California Gov signs Pay the Players legislation

[Lobot]

This is going to very be interesting to watch. Gavin Newsome signed the SB206 in California that gives players the right to profit from their likeness among over things srating in 2023 . Several other states have bills pending.

I probably can't explain this so here you go:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/...r-pay-play-act

[Bearcats1232002]

[QUOTE=Binturong05;n370331]

The easiest and most logical rule change would be to strike down the NFL's requirement a player be three years removed from HS to be eligible. Trevor Lawrence should have been the #1 draft pick last year. He, and other players who have hit the genetic lottery like him, should not be prohibited from capitalizing on their skills. If a team will expend the $ on a 19 year old then so be it.

I wish this was the current situation! As a Bengals fan, even though I like Burrow, I would pick Lawrence number 1 this year if he was available.

[red_n_black_attack]

The easiest and most logical rule change would be to strike down the NFL's requirement a player be three years removed from HS to be eligible. Trevor Lawrence should have been the #1 draft pick last year. He, and other players who have hit the genetic lottery like him, should not be prohibited from capitalizing on their skills. If a team will expend the $ on a 19 year old then so be it. Allowing super star athletes to go pro whenever the market dictates would eliminate much of the need for rules like the one California just passed. By the way, same goes for the NBA. The one-and-done rule needs to go. Guys like Lebron and Shawn Kemp made great livings without subsidizing a collegiate athletics program as an entry fee to professional sports.

I would like to see a similar rule to MLB, you can enter draft pool after HS or minimum 3 years on campus. That is fairest option to the kids and keeps student-athlete amateurs. Unfortunately, this won't work. Today, there's little tv interest in either college or minor league baseball. Same for hockey, though I love going to both at either level. No one pays attention to the G-League or D-league, whatever minor league basketball is. It might work for FB, BB because of the unknown talents.

[Binturong05]

Great news and long overdue. I’m a huge supporter of capitalism.

The easiest and most logical rule change would be to strike down the NFL's requirement a player be three years removed from HS to be eligible. Trevor Lawrence should have been the #1 draft pick last year. He, and other players who have hit the genetic lottery like him, should not be prohibited from capitalizing on their skills. If a team will expend the $ on a 19 year old then so be it. Allowing super star athletes to go pro whenever the market dictates would eliminate much of the need for rules like the one California just passed. By the way, same goes for the NBA. The one-and-done rule needs to go. Guys like Lebron and Shawn Kemp made great livings without subsidizing a collegiate athletics program as an entry fee to professional sports.

[swilsonsp4]

It would be tough to swallow if all of a sudden Ok St basketball has 8-10 5 star recruits next year, each with a seven figure endorsement contract for T. Boone Pickens. Since we know how fast the NCAA moves on these kinds of things, expect it will be several years to figure out.

Or, at least someone who's still alive. T. Boone died in September. But, I get the drift.

[red_n_black_attack]

The NCAA has voted to look into allowing Compensation. Multiple outlets got the reporting wrong in this move saying they were allowing players to be paid for name image and likeness. This not the case.

The NCAA will discuss setting up rules to allow it. There are no rules in place currently. No ones getting paid yet. (Except them)

They did vote to allow players to profit from name, image, and likeness. Now the rules have to catch up to the general guidance. I don't expect to see players setting up autograph booths at the next Midnight Madness, but I can see players appearing in tv commercials. My hope is that the NCAA somehow makes this work such that boosters cannot pay or hire players to endorse their products allowing the rich to get richer. It would be tough to swallow if all of a sudden Ok St basketball has 8-10 5 star recruits next year, each with a seven figure endorsement contract for T. Boone Pickens. Since we know how fast the NCAA moves on these kinds of things, expect it will be several years to figure out.

[Lobot]

The NCAA has voted to look into allowing Compensation. Multiple outlets got the reporting wrong in this move saying they were allowing players to be paid for name image and likeness. This not the case.

The NCAA will discuss setting up rules to allow it. There are no rules in place currently. No ones getting paid yet. (Except them)

[Lobot]

Multiple states have now introduced bills that copy California's. It looks like Florida is about to pass one. There's also a federal bill going through Congress right now that would conceivably put everything on a level playing field.

[Lobot]

Emmert responded to the Passage of the bill.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ct/3859075002/

I want to point out that most of what he says here is politics. In the 2nd and 3rd paragph of the article, he's not telling the truth. Emmert is very obviously trying to protect his job and the NCAA cash cow. I don't know entirely how I feel on this entire subject but the interview is coming from a guy that makes 2.9 million in compensation a year.

