Costly change is coming: Pat Haden expects NCAA to lose Ed O'bannon suit

BTW, the NCAA does want to pay the kids? Very easy solution, DON'T USE THEIR LIKENESS.

 

Schools used to be smart enough to sell jerseys that didn't have a star player's name or number on it. But I continue to be amazed how many idiots are running major universities in this country nowadays.

I agree with a lot of what's here but where the problem is going to come from is when Title IX advocates start asking where the money is for female athletes.

And anyone who doesn't think they'll sue the NCAA to get paid is a fool.

 

It's the school's jersey.

 

Maybe real lawyers can address this, but it would seem to me the only way the NCAA can get out of paying everyone per Title IX is to give individual athletes the right to profit from their likeness and name as they see fit. They could, in theory, not allow them to be in uniform or identified by the school name, but you could still have, "Hi, I'm Cody Zeller, and nothing is better to wind down after a game than an ice-cold Pepsi!" With Sonny Vaccaro involved, I wonder if this means the shoe companies, instead of paying teams, want to pay individual players.

How would that work without Title IX becoming an issue?

 

That might be the only thing that pushes schools to open their books completely and publicly. They'll have little trouble proving that aside from football and men's basketball, most sports are in the red based on what they bring in.

If they allow athletes to set their own price for endorsements without university oversight, they'll have a fun fight on their hands.

 

The point is, you keep talking about intangible benefits outside the scholarship. But the issue here is the tangible benefits, and the fact that the athletes are limited in receiving them.

College sports, as the NCAA defines it, is supposed to be like the Ivy League and D-III. We all know it's not. So, unless the coaches and referees and everyone else are willing to volunteer their time for free, it's a business just like anything else. And the athletes should have a right to fully exploit the fruits of their own labor. Right now, and for decades, they've been limited.

It's like free agency in baseball. For decades, there were cries about how free agency would ruin baseball, and that players should be grateful for getting paid to play a game. Meanwhile, the owners were getting rich off of their labor. When players finally got their rights, attendance rose, as well as their salaries.

 

BTW, I've been before Judge Wilken (who is overseeing this case) several times over the years and she's a very bright, fair minded judge.

I would bet nearly my last $$ that this is certified as a class action suit; these claims are tailor made for a class certification; either NCAA used the likeness of athletes or not, then its just a matter of identifying who was used.

As for Title XI female athletes, sorry but very doubtful your likeness was ever used, at least by the major revenue generators (jerseys, games, maybe some TV).

 

Is that Sonny & the sneaker companies' goal? To make deals with kids while they're still in college?

That would be interesting. Would it cost them more to have to work out a number of individual deals? Are they better off now, where everyone on the team is wearing the same shoe?

It also makes me wonder if some stars might stay in school longer. If Nike could pay a star directly, they might want him to remain on that stage for longer than the standard one year that basketball superstars usually stay.

 

Simple. Schools give athletes the same scholarships. But if someone else wants to pay them for endorsements on top of that, they can get whatever they can earn. Title IX is for the schools to obey, not the businesses. They can choose who they want to hire, or not hire.

And shoe companies should be paying individual players. Coaches get paid, so why shouldn't the players?

 

Except in college, the fiction is that everyone is playing for the glory of ol' State U. I'm curious if the alums will still be as warm to their school when the starting point guard is pulling down $1 million a year in endorsements (or if their school isn't recruiting the kind of player good enough to get it).

 

So a kid's going to give up an NBA deal so Nike can make a few bucks off of him? Kind of defeats the purpose of the lawsuit.

 

Actually, what Sonny and the shoe guys might be able to do is tell AAU leeches/coaches to fuck off. Right now they're paying coaches of the most successful "teams" to wear their gear, and using that to steer kids to a school that wears the same. If you can pay individuals, no need to deal with those shitheels anymore.