Coming soon: NCAA v. California

Schools can still take away scholarships for certain conditions, such as asking to transfer, and the proverbial “violation of team rules,” which can be interpreted as anything.

Just like the 20-hour rule and “voluntary” workouts,” the schools find loopholes.

 

This isn't going to happen. Students aren't choosing the likes of Middle Tennessee State or UAB or San Jose State over Alabama or Ohio State because it's their choice. Alabama and Ohio State football aren't giving those kids the time of day. Players choose the "mid majors" or lower tier programs because their choice is play for them or not at all. If students are getting paid, Alabama isn't suddenly going to offer these kids a spot. If anything, the big schools will just pillage from each other. It will be a fight between Notre Dame, big SEC schools, big Big 10/12 schools and the like. Your small programs will still get those kids who are just happy to be called D-1 athletes. Plus, you might see the number of players on a team fall because they don't want to have to pay everyone.

Besides, all these laws are talking about is letting athletes make money off their likeness. You can't do that unless you actually play and have a likeness people want. Preferred walk No. 5 is not getting an endorsement deal.

 

Nobody is saying the scholarship is worth nothing, but in general, it costs the universities almost nothing. Other than direct program costs, it's just room and board and some minor marginal cost for a few more students. More importantly, it's not how the majority of high-end college athletes would prefer to get paid. It's the equivalent of company scrip.

The training is also worth something, but it's far less valuable than what they would get from a real minor league system.

 

Make them all school employees with an option to free tuition (five to play four or 8 to play 10). The NCAA can agree on a pay scale.

Schools offer a salary scale to each athlete. Some schools might offer a player a better salary than others. Boosters can go wild.

 

As far as framing goes, its curious that we may have a Presidential election decided in part by the student debt crisis while also having an NCAA crisis that refuses to place any value on the advantage of student-athletes leaving school debt free

 

Please explain how you came to this conclusion.

 

The problem for the players is that their endorsement value is almost exclusively through their relationship with their school. Maybe a Tebow in a blank orange jersey or Zion hooping in a blue tank top would register with most viewers, but schools won't be allowing their jerseys to be used if they aren't making a dime.
The obvious solution is schools cutting a player in on a regional ad for shoe company, restaurant chain or car dealership. And if the big name says no - they go to the next guy until they find someone to accept the offer.

 

Pro players do tv ads all the time without their teams' jerseys and radio ads without mentioning their team.

 

But by that point they are name brands right? If Joe College just says I'm X without saying his affiliation - how many people know who he is?

 

Also in California ...

College Football Coach Under Investigation For Allegedly Letting Players Sleep In The Locker Room -- While He Charged Them Rent

 

Loved that movie.

 

Television stations' new stories are some of the most poorly written pieces on the internet. Are the people at tv stations that dumb?