[red_n_black_attack]

That effort should start with firing Mark Emmert IMO. He's been ineffective at best on multiple issues and the NCAA needs new leadership if it's going to survive

Two things:

1. Former tO$U TE and Cleveland Representative Gonzalez is proposing Federal legislation similar to the California Bill to give athletes the rights to likeness, etc...This is to counter another proposed Bill that would end tax exempt status for the NCAA unless they pay players

2. I'd propose an alternative solution: pay the players for their image/likeness and allow former players free reign to cash in on likeness while wearing uniform and licensed apparel. This is more than cost of attendance and needs to be a fair amount. Additionally, each player gets paid, scholarship and walk-on players the same amount. The pay doesn't increase for highly rated players or skill positions, but does increase annually with 4th year max. Redshirt players get paid for their redshirt year, and thusly have opportunity to get two max pay years and five total paid years.Keeping in mind that we need an even playing field, plus assistant coach salaries aren't great everywhere, I'd start with the following pay by class:

1st year - $18,720 ($9/hour annualized)
2nd year - $20,800 ($10/hour annualized)
3rd year - $24,960 ($12/hour annualized)
4th-5th - $31,200 ($15/hour annualized)

This is a lot of money considering it is on top of room/board/tuition. Players who get injured or granted medical redshirts get paid, though some of that might come out of worker's compensation insurance. Interestingly, if a player gets severely injured with lasting health effects, the player gets worker's compensation benefits or can sue their employer for damages (which can get big if highly rated player). Lastly, this applies to all players in all sports to satisfy any Title IX naysayers.

Please don't use the argument about cost. 'Bama may be a big draw for tv money, but they need every small school on their schedule. The NCAA can work out a way that ties conference tv contracts and NCAA tv contracts such that tv revenue is evenly shared for student athlete salaries. One side benefit of this would be a bit of parity as I can see maximum number of scholarships dropping in football to cover costs in other sports.

[Lobot]

If the NCAA doesn't come up with a plan that removes the recruiting advantages that CA and other states considering such legislation would have, then the Federal government would have to get involved. I'm not one who prefers Federal involvement in such issues, but, unless there's unanimity, the situation would be inherently unfair to schools in states that don't go that way.

That said, it would be best if the NCAA would get off their collective butts and solve the problem internally. That effort should start immediately. Pandora's Box already has been opened.

That effort should start with firing Mark Emmert IMO. He's been ineffective at best on multiplle issues and the NCAA needs new leadership if it's going to survive

[swilsonsp4]

If the NCAA doesn't come up with a plan that removes the recruiting advantages that CA and other states considering such legislation would have, then the Federal government would have to get involved. I'm not one who prefers Federal involvement in such issues, but, unless there's unanimity, the situation would be inherently unfair to schools in states that don't go that way.

That said, it would be best if the NCAA would get off their collective butts and solve the problem internally. That effort should start immediately. Pandora's Box already has been opened.

[longtimefan]

I think the amateurism model will be gone by 2023. There will be lofty pronouncements on the integrity of NCAA sports, but there will be no real way to stop boosters from bidding for recruits. Then the transfer rule will be jettisoned for good the first time a player sues because he can make more money from his name and likeness at another school. So, it will end up with every player being a free agent every year, with financial incentives to move for at least some players. So imagine the NFL or NBA, where there is no player draft, and everybody is an unrestricted free agent every year. I hope I'm wrong, but that's where it's going.

[Lobot]

I think somewhere in the middle where we're headed here. Should the players be able to make money off their likeness? Yes. However, that creates a whole new branch of the enforcement tree for the NCAA and they can't even handle what they have now correctly so I have no faith that this path won't get abused by schools and particularly boosters.

I think you give all players in all sports an equitable spending stipend based on the sport they play. Football players at every school gets $X, Lacrosse gets $X etc. From that amount you then you penalize them for the next semester based on previous semester GPA. Get an A get the full amount. Get a B, lose 10%. etc. Pegging the stipend to academics is they only way the NCAA member schools can pretend college revenue sports are still tied to the actual function of the university. If they don't do something like this, the NCAA should just give up the amateurism model entirely.

I know there are multiple holes here but the real challenge would be making this type of system stand up to title IX.

[Corporateballa]

The NCAA is corrupt. These ‘academic institutions’ are corrupt. PAY THE PLAYERS!