the Athletic department when an athlete was in his class delineating the "extra burdens" on the student athlete and asking the professor to be mindful of those burdens. He always thought they were funny.
Posted on 8/21/13 at 11:56 pm to TrueSon2014
quote:
You could argue they are paid with a free tuition
Not all of them, though.
quote:
a chance to play college sports against the most competitive student athletes in the world
Sounds nice, but doesn't pay tuition.
quote:
Maybe have a system where players could make money off their own image but give a majority of it back to the NCAA and then let the player get to keep some of it?
Might as well keep the system we have now. Whatever sum they give back will still be wildly disproportionate to the amount made off them by the NCAA, IMO.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 7:27 am to TrueSon2014
it isn't about the NCAA needing the money. You CANNOT allow it and maintain a level playing field. This allows boosters to pay whatever they want for a player or recruit's sweat band or whatever. It creates paid players, paid recruits, etc. type environment that would absolutely KILL college sports.
This post was edited on 8/22/13 at 7:35 am
Posted on 8/22/13 at 7:31 am to TrueSon2014
quote:
Yes I agree. From what I know here at Mizzou now many athletes have a tutor thus making class somewhat more of an option rather than a necessity. I am not saying all athletes don't go to class but I have some classes with some athletes and they are not there every class period. However I am sure many do go to class as well.
This isn't true. Class is not optional. The AD specifically requires attendance from all athletes for classes and does check up on them. They even have students within athlete classes to take unknown attendance and report when players don't show up.
I can vouch for this personally. I watched Kareem Rush, for example, show up for his 8AM English 20 class EVERYDAY it was held for an entire semester. He was even there the morning after a 9pm tipoff at Baylor the night before.
This post was edited on 8/22/13 at 7:36 am
Posted on 8/22/13 at 7:35 am to notsince98
quote:
It creates paid players, paid recruits, etc. type environment that would absolutely KILL college sports.
Wouldn't kill college sports at all. The sentiment that these kids are "amateur" athletes is poppycock anyway.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 8:01 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Wouldn't kill college sports at all. The sentiment that these kids are "amateur" athletes is poppycock anyway.
How would it not kill it? Mizzou would have no chance to compete.
The current rules and regulations are not enough. They need to start enforcing MORE limitations, not less.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 9:27 am to notsince98
quote:
This isn't true. Class is not optional. The AD specifically requires attendance from all athletes for classes and does check up on them. They even have students within athlete classes to take unknown attendance and report when players don't show up.
I have taken classes where the opposite can be said where some student athletes are present while others are missing. Whether it is because they have a lingering injury or a practice or a game is unknown to me as a student but I know I have had class and have seen athletes not be in attendance. I am not saying it's worse than any normal student just an observation
Posted on 8/22/13 at 9:30 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Not all of them, though.
Truth which is why walk on players might be able to see some benefits from what I propsed. Some is better than nothing. Or perhaps they play well enough to be offered a scholarship as they do now.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 11:52 am to TrueSon2014
Question - are walk-on players allowed to keep other scholarships? Such as academic, local civic groups, etc? If they're not, they should be. That's ridiculous.
And TBird, they're not necessarily "amateurs" in the way a kid playing American Legion baseball is an amateur. But I think the point is we don't want them to become NFL Lite. They are still student-athletes, and the student part of that comes first in my mind. I prefer college football over NFL, and would hate to see the NCAA make moves toward turning it into a lower-level NFL.
Just my opinion, of course.
And TBird, they're not necessarily "amateurs" in the way a kid playing American Legion baseball is an amateur. But I think the point is we don't want them to become NFL Lite. They are still student-athletes, and the student part of that comes first in my mind. I prefer college football over NFL, and would hate to see the NCAA make moves toward turning it into a lower-level NFL.
Just my opinion, of course.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News