• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Should semipro/college players be paid, or allowed to sell their stuff? (NIL and Revenue Sharing)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Former USC coach Pete Carroll never thought players needed to get paid

gettyimages-563591507-e1568838756699.jpg


The state of California recently passed a law that would allow college athletes to hire agents and be paid for the use of their name, image and likeness if they desire. The NCAA, naturally, has weighed in to protest the law and is hoping the governor of California decided to hear their case and not sign the bill into law. Former USC head coach Pete Carroll, now the head coach of the Seattle Seahawks in the NFL with a Super Bowl championship to his name, was asked for his opinion on the developments in California. Perhaps not surprisingly, Carroll came on the side of the conversation which suggests players do not need any additional compensation beyond what is provided by a scholarship.

“I’ve never been of the thought that players need to get paid,” Carroll said, according to Joe Fann, Seattle Seahawks insider for NBC Sports Northwest.

Of course, nobody needs to be reminded Carroll was the head coach of former USC running back Reggie Bush (Ok, I guess I just reminded you anyway).The NCAA found Bush had received improper gifts from an agent, which ultimately dropped a series of sanctions on USC including four years of probation, forced the Trojans to vacate a national championship and the entire 2005 season. USC was also placed on a two-year postseason ban and was stripped of 30 scholarships over a period of three years. The Heisman Trust also vacated Bush’s Heisman Trophy from the record book, and USC has removed any ties and references to Bush from the program. USC was handed their sanctions after the 2009 season, at which time Carroll left the Trojans to coach in the NFL with Seattle.

Entire article: https://collegefootballtalk.nbcspor...oll-never-thought-players-needed-to-get-paid/

Leach Says California Needs to Focus on Keeping Streets Clean, not College Football

5d80e014ab351.image.jpg


The UCLA Bruins travel to Pullman to take on the Cougs at Martin Stadium this Saturday night. Washington State University Head Football Coach Mike Leach met with reporters on Monday to talk about the upcoming contest. An L.A. Times reporter asked Leach for his thoughts on California's proposed law that will allow college players to more easily be compensated for use of their name, image and likeness. "The state of California has trouble keeping their streets clean right now. So my thought is that they probably ought to focus on that. That's just one man's opinion," said Leach. "I'm sure I'm probably wrong. But at the rate that California's handling their infrastructure and some of their other problems, I think we'll see how they do with that before I really think it would be that beneficial for the legislature in California to enter into college football." The proposed law is awaiting the California Governor's signature. If it is approved, it will become law in 2023.

Entire article: https://www.nbcrightnow.com/news/st...cle_ebb7ddf9-2ab3-5d21-9b03-6905339ecf63.html
 
Upvote 0
SKULL SESSION: J.K. DOBBINS OVERCOMES ADVERSITY, GENE SMITH TALKS IMAGE AND LIKENESS BILL, AND JUSTIN FIELDS HAD A TOUGH ADJUSTMENT TO OHIO STATE

TIMES A CHANGIN'. We're just a signature away from a drastic change in college athletics with a California bill that would allow college athletes in the state to make money from their name, image and likeness.

If it happens, we're gonna feel the ripples a long, long way. Gene Smith thinks it will even result in California schools getting booted from the NCAA.

From Steve Berkowitz of USA TODAY:

Ohio State athletics director Gene Smith, who is co-chairing the working group, told USA TODAY Sports this week that if Newsom signs the bill, the uncertainty surrounding a potential difference between California law and NCAA rules would prompt him – for now -- not to schedule games against California schools for dates after Jan. 1, 2023, because he does not see how they could remain NCAA members unless differences between the law and the NCAA’s rules can be resolved.

...

“If the California law goes into effect in ’23,” Smith said Tuesday, “and let’s say the NCAA legislation, how ever it emerges, doesn’t quite meet what California wants it to be and they continue to hold that law, who’s going to play (California schools)? We’re certainly not. They won’t be members of the NCAA. I think that’s going to be the problem."

Smith said that if Newsom signs the bill, schools in California are "going to have a model where they can almost pay for play – not quite – but I think they’re going to be challenged to maintain their membership in the association because, as an association, we have the authority as a group to make our own rules and regulations, and they will be outside those rules and regulations. So, I’m not quite sure how they will stay in the association."

The ironic angle to Gene's comments – especially the ones about not scheduling California teams – is that Ohio State just scheduled a 2023 matchup with San Jose State like three weeks ago. So uh, I think we'll just be figuring something out there.

As for the law itself, I ain't going to tell you how to think, but I will say it'll be a disaster if one single state makes this move all by its lonesome. Regardless of where you land on the pay for play/likeness debate, that ain't gonna work for obvious reasons. Whatever the ultimate decision is, it's gotta be universal.

Entire article: https://www.elevenwarriors.com/skul...keness-bill-justin-fields-adjustment-transfer
 
Upvote 0
DRAKE SAYS "MAINTAIN COLLEGIATE ATHLETICS," NO PROFIT FOR PLAYERS

IMG_2465-1-530x353.jpg


College athletes are inching closer to the chance to make money off of their names with endorsements, marketing deals and other self-marketing opportunities.

