NCAA legislation

kcsu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,485
Like
11,264
To me the NCAA has a solution. Shift the focus away from the player to the school. If a schools policy allows a player to be compensated outside of the guidelines set by the NCAA the school loses its membership in the NCAA. This will allow schools who wish to pay players on a different basis to do so while maintaining more of am amateur status for schools that wish to remain members.

Just because a person has the ability to participate at or in an organization doesn't give them the right to. For instance i graduated with an honors degree from HS. I wanted to attend an IVY league school. I wasn't accepted.
If im a HS athlete and i want to profit from selling my likeness or get paid based on any criteria that is fine as long as i attend a school that allows that.
Liberty University has strict conditions regarding its social policies such as the use of alcohol. If im a person and im 21 living in VA and i want to drink and go to college i can. Just not at Liberty University.
So my point is simple. If the NCAA focuses soley on the governance of the institution vs the individual it can control this situation.
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
To me the NCAA has a solution. Shift the focus away from the player to the school. If a schools policy allows a player to be compensated outside of the guidelines set by the NCAA the school loses its membership in the NCAA. This will allow schools who wish to pay players on a different basis to do so while maintaining more of am amateur status for schools that wish to remain members.

Just because a person has the ability to participate at or in an organization doesn't give them the right to. For instance i graduated with an honors degree from HS. I wanted to attend an IVY league school. I wasn't accepted.
If im a HS athlete and i want to profit from selling my likeness or get paid based on any criteria that is fine as long as i attend a school that allows that.
Liberty University has strict conditions regarding its social policies such as the use of alcohol. If im a person and im 21 living in VA and i want to drink and go to college i can. Just not at Liberty University.
So my point is simple. If the NCAA focuses soley on the governance of the institution vs the individual it can control this situation.
I think the Alston case could make that illegal. Legally, that may just be a re-wording, with the same violation. Bill would make it a violation of the players rights... Illegal. At least that's my understanding.

Even Wildhack admitted that the model may be due for creative changes. (I don't believe that's an endorsement to straight up pay the players, though)
 

kcsu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,485
Like
11,264
I think the Alston case could make that illegal. Legally, that may just be a re-wording, with the same violation. Bill would make it a violation of the players rights... Illegal. At least that's my understanding.

Even Wildhack admitted that the model may be due for creative changes. (I don't believe that's an endorsement to straight up pay the players, though)
Not if you make it an institutional vs individual rule that applies to All Student Athletes. My daughter is athlete at Loyola of Chicago. If her GPA falls below a certain level she is free to remain in school but she has her aid taken away and cant play. Its simple. Institutions have significant latitude in the rules they subject members to. Be it a club, school, association as long as those rules dont discriminate.
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
Not if you make it an institutional vs individual rule that applies to All Student Athletes. My daughter is athlete at Loyola of Chicago. If her GPA falls below a certain level she is free to remain in school but she has her aid taken away and cant play. Its simple. Institutions have significant latitude in the rules they subject members to. Be it a club, school, association as long as those rules dont discriminate.
Ok. I just believe the NCAA has been hiding behind the same rule. At least when it comes to a players likeness, there may be legal precedence, that the player is entitled to it. (I'm think the EA sports ruling , where the settlement had each player getting $600)
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
What happens when the TV $$ crater due to public rejection of
junior NBA or NFL play?
I don't buy that argument, personally. Exhorbitant salaries in MLB haven't hurt the business model.(being boring, may have... )

Wouldn't bother me if a player was. Compensated $10/hour for the 39 hours a week they work(on average). Same as it doesn't bug me that the kid bagging my groceries, or flipping my burgers gets that. Remember, there's still a title ix element.

If the kid received a percentage of Jersey sales, and a larger percentage went in the pool, for the have nots? Wouldn't bug me. If Trevor Lawrence signed a huge NCAA '20 deal, to be on the cover, along with his officially licenced NCAA football? If that license came with a price tag, that went to the have nots? I'd still hate Trevor Lawrence, but the rest wouldn't bug me.

