Yahoo, Tattoos, and tOSU (1-year bowl ban, 82 scholly limit for 3 years)

[zincfinger]

A question on the topic of NCAA hypocrisy, rather than tattoos'n'things.

For those of you who dislike the fact that i) schools can sell jerseys that have no names but obviously carry the numbers of current players, while ii) the players who made those numbers marketable are prohibited from cashing in, what is the remedy you'd like to see? Do you want schools to be prohibited from selling jerseys with current players' numbers, or do you want the players to be allowed opportunities to profit from their play (as in, cash now) while they're still in school? The more generalized version of this question is (assuming you have a problem with the status quo); do you want college football to be more amateur, or more professional? If you want players to be paid salaries, or to be able to sell autographs and other items, I'd say you want it to be more professional. If you want to limit schools' ability to make money from the game, I'd say you want it to be more amateur. At least a couple people have effectively already answered this, but I'm curious what the consensus is.

 

[jwinslow]

I'd wish players could get a portion of the profit, but it would create too many problems, both with cheapening the game philosophically as well as the problematic doors it would open for laundering improper benefits.

As such, I'd vote instead for a more amateur option that bans all parties from selling amateur jerseys.

 

[zincfinger]

...I'd vote instead for a more amateur option that bans all parties from selling amateur jerseys.

I ask this question solely to clarify your view in my own mind, because I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion, but do you feel this way because you think it would benefit the players (or some other party) if the schools were prohibited from selling their jerseys, or is it just a matter of general principle/consistency for you?

 

[jwinslow]

Principle/consistency. The latter is the biggest problem with the NCAA and why no one takes their rules seriously.

 

[AKAK]

I'd like for them to get a cut of it, but it would be too problematic, so I'd vote instead for a more amateur option that bans all parties from selling amateur jerseys.

I'm not disagreeing with you Josh...

I did want to point out, as have others, that I'm not exactly sure of the hypocrisy here... at least as it relates to the rest of the world. The jerseys beong to Ohio State... and it's no different than any time that you "work" in the employ of someone that the product of that work belongs to them. For example, the guys who invented post it notes or WD-40 dont' necessarily get a "cut" of the profits... I hope they got a raise or something, but, they aren't entiteled to it as they do not own those properties. Likewise, I have helped develop products that are commercialy viable while in the employ of others, in addition to the purpose they were developed for, but, I don't have a right to future proceeds.

Having said that, the guys who invented that stuff, myself and the football players (assuming jersey sales #'s have some correlation to talent) have better resumes, and as such can gain better employment in the future...

Now, I realize we get into "amatuer" and what the value of a scholarship is and all that stuff. But it's a similar kind of thing.

 

[jwinslow]

The hypocrisy is not the lack of compensation, but rather the double standard for selling pryor merchandise before his eligibility expires, which is against NCAA rules.

They are marketing & selling Pryor jerseys with an anonymous nameplate as their legal loophole with no compensation for the profits based on his likeness & number.

They produce a football product which is compensated with tuition, board, stipends and job placement.

I don't think a company could sell products based on your image (bobble heads, sound boards about wine, etc) without compensating you (or including it in your contract), even if they had the right to keep the profits made from your work & research itself.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Given the responses in this thread, I don't think mili would fare very well if we took a straw poll of what is more stupid, arguing that merchandise revenue is a competitive advantage or arguing that star amateurs don't drive jersey sales, while including incredibly unusual and personal reasons for purchasing them.

If merchandise sales were truly a "competitive advantage", then the NCAA would quash it. Then again, we see how much advantage merchandise juggernauts like Boise State and Utah have got in their rise to relevence.

 

[BUCKYLE]

If merchandise sales were truly a "competitive advantage", then the NCAA would quash it. Then again, we see how much advantage merchandise juggernauts like Boise State and Utah have got in their rise to relevence.

Neither are merchandise juggernauts.

See: Oregon

 

[MaliBuckeye]

Neither are merchandise juggernauts.

See: Oregon

WAAAAY off topic, but it continues to piss me off that Ohio State (and other schools) partner with Nike and essentially fund Oregon athletics.

That's probably the only positive thing I can say about Mich1gAAn- they don't use Nike.

 

[jwinslow]

If merchandise sales were truly a "competitive advantage", then the NCAA would quash it.

Let me know when they squash the outrageous TV deals given to the B10, SEC, Texas & P10 in order to avoid a competitive advantage over the lousy revenue streams in the WAC.

OSU clears about $12 million annually in merchandise revenue between sales and contracts. I'd say $120 million a decade is an advantage.

You continue to get hung up on absolutes:

They don't buy OSU #2 jerseys JUST because of Pryor, thus they don't buy them because of Pryor.

They don't have a competitive advantage in their operating budget JUST because of merchandising rights & sales, thus they don't represent a competitive advantage.

 

[RugbyBuck]

Blow it up completely.

 

[jwinslow]

WAAAAY off topic, but it continues to piss me off that Ohio State (and other schools) partner with Nike and essentially fund Oregon athletics.

That's probably the only positive thing I can say about Mich1gAAn- they don't use Nike.

I'd bring up the 7.5 million adidas gives them annually - compared to 3.54 for Nike & OSU - in equipment and sponsorship rights... but only the galactically stupid would suggest that is a competitive advantage to get millions of dollars a year.

Rich Rod certainly clarified the distinction between the potential of an advantage and actually capitalizing on it

 

[Onebuckfan]

One thing there are no Pryor Jersey's ..he has a history of what 3 years in college football ...but there are OSU jerseys with a number 2 on it and they do have a History and a Legacy...MANY players have worn the scarlet and gray and represented the University proudly..only a few have tried to profit from it...if Tatgate hadn't happened I didn't see much support for AJ Green ...

 

[jlb1705]

Not really. When they sell ten thousand #33 jerseys, those items will become obsolete quickly, compelling kids to ask for a new jersey in a few years, if not a year later.

If they sold classics, there's no need to replace a legend's jersey with another one. You could buy more if you wanted to switch it up, but it would still be the same tribute in 5-10 years, where the fresh #33 jersey from 08 is now an old jersey.

A better example of my replacement theory (for current amateur #s) would probably be a number like Robiskie or Boeckman, since those two aren't going to have many fans wearing them as a throwback (whereas some might with #33).

Archie Griffin hasn't been topped despite many elite backs in recent years. I'm not sure you can top the image and folklore of Spielman, even if Hawk was as good of a linebacker.

Do the majority of people really consider a replica jersey obsolete when the player leaves the team? I know I'm not one of them, so that possibly colors my perspective, but I still see a bunch of #7, 10, 13, 27, 28, 33, 45 & 47 jerseys out there when I go to games or to the bar.

Hell, there's probably a bunch of people out there with "Pryor" jerseys out there that were once actually "Doss" jerseys. I know my #5 is about to come back in style thanks to Braxton Miller. :)

 

[MaliBuckeye]

One thing there are no Pryor Jersey's ..he has a history of what 3 years in college football ...but there are OSU jerseys with a number 2 on it and they do have a History and a Legacy...MANY players have worn the scarlet and gray and represented the University proudly.

I like to pretend mine is a Mike Doss jersey.