But not if University President Michael V. Drake has anything to say about it.

Drake said Tuesday during an interview with Ann Fisher on WOSU Radio that he opposes the prospect of student-athletes profiting from their name, image and likeness.

“We don’t want to have things turn into professional sports,” Drake said in the WOSU interview. “There are professional sports available now. Great. We want to do what we can to maintain collegiate athletics.”

Drake’s comments were in response to the California “Fair Pay to Play Act,” a bill that would allow student-athletes in the state to sign endorsement deals and hire agents without forfeiting college eligibility. The State Senate passed the bill in September, and if passed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, would go into effect in 2023.

Ramogi Huma played football for UCLA in the 1990s. He helped found the advocacy group National College Players Association and has been an adviser for major antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA. He said Ohio State players deserve better.

“These players are people, not university property,” Huma said in an interview with The Lantern. “To assert that the university is in the right, is in the moral high ground, by saying it completely owns its players’ name, image and likeness is unjust and extremely hypocritical.”

Drake’s remarks were made as the chair of the board of governors for the NCAA, University spokesperson Ben Johnson said, therefore Ohio State does not have a statement on his comments.

“The athletic staff there at Ohio State, they are all paid well because of the work, blood, sweat and brain damage of those college athletes,” Huma said.

Ohio State Athletics generated more than $205 million in revenue in the 2018 fiscal year, with football bringing in $110,692,709 and men’s and women’s basketball adding $25,330,985, according to the NCAA Financial Report.

The expenses for coaches’ salaries, benefits and bonuses totaled $38,911,213.

“We’re also interested in being appropriate and supporting our students and being fair to our students, and we and all the other schools commit millions, tens of millions, of dollars a year in scholarships and other support to our student-athletes,” Drake said.

Entire article: https://www.thelantern.com/2019/09/drake-says-maintain-collegiate-athletics-no-profit-for-players/
 
Upvote 0
From the LA Times article:

The bill prohibits the NCAA from barring a university from competition if its athletes are compensated for the use of their name, image or likeness beginning in 2023.

I haven't read the bill, but this seems unlikely to me. The State of California could pass a law saying something like, it will pull its public universities out of the NCAA if the NCAA enforces its own rules, but that's a very different thing. Hard to imagine how California could envision itself enforcing a blanket prohibition. And if all the law really says is that the State of California allows its student to take endorsement money, that's largely a symbolic vote.
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
BigWoof31 said:
https://www.latimes.com/california/...athlete-endorsement-deals-ncaa-california-law


Done deal. California Governor signs bill saying NCAA athletes at California state schools can be paid endorsements for their likeness or name.
This is going to change everything.
Click to expand...

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs Fair Pay to Play Act

SB 206 will not come into effect until Jan. 1, 2023, but it has already inspired copycat efforts in South Carolina, New York and another coming in Florida, not to mention bipartisan efforts in Washington to guarantee athletes their NLI rights.

The NCAA responded to the news with this statement: “We will consider next steps in California while our members move forward with ongoing efforts to make adjustments to NCAA name, image and likeness rules that are both realistic in modern society and tied to higher education.”



The NCAA has already formed a working group to study this issue, but seems customarily dismayed that the California bill and others like it will push the organization off its preferred timeline. Which is entirely the point.

Entire article: https://collegefootballtalk.nbcspor...-gov-gavin-newsom-signs-fair-pay-to-play-act/

Meanwhile at the NCAA headquarters......
shit.gif
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
You will have boosters willing to pay more for student athletes likenesses/endorsements/names in the south than you know what to do with.

"Come to [insert SEC school here] and we have a guy who will pay you [insert dollar amount here] to endorse his [insert business name here]"

and it will be 100% legal
Click to expand...

It's amazing that this even has to be said. That's the reason it's against the rules in the first place, and it should be so obvious that it doesn't need to be mentioned.

Sadly, it isn't (apparently) and it does.

This does not necessarily mean I'm coming down on one side or the other; but there is no doubt that one of the consequences of this moving forward is a further MASSIVE shift south in the college football center of power.
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks said:
It's amazing that this even has to be said. That's the reason it's against the rules in the first place, and it should be so obvious that it doesn't need to be mentioned.

Sadly, it isn't (apparently) and it does.

This does not necessarily mean I'm coming down on one side or the other; but there is no doubt that one of the consequences of this moving forward is a further MASSIVE shift south in the college football center of power.
Click to expand...

Give them a free education and some form of health care after they are done playing just like vets get from the DOD

All other inducements are still eligibility killers

Either that or go to full on semi pro football and drop the pretense

This Cali idea is just bad
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks said:
It's amazing that this even has to be said. That's the reason it's against the rules in the first place, and it should be so obvious that it doesn't need to be mentioned.

Sadly, it isn't (apparently) and it does.

This does not necessarily mean I'm coming down on one side or the other; but there is no doubt that one of the consequences of this moving forward is a further MASSIVE shift south in the college football center of power.
Click to expand...
Wait, you don’t think we’d do that too? Seriously?

I’m quite positive that all schools will participate in this activity.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top