What is CBS paying for March Madness? Thought I read $1 billion.
For some people, it bugs them even more, that the kid can't get the tiniest little crumbs...I'm on the fence.
 

upperdeck

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,977
Like
8,511
if you work for a company you cant sell your likeness and make money off it, why should this be any different?

and yes crazy salaries have killed most every sport for the avg person to attend and hurt the business model.

and CBS paying a ton of money is why these kids are flying to games and staying in nice hotels and eating fancy food on top of free education.. go back 60 yrs, we still had championships and kids got way less nice stuff and schools footed most of the bills.
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
So the players are employees? If that's the case, they would be entitled to the same labor laws. Insurance, unemployment, etc... Therein lies the problem...

And yes, entertainers are allowed to make $$ off of their likeness .

It's a can of worms. Either way, rulings/legislation may decide that very shortly.
 

kcsu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,485
Like
11,264
Ok. I just believe the NCAA has been hiding behind the same rule. At least when it comes to a players likeness, there may be legal precedence, that the player is entitled to it. (I'm think the EA sports ruling , where the settlement had each player getting $600)
My point is to make it the schools policy and have the schools policy in synch with membership in the NCAA.
Heck Doug M had facial hair policy for the football team. If a kid wants to endorse a business, get paid to be in a video game or come to practice dressed as Hitler let them as long as the school allows it. However if that school wants to belong to the NCAA and its against that associations rules they wont be admitted.
 

Hoo's That

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
8,185
Like
11,301
{snip}
and CBS paying a ton of money is why these kids are flying to games and staying in nice hotels and eating fancy food on top of free education.. go back 60 yrs, we still had championships and kids got way less nice stuff and schools footed most of the bills.
The CBS money goes strictly for paying expenses at NCAA championship events at the various levels. So, yes, the D-3 field hockey players get to fly and stay in a nicer hotel than they would have otherwise when they're in the playoffs. No CBS money goes toward anything in any school's regular season in any sport. 60 years ago, there weren't any NCAA championships in any women's sport, or men's lacrosse for that matter, so the expenses were somewhat less than they are now. Men's lacrosse still has what's been called the "Two Flight Rule" which causes the bracket to be reshuffled to limit travel to two plane flights in the first round.
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
My point is to make it the schools policy and have the schools policy in synch with membership in the NCAA.
Heck Doug M had facial hair policy for the football team. If a kid wants to endorse a business, get paid to be in a video game or come to practice dressed as Hitler let them as long as the school allows it. However if that school wants to belong to the NCAA and its against that associations rules they wont be admitted.
There used to be institutional child labor policies, indentured servitude, etc... Laws were put in place to stop that. I think the ruling/bill would be an attempt to give players the legal rights, regardless of ANY institutions policies.

Employers have the right to institute a code of conduct. But not like Henry Ford's policies of not allowing employees to drink alcohol (on their own time), or forcing them to go to church on Sunday, etc... (Under age 22, must be married, house must be kept clean, personal spending was subject to company approval) He was rascist enough, and so thoroughly controlled his work force, that Hitler kept a full sized portrait of Ford at his desk. There are limits to codes of conduct.
 
Last edited:

CuseOnly

All American
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
5,638
Like
5,464
So the players are employees? If that's the case, they would be entitled to the same labor laws. Insurance, unemployment, etc... Therein lies the problem...

And yes, entertainers are allowed to make $$ off of their likeness .

It's a can of worms. Either way, rulings/legislation may decide that very shortly.
Players don't have to be employees to the University or the NCAA for Joe's Auto World to want to pay them for their likeness.

It started with EA sports but that is the tip of the iceburg if this is allowed.

SO lets use another poster's example of how the NCAA or school could potentially limit this...which won't work by the way. If you make X or below then you get the scholarship or if you make more than X then you have to pay for school. What is to stop Bill Rapp from adding X to the player's likeness compensation and completely covering school either way? Yep, nothing.

There is so much money that boosters have that if allowed, kids will start getting paid in HS for likenesses so they go to certain schools. There is no law stating that a kid can's have a job in HS. Or an underage kid who might get a "modeling" contract that gets paid to his mom for his likeness as a summer job.

There would be no end but I would love to hear some creative ways to keep it fair because I don't see a way that it possible in any way shape or form.

You can't use a salary cap because it's illegal to cap compensation if someone is willing to pay. An really, if the kid's likeness is worth that much, then they are entitled to whatever it is worth.
 

