ND ran into a cold dreary swamp and a tough Michigan running game Saturday night. Ian Book was well, Ian Book, which is not very good. I think it's time he sat. He and Kelly can't win when it counts. He comes up soft.
NCAA board votes to allow athlete compensation The NCAA Board of Governors has taken the first step toward allowing athletes to cash in on their fame. The board voted unanimously on Tuesday to clear the way for the amateur athletes to "benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness." The vote came during a meeting at Emory University in Atlanta. In a news release, board chair Michael V. Drake said the board realized that it "must embrace change to provide the best possible experience for college athletes." (AP)
California judge ruled players in California could do it so they had to just make it nationwide or all the really good players would go to California. Their hands were tied catfish
I'm thinking it may keep some players from declaring for the draft early and give them an additional year to hone their skills while still in college. That would give NFL scouts and GM's an additional years worth of film.
It will pay players for their full time job of playing football, and having merchandise, TV revenue, ticket revenue, etc. And the argument of "They get scholarships" is simply not worth the time - other scholarship recipients have both the time and contractual right to get paid via other work / goods, something players are barred from doing. Moreover, most players aren't able to sustain rigorous education for an advanced degree while still fulfilling football needs. This opens up a lot of new potential hiccups and issues needing resolving. However, using those as a barrier to entry wasn't going to hold up for long, and was never justified. NCAA is a criminal organization - but this is a step in a redeeming direction.
I didn't see where the players would receive a piece of the TV or ticket revenues. I interpreted it to them being paid for product endorsements and/or things of that nature (IMO - as they should).
link... https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/p...0191030-cc37p26zpzeqlj6qyut5z42lye-story.html ATLANTA ― The NCAA Board of Governors voted Tuesday to allow amateur athletes to cash in on their fame. The unanimous decision will allow athletes to “benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness.” The NCAA and its member schools now must figure out how to allow athletes to profit while still maintaining rules regarding amateurism. The board asked each of the NCAA’s three divisions to create the necessary new rules beginning immediately and have them in place no later than January 2021. “The board is emphasizing that change must be consistent with the values of college sports and higher education and not turn student-athletes into employees of institutions,” said board chair Michael Drake after the decision was announced at Emory University in Atlanta.
A group of NCAA administrators has been exploring since May the ways in which athletes could be allowed to receive compensation for the use of their names, images and likenesses. The working group, led by Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman, presented a status report Tuesday to the university presidents who make up the Board of Governors. Smith and Ackerman’s group laid out principles and guidelines, endorsed by the board, to be followed as NCAA members go about crafting new rules and tweaking existing ones, including: — Making clear the distinction between collegiate and professional opportunities. — Making clear that compensation for athletic performance or participation is impermissible. — Protecting the recruiting environment and prohibiting inducements to select, remain at or transfer to a specific institution. Some college sports leaders fear allowing athletes to earn outside income could open the door to corruption. “One of the most distinctive things about college sports is this whole recruitment process,” NCAA President Mark Emmert told the AP. “The whole notion of trying to maintain as fair a playing field as you can is really central to all this. And using sponsorship arrangements, in one way or another, as recruiting inducements is something everybody is deeply concerned about.” The shift came a month after California passed a law that would make it illegal for NCAA schools to prohibit college athletes from making money on endorsements, autograph signings and social media advertising, among other activities. California SB 206 goes into effect in 2023. More than a dozen states have followed with similar legislation, some of which could be on the books as soon as next year. “This is another attempt by the NCAA at stalling on this issue,” said Ramogi Huma, executive director of the National College Players Association, an advocacy group. Huma said the association has posted model legislation on its website that it is encouraging “all states” to pass “to ensure their college athletes are afforded economic freedom and equal rights.” The NCAA has said California’s law is unconstitutional, and any states that pass similar legislation could see their athletes and schools being declared ineligible to compete. But the board also said it hopes to reach a resolution with states without going to court. “We would hope that all who are interested in the future welfare of student-athletes would work with us to get to that point and using reasonable processes to get there,” Drake said. In addition to pending state laws, North Carolina Republican U.S. Rep. Mark Walker has proposed a national bill that would prohibit the NCAA and its member schools from restricting athletes from selling the rights to their names, images and likenesses to third-party buyers on the open market. “We’re going to continue to communicate with legislators at the state and federal level,” NCAA President Mark Emmert said. “That’s one of the things that the board is asking of me and my staff and the membership in general, and hopefully we can avoid anything that’s a direct conflict with our state legislators.” (FOX Sports)
You're likely right - I can't imagine the NCAA giving up any larger piece of the pie than they have to. I naively interpreted "benefitting from the use of their name, image, and likeness" to mean ALL the things that did that, but I'm sure the specifics of this will exclude any serious income sources. Why give it all up now when you can give a little and buy yourself some time? I'm eager to read more / see this all play out. Just glad we've at least gotten this far.
