(10-05-2019 08:50 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 10:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 09:34 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-04-2019 10:37 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-04-2019 10:32 AM)e-parade Wrote:  Does anything prevent someone who is on an academic scholarship from being in a commercial? From having their picture used in an advertisement and getting reimbursed for it?

If it's within strict limits for the amount of time they can spend doing it, then let them do commercials, pose for pictures, etc. within those time limits. This isn't "the athlete has a full time job" - it's "the athlete spent an hour shooting a commercial and gets compensated every time the commercial airs" (which is fairly standard for actors and spokespeople).

Yes--thats against the rules. The whole reason outside jobs and earnings are either closely regulated or flat out prohibited is to stop boosters from buying players. Thats the entire reason for those rules. They dont want boosters paying players 10K a month to turn the sprinklers on an off. They arent trying to screw over players--they are trying to maintain a competitive balance in the league where everyone is on a relatively similar footing. That said--Im very open to options that share some revenue with players without upsetting the current competitive balance and character of college sports. Unfortunately, this "olympic model" concept being batted about does not do that.

So boosters and shoe companies don't pay players under the table now?

The last thing in the world we have in college football right now is competitive balance. Only about 10 teams have a real chance at a championship. It's not much different in basketball.

You can make a argument that some schools are cheating in the current system and not enough of the cheaters are being caught and punished. That doesnt mean the rules dont make sense. Despite having laws against credit card fraud and identity theft, tons of people commit these offenses and get away with it every year. Thats hardly an argument for making credit card fraud and identity theft legal. Just because every violator is not caught and punished doesnt mean the rules are not largely performing the function they were designed to perform.

Regardless of cheating, the imbalance is there, and always has been. It's worse now than ever. This might actually help.

Yes, the California model could help close the G5 - P5 gap, especially for the upper crust G5. Too bad many G5 fans can't see it.