(10-01-2019 07:26 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 02:08 PM)TheMoody1 Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 08:11 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  We fans have created a bunch of greedy, entitled, spoiled brats. They're no longer satisfied to use their athletic talents to get a $50,000 free education with room & board and food. No longer satisfied with receiving professional coaching, professional strength and conditioning coaches and trainers, eating specifically prepared meals and nutritional snacks designed by professional nutritionists. In some cases enjoying free barbers, doctors and dentists. Then there's the full time public relations department, free clothes, shoes and who knows what else. Not to mention the over the top, lush and plush facilities schools are building these days. They are even being paid a stipend and that's still not enough.

I expect schools will stop selling items with names & likeness on them. Since numbers have been worn by dozens of players there's really no way for current players to claim them.

Craig Melvin, a Wofford grad, on the Today show actually said it was about time these guys can get paid because many of them have to worry about being able to afford their next meal.

Says someone that graduated from a school that costs almost $60K a year.

It's also false. The NCAA approved unlimited meals and snacks for college athletes years ago.

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

(10-01-2019 05:46 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 03:47 PM)slycat Wrote:  I think it'll be forced as other states pass measures or it'll go to Supreme Court.

About time the billions NCAA makes goes to those that earned it.

I'm curious. Where do you think the money that the NCAA takes in actually goes?

Dontcha know?!? It's billions in revenue that could go to football and basketball players!

*the lack of understanding of revenue and profit is mind blowing. I imagine someone here could do a quick examination of the NCAA's financial statements to deduce how much, if any, net profit is being reinvested. It's not like the NCAA is some private organization where the owners are taking a massive salary simply by owning it.

(10-02-2019 10:14 AM)VNova Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

The question is how much revenue is actually generated using players name, image, and likeness? Do highlights for advertising televised games count?

I'd imagine jersey's count but considering that they have no name on the back, does that qualify as likeness?

This will become a massive recruiting tool and will drive a wedge even deeper into the divide that will force a split between the "P5" (mostly like 15 schools) and the rest of the group.

(10-02-2019 10:37 AM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 10:14 AM)VNova Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

The question is how much revenue is actually generated using players name, image, and likeness? Do highlights for advertising televised games count?

I'd imagine jersey's count but considering that they have no name on the back, does that qualify as likeness?

This will become a massive recruiting tool and will drive a wedge even deeper into the divide that will force a split between the "P5" (mostly like 15 schools) and the rest of the group.

This is where there's a distinction between official team activities comes into play. Using highlights would be something obtained while conducting official team activities (playing a football game), therefore doesn't count. CA's law is one of the better written NIL laws cropping up because it draws a strong line in the sand on commercial endorsements and institution activities.

As for jerseys, I can't imagine a number can be considered a part of likeness.

I agree, this will be a major recruiting tool. Whoever can best get its players commercial deals will get the recruits. However, I also think this is not going to be heavily focused on traditional TV/print advertisement. It's going to be in the social media realm, at which point it's whoever has the best following and can best sell themselves as the ideal influencer for a brand.

(10-02-2019 10:14 AM)VNova Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

The ACLU will get that part struck down in court, dollars to donuts. There is no way they are going to allow a 21 year old who just made $100,000 in a FedEx commercial deal to get away with taking scholarship money away from truly deserving underprivileged kids.

Mohajir's take: http://953theticket.com/workday-redzone-...ct-2-2019/

(10-02-2019 12:08 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 10:14 AM)VNova Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

The ACLU will get that part struck down in court, dollars to donuts. There is no way they are going to allow a 21 year old who just made $100,000 in a FedEx commercial deal to get away with taking scholarship money away from truly deserving underprivileged kids.

...because no academic scholarship holders come from rich families....

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

The deal breaker is when a student takes $ away from a university. Never happen.

(10-02-2019 07:50 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 12:08 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-02-2019 10:14 AM)VNova Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 08:57 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 07:29 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Schools will have to begin adding clauses to the scholarships saying they own the rights to their likeness and names while they are receiving financial aid.

Yep.

The CA law is written in such a way that the institution would not be able to do this. The first line states:

"A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

Then it states: "A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section."

The law is designed to ensure student-athletes can use their name, image, and likeness in commercial pursuits like any other college student can. We'll see what happens in 2023 when this law becomes active.

The ACLU will get that part struck down in court, dollars to donuts. There is no way they are going to allow a 21 year old who just made $100,000 in a FedEx commercial deal to get away with taking scholarship money away from truly deserving underprivileged kids.

...because no academic scholarship holders come from rich families....

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

For the most part? I suppose, but you can bet that won't be the "take" within the public realm.

(10-02-2019 10:31 AM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(10-01-2019 05:46 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 03:47 PM)slycat Wrote:  I think it'll be forced as other states pass measures or it'll go to Supreme Court.

About time the billions NCAA makes goes to those that earned it.

I'm curious. Where do you think the money that the NCAA takes in actually goes?

Dontcha know?!? It's billions in revenue that could go to football and basketball players!

*the lack of understanding of revenue and profit is mind blowing. I imagine someone here could do a quick examination of the NCAA's financial statements to deduce how much, if any, net profit is being reinvested. It's not like the NCAA is some private organization where the owners are taking a massive salary simply by owning it.

For 2017 there was a little over $100 million net profit. They gave almost $500 million back to its member institutions.