(06-01-2019 02:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 11:47 AM)Mister Consistency Wrote:  

(05-31-2019 10:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The rules wouldnt violate Cali law. The individual COULD earn money outside of sports, they just would be ineligible for NCAA play. Thus, the schools would likely have rules against players doing so.

That's not correct. Any rule from any school or organization that bars college athletes from receiving compensation for their name, image, or likeness would be in direct violation of state law. That means the California colleges would be legally obligated to ignore NCAA bylaws on the matter.

From the bill as it passed in the California Senate:

Quote:67456. (a) (1) A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility.

(2) An athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, including, but not limited to, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, shall not prevent a student of a postsecondary educational institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.

In effect, California is threatening the NCAA with an ultimatum; either allow athletes to make money off themselves, or bar the California schools from competition.

You are correct. I had not seen the actual language until just now. The law doesnt make it legal to earn money outside of athletics---its language actually makes it ILLEGAL to prevent a player from earning money outside of athletics. Sounds like a game of chicken. Essentially, the NCAA has to get half its membership on the same page as California law by 2023 or the California schools become huge losers as their players would be reasonably barred from NCAA competition due to a rules violation that gives them an unfair recruiting advantage (basically the same thing SMU got the death penalty for). Thats a lot of cat hearding to get done in a fairly short period of time.

I betcha that law fails to pass. Very little to gain and lots to lose. Unless your Don Quijote---the risk vs the reward is just not there any politician. That said, the final disposition of the Alston case may make something like that the law of the land anyway. In that case, the California legislators my get bailed out by the courts.

https://sd09.senate.ca.gov/news/20190522...y-play-act

It passed 31-4 in the state senate. It is going to get signed into law.

“SB 206 doesn’t require colleges to pay student athletes or incur any other costs. Instead, it will help relieve the financial pressure on young athletes to quit school and turn pro before they’ve completed their degrees.”

“The California Senate has spoken loud and clear: Student athletes should enjoy the same right as all other students — to earn income from their talent. SB 206 gives our college athletes the same financial opportunity afforded to Olympic athletes.”

It is going to be very hard for the NCAA to argue against this law. It is not unreasonable. It will go into effect in three years. That should give the NCAA plenty of time to respond to this law.