https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college...234706713/

Bill seeks to share 50% of revenue (not profits) to players. Note, it does discount cost of Grant in Aid. Most of the olympic would receive a very small amount or nothing at all.

(01-19-2023 08:37 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college...234706713/

Bill seeks to share 50% of revenue (not profits) to players. Note, it does discount cost of Grant in Aid. Most of the olympic would receive a very small amount or nothing at all.

That would end college athletics as we know it

This is big news.

From CliftonAve's OP link...

Quote:The bill could pave the way for a number of football and men’s basketball players to receive six-figure payments each year from their institutions.

Holden’s bill, however, attempts to sidestep the labor question entirely, stipulating that its provisions do not, one way or the other, “serve as evidence of an employment relationship.”

Does anybody else see the inherent problems from a legal, labor standpoint? The bill's author is a former SDSU basketball player so obviously he is pro "student athlete." Two previous pay-for-play bills didn't get to a vote in the California legislature. Even if this one does, it still may not pass or if it does pass it will most assuredly face legal challenges.

Not going anywhere if the UC regents oppose it. And they will oppose it because of the Cal stadium debt problem. They need the revenue.

(01-19-2023 09:33 PM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(01-19-2023 08:37 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  https://www.sportico.com/leagues/college...234706713/

Bill seeks to share 50% of revenue (not profits) to players. Note, it does discount cost of Grant in Aid. Most of the olympic would receive a very small amount or nothing at all.

That would end college athletics as we know it

In California at least.