- 74,588
- 24,011
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2008
This is the best way to pay the athletes without having title 9 issues and all the other nonsense that comes from joe qb making 5 mill from the school while Jane field hockey making $7
California signs 1st in nation law for College athletes to make money VOL. NCAA endgame
- 40,829
- 41,878
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
...and that could be a problem.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
that's still gonna happen, Jane field gonna betta start thirst trappin on da gram
langfor5
Supporter
- 6,821
- 5,011
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
The NCAA has only themselves to blame. They knew this day was coming but didn't adapt or want to change. Reminds me of BlackBerry...they refused to change, believed the one thing they did was good enough but eventually everyone and everything around them changed and by the time the realized it was to late.
These rulings are going to open up a pandora's box of complications; rampant cheating, sham endorsement deals and the complete professionalization of college sports.
These rulings are going to open up a pandora's box of complications; rampant cheating, sham endorsement deals and the complete professionalization of college sports.
- 87,159
- 115,037
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
Florida is in the game now:
- 11,143
- 17,643
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2012
Agreed. The NCAAs refusal to compromise and smug approach when it came to this matter is a big part to why things are where they are today. College sports is a business.
As much as they want to push that “student athlete” narrative. When you got top tier college coaches making multi million dollar salaries, networks paying billions to watch the games, and coaches being able to disregard contracts and jump from school to school despite players committing to a school because that coach recruited him, it’s a bad precedent.
The way the current format is. I couldn’t blame a one and done type guy like Zion if they just openly broke NCAA rules and did whatever they wanted during their semester on campus. It’s not going to affect their draft stock and if anyone gets in trouble it’ll be the university, but that doesn’t affect him personally.
- 10,459
- 8,935
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2011
Agree
If they would've been fair from the get go wouldn't be an issue. They had so much power they had little incentive to change .
- 14,422
- 16,738
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
PAC 10 I mean 12 >
- 44
- 22
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
Finally! About damn time considering all the money their games, merchandise, etc. make for their school’s
- 87,159
- 115,037
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
Sadly the PAC-12 is against this bill.
- 14,422
- 16,738
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
As they prob should. UCLA and Stanford probably hold more sports titles than any other skoo.
California jucos >
- 87,159
- 115,037
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
- 22,638
- 45,725
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2014
I respectfully disagree...If Lamelo and RJ go in the lottery I expect even more players to bet on themselves and leave for overseas.
- 11,161
- 12,128
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2012
The value of being a marquee player at a team like Duke, UNC, UCLA, etc. will never go away.
lightweight champion
Banned
- 13,481
- 5,271
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2007
No it won’t, that’s where the marketing dollars are.
- 63,609
- 50,737
- Joined
- May 23, 2005
- 40,829
- 41,878
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
whose that in ur avy???
Jessica Kylie
- 156,452
- 136,059
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
Interesting perspective on the topic.
On this episode, we dig into the newly signed ‘Fair Pay to Play Act’, allowing college athletes to make money off of their likeness. Of course it’s a step in the right direction and a game changer. However, there’s another side to the coin. Gil flips it over and looks at the entry point for the brands and companies looking to make money off of the players.
Who really benefits? Why it all revolves around the one-and-done players. And why it’s mainly about basketball versus other sports.
We’ll see how things shake out as this thing takes shape and what the actual money looks like. There’s a big winner here and Gil points out that is the bigger play.
On this episode, we dig into the newly signed ‘Fair Pay to Play Act’, allowing college athletes to make money off of their likeness. Of course it’s a step in the right direction and a game changer. However, there’s another side to the coin. Gil flips it over and looks at the entry point for the brands and companies looking to make money off of the players.
Who really benefits? Why it all revolves around the one-and-done players. And why it’s mainly about basketball versus other sports.
We’ll see how things shake out as this thing takes shape and what the actual money looks like. There’s a big winner here and Gil points out that is the bigger play.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
- 22,638
- 45,725
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2014
I just hope this compensating a player means we can get our college sport title video games back.
- 156,452
- 136,059
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
- 22,638
- 45,725
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2014
That isn't how this works man.
I know...but one can dream can't he?
- 37,811
- 52,267
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
i wonder how much nike is gonna drop on a college athlete
- 5,003
- 6,111
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2018
Cali about to corner the market on top college athletes if other states dont adapt quickly. Could be huge in states where college sports rule. This **** is chess not checkers....
- 11,143
- 17,643
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2012
****s going to be funny when top recruits basically say “**** your little bowl games and tournaments, pay me” and go to Cali schools.
and pay me as in endorsements and profiting off their name/image. I know they aren’t getting paid directly by the university.
and pay me as in endorsements and profiting off their name/image. I know they aren’t getting paid directly by the university.