FrancoPizza

2018 Iggy Leading Minutes Per Game Winner
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
3,917
Like
4,663
To me the NCAA has a solution. Shift the focus away from the player to the school. If a schools policy allows a player to be compensated outside of the guidelines set by the NCAA the school loses its membership in the NCAA. This will allow schools who wish to pay players on a different basis to do so while maintaining more of am amateur status for schools that wish to remain members.

Just because a person has the ability to participate at or in an organization doesn't give them the right to. For instance i graduated with an honors degree from HS. I wanted to attend an IVY league school. I wasn't accepted.
If im a HS athlete and i want to profit from selling my likeness or get paid based on any criteria that is fine as long as i attend a school that allows that.
Liberty University has strict conditions regarding its social policies such as the use of alcohol. If im a person and im 21 living in VA and i want to drink and go to college i can. Just not at Liberty University.
So my point is simple. If the NCAA focuses soley on the governance of the institution vs the individual it can control this situation.
In which case expect every school to secede from the NCAA.
 

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
16,124
Like
17,478
I think the Alston case could make that illegal. Legally, that may just be a re-wording, with the same violation. Bill would make it a violation of the players rights... Illegal. At least that's my understanding.

Even Wildhack admitted that the model may be due for creative changes. (I don't believe that's an endorsement to straight up pay the players, though)
People give up rights all the time. Work for company A, you can't work elsewhere. Invent something for your company, it owns the patent. Same with a scholarship.
 

CuseOnly

All American
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
5,638
Like
5,464
People give up rights all the time. Work for company A, you can't work elsewhere. Invent something for your company, it owns the patent. Same with a scholarship.
Getting paid for your likeness is usually a contract between the company paying and the person's likeness being used.

What company is he working for? Certainly not the school, not the NCAA, not the league, he is working for the advertiser or company paying them, kind of like a modeling contract or a contract for an appearance.

Any conference or school that limits that would immediately be relegating themselves to the bottom, kids would just go elsewhere.

Any attempt to cap that or schools getting together to limit it could be considered collusion and they would be back in court.

Point is they aren't working for company A.
 

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
16,124
Like
17,478
Getting paid for your likeness is usually a contract between the company paying and the person's likeness being used.

What company is he working for? Certainly not the school, not the NCAA, not the league, he is working for the advertiser or company paying them, kind of like a modeling contract or a contract for an appearance.

Any conference or school that limits that would immediately be relegating themselves to the bottom, kids would just go elsewhere.

Any attempt to cap that or schools getting together to limit it could be considered collusion and they would be back in court.

Point is they aren't working for company A.
It's part of the contract. I think the NCAA, not Congress, should do something.
 

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
Bentley to get to class. Unlimited travel expenses to learn about cultures, Lavish computers, televisions, smart phones, media/study rooms in the athletes dorms, etc, could all be argued as an "educational" expense.
 
Last edited:

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
She ruled that the NCAA itself can’t bar schools from offering players “compensation and benefits related to education” in excess of their scholarship money and cost-of-attendance payments. Those benefits don’t include cash, however. They include things like “computers, science equipment, musical instruments,” and whatever else the courts might decide to count as a non-cash educational benefit.

college athletes still aren’t paid under NCAA rules. But the courts also found that NCAA rules banning schools from offering scholarships worth the full cost of attending the university (beyond just tuition and board) were illegal.

90 days to comply.
 
Last edited:

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
Looks like there is a pay to play bill in California. If passed, Any school with $10 mil in media rights would have to share with the players.

The federal bill would cause schools to lose their non-profit status, if they didn't allow players to profit off of their likeness ..
 

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
16,124
Like
17,478

RandomGuy

All Conference
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,500
Like
4,807
Congress may give the NCAA anti-trust protection.
Hadn't heard that.

Ya know... Let's say a school says you can have a Bentley to go to class .. They may bend the rules, but the IRS certainly won't, and the kid may have to pay the 40% gift tax... 3000 guitar for music class? Pay the tax ..

The tax could take care of any exhorbitant "educational" gifts, because the kid can't pay the tax.
 

Online statistics

Members online
216
Guests online
567
Total visitors
783

Top Bottom