CSNbbs

Full Version: Endorsement Pay
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
New day coming in college athletics?

https://www.apnews.com/a1aacd618278414e8a6b999466640e67
I really don’t have a problem with endorsement pay or selling your likeness if it can be regulated, which seems to be tricky. I do have a problem with universities just paying players.
(10-03-2019 11:37 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote: [ -> ]I really don’t have a problem with endorsement pay or selling your likeness if it can be regulated, which seems to be tricky. I do have a problem with universities just paying players.

Dittos. Do it right and will be a good thing. Do not want the bigs to just pay off players with no regulations.
(10-03-2019 11:37 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote: [ -> ]I really don’t have a problem with endorsement pay or selling your likeness if it can be regulated, which seems to be tricky. I do have a problem with universities just paying players.

I believe the Big Five are already paying stipends above and beyond the athletic grants. But, likely all on the team are getting the same amount. This selling your likeness could create some unusual disparity. How many offensive linemen, for example, could line up endorsements like those of star offensive players? Since the NCAA is against this, seems they could have difficulty regulating it. Is all this headed to court?
(10-03-2019 03:27 PM)Buc66 Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-03-2019 11:37 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote: [ -> ]I really don’t have a problem with endorsement pay or selling your likeness if it can be regulated, which seems to be tricky. I do have a problem with universities just paying players.

I believe the Big Five are already paying stipends above and beyond the athletic grants. But, likely all on the team are getting the same amount. This selling your likeness could create some unusual disparity. How many offensive linemen, for example, could line up endorsements like those of star offensive players? Since the NCAA is against this, seems they could have difficulty regulating it. Is all this headed to court?

If paying athletes (not just allowing them to sell their images on their own) results in an employer-employee relationship between the university and the athlete that opens up a whole can of worms...are they benefit eligible? are they subject to the rules of the Fair Labor Standards Act? etc.
Tennessee State Senator Brian Kelsey has announced plans to introduce legislation in the next session that would permit college athletes in Tennessee to be paid for endorsement deals. He says his legislation will follow the California law and be similar to laws under consideration in Florida, South Carolina, and Illinois.
(10-03-2019 11:37 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote: [ -> ]I really don’t have a problem with endorsement pay or selling your likeness if it can be regulated, which seems to be tricky. I do have a problem with universities just paying players.

Generally agree. Because of Title IX, paying athletes in any sort of equitable fashion is virtually impossible. Allowing them to tap into the market for their own likeness, however, is a great way for them to capitalize on their fame without impacting the bottom line for universities.

A lot of the consternation from the NCAA on this is overblown. I honestly don't think it changes much.
Overall, I could support endorsement deals. Of course offensive linemen couldn't line up endorsement deals the same as the star players, just the same as they wouldn't be paid as much if they go to the NFL, and that is just life. If your likeness doesn't have any market value, which is the case for almost all college players, then you shouldn't make any money. I strongly oppose any type of college directly paying the players, and this could be a good compromise where only those who really deserve to be paid would be.

My concerns:
1) We are already increasingly in sports world of putting the player above the team. Just yesterday, the starting running back and the starting quarterback for Rutgers told their coach to quit playing them the rest of the year so they would be eligible for a redshirt since they had only played 4 games. I hate seeing that kind of thing, and this may increase that overall mentality.

2) What happens when a apparel company sponsors a player, but the team has a deal with a competing company? What happens when Pepsi sponsors a player, but the school has a deal with Coke? The logistics of regulating that kind of thing would seem to be difficult.
NCAA joins in thus eliminating a protracted court battle? Who will represent these athletes? What will be the agent’s commission? Or, can the kid hire representation? How will NCAA regulate this, if it can? Plus, a zillion other questions and multiple unintended consequences. Looks like a new playground for crooks.


https://www.npr.org/2019/10/29/774439078...e-athletes
(10-29-2019 05:30 PM)Buc66 Wrote: [ -> ]NCAA joins in thus eliminating a protracted court battle? Who will represent these athletes? What will be the agent’s commission? Or, can the kid hire representation? How will NCAA regulate this, if it can? Plus, a zillion other questions and multiple unintended consequences. Looks like a new playground for crooks.


https://www.npr.org/2019/10/29/774439078...e-athletes

And I wonder how the IRS is going to handle it?
First of all, to anyone who argues that athletes should be paid because colleges are making enormous profits from their athletic departments, you need to check your facts. The vast majority of athletic departments operate in the red.

Second, if the NCAA allows unfettered endorsement deals, it's going to unleash a free-for-all, with rich boosters bidding for players to come to their schools. Now, I don't really care if a rich Alabama-booster car dealer gets in a price war with a rich Auburn-booster car dealer to see who can offer the best endorsement deal to entice some hotshot 5-star high school quarterback to come to their school. But, all this will accomplish is the rich will get richer, and 99% of collegiate athletes will be no better off than before.

So, if the current system is unfair to those one-percenter college athletes, then remove any restrictions that keep him or her from going pro. Each athlete will be free to decide if he/she would rather be an amateur college athlete or be paid to play (and endorse products) in a professional league.

All that said, I'm actually in favor of allowing athletes to be compensated for endorsements, with the following caveat. All endorsement monies go into a pool, which is then distributed among all athletes at all schools. If the one-percenters don't like that deal, they can go pro.
(10-30-2019 08:33 AM)Flippmb Wrote: [ -> ]First of all, to anyone who argues that athletes should be paid because colleges are making enormous profits from their athletic departments, you need to check your facts. The vast majority of athletic departments operate in the red.

Second, if the NCAA allows unfettered endorsement deals, it's going to unleash a free-for-all, with rich boosters bidding for players to come to their schools. Now, I don't really care if a rich Alabama-booster car dealer gets in a price war with a rich Auburn-booster car dealer to see who can offer the best endorsement deal to entice some hotshot 5-star high school quarterback to come to their school. But, all this will accomplish is the rich will get richer, and 99% of collegiate athletes will be no better off than before.

So, if the current system is unfair to those one-percenter college athletes, then remove any restrictions that keep him or her from going pro. Each athlete will be free to decide if he/she would rather be an amateur college athlete or be paid to play (and endorse products) in a professional league.

All that said, I'm actually in favor of allowing athletes to be compensated for endorsements, with the following caveat. All endorsement monies go into a pool, which is then distributed among all athletes at all schools. If the one-percenters don't like that deal, they can go pro.

How is the athletic grant viewed these days? I knew some guys back in the day who would not have been able to attend college without the athletic grant. There were no student loans which is, of course, a whole other issue today. At least the modern athlete can leave college without a huge debt, which seems significant given the growing student debt problem. This compensating the “student-athlete” above and beyond his/her college costs while his “classmates” pile on debt seems warped. But, paying these coaches these millions is even more twisted given what higher education claims to be and represent. These are strange times in higher education, which is likely unsustainable in its present set up.
Reference URL's