ADVERTISEMENT

NCAA explores compensation for names, likeness

ichawk24

HR Legend
Nov 21, 2005
10,224
11,722
113
This is the best solution to the player compensation question.

And we'd hopefully get football video games back.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/26747489/ncaa-explores-compensation-names-likeness

NCAA explores compensation for names, likeness

The NCAA is forming a working group to consider how its rules can be modified to allow college athletes to be compensated for use of their names, images and likenesses. The NCAA made it clear, however, that the group would not consider anything that could be construed as paying athletes.

NCAA president Mark Emmert and the board of governors announced Tuesday that Big East commissioner Val Ackerman and Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith will head the new federal and state legislation working group.

"This group will bring together diverse opinions from the membership -- from presidents and commissioners to student-athletes -- that will examine the NCAA's position on name, image and likeness benefits and potentially propose rule modifications tethered to education,'' Ackerman said in a statement.

"We believe the time is right for these discussions and look forward to a thorough assessment of the many complexities involved in this area.''

The NCAA said a final report from the working group is due to the board of governors in October.

NCAA rules forbid athletes in most circumstances from receiving benefits or compensation for use of their names, images and likenesses from a school or outside source. For example, college athletes cannot take part in commercial advertising or sign autographs for money -- which notably got Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel into trouble with the NCAA in 2013.

Todd Gurley is among several prominent athletes suspended by the NCAA for receiving money for autographs. In 2014, Gurley, then with the University of Georgia, received a four-game suspension after an investigation determined he had received $3,000 over two years for signed autographs and memorabilia.

"While the formation of this group is an important step to confirming what we believe as an association, the group's work will not result in paying students as employees,'' Smith said. "That structure is contrary to the NCAA's educational mission and will not be a part of this discussion.''

The NCAA's amateurism rules have faced several legal challenges in recent years and threats from lawmakers. A federal antitrust lawsuit brought by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon in 2009 challenged the NCAA and its member schools' right to use athletes' names, images and likenesses without compensation.

The case led to the elimination of the NCAA Football video game series, and in 2014, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken ruled the NCAA could not restrict schools from paying athletes up to $5,000 per year for names, images and likenesses. That part of the ruling was overturned on appeal, but the issue has been one that continues to hound the NCAA; how rules are applied often seems inconsistent if not illogical.

"Hmmm, I wonder where the NCAA got the idea to modify their rules to allow college athletes to be compensated for the use of their names, images and likeness," O'Bannon told ESPN on Tuesday. "Nonetheless, as I've been saying for over a decade, this is the right thing to do for college athletes."

Last year, a kicker at UCF gave up his scholarship rather than stop making money off his profitable YouTube channel, which threatened to make him ineligible. But Notre Dame basketball star Arike Ogunbowale was allowed to participate in the popular television show "Dancing with the Stars."

While the Rice Commission on College Basketball avoided making a definitive recommendation on the issue of name, image and likeness in its report to the NCAA last year, the commissioners did encourage the association to take a long look at its rules.

"It is hard for the public, and frankly for me, to understand what can be allowed within the college model -- for the life of me, I don't understand the difference between Olympic payments and participation in 'Dancing with the Stars' -- and what can't be allowed without opening the door to professionalizing college basketball,'' former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said at the time.

Recently, legislation was introduced to the House Ways and Means committee by Congressman Mark Walker (R-N.C.) aimed at lifting restrictions that keep athletes from profiting from their fame while they are in school.

"I am thankful the NCAA has created a working group to examine my Student-Athlete Equity Act and how it will empower college athletes with free-market opportunities," Walker said in response to the NCAA's announcement. "While this is encouraging, the NCAA has claimed to study this issue for years. Now they need to act to fix the injustices in their model, protect athletes and save the college sports we love."

"The NCAA is profiting on the backs of unpaid labor, and I've felt like maybe it's time where we've reached a place to right this wrong. Student-athletes are the only ones on a college campus who have to sign over their rights to their image. And 99 percent of these student-athletes will never receive any kind of compensation from a professional sports organization, so you're basically stymying any type of growth and networking. It just doesn't make any sense."
 
I like it but its going to take some serious structure to allow this. There would have to be significant limitations and administration. We all know that the school with boosters that pay the most for autographs wins the recruiting battle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birdmanil
I wholly agree with this. I don't like the idea of paying COLLEGE athletes. It would fundamentally change college sports for the worse. Nobody is forcing kids to go to college, that is completely 100% at their discretion to do so or not. If they want actual pay, then they should get an actual job. They already get plenty of compensation in the form of education, room and board, food, world class training and coaching, exposure, tutoring, and more.

Playing a sport is not a right, so they need to go through the structure that exists and follow its rules. However, they should own their own likeness and have the ability and right to earn money on their own likeness. I agree with the earlier poster that there would definitely need to be some serious structure and rules around it, and perhaps it all needs to go through the school legal department or some other entity. And if somebody goes outside that structure to obtain compensation, then it should be a violation.
 
I wonder if this could be in response to the XFL and no age requirements? Some recruits may decide getting paid while showing skills for NFL is better than college route?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Niko13
I still think the best option is to create a trust fund for college athletes building wealth through endorsements, that is executable when that athlete graduates from college. If that athlete leaves early to play pro ball or drops out of school, they forfeit their earnings until they have a diploma in hand. It would encourage some to stick around, maybe try harder in the classroom, but also benefit those athletes that have no chance of making a living playing sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sivert and Hawk_82
I like it but its going to take some serious structure to allow this. There would have to be significant limitations and administration. We all know that the school with boosters that pay the most for autographs wins the recruiting battle.

I don't see the need for significant limitations and administration. In fact, I think that mindset is a mistake.

Yes, the big schools will have bigger endorsements and draw higher recruits. That is already happening. It is a fact of life.

Let the free market decide.
 
I still think the best option is to create a trust fund for college athletes building wealth through endorsements, that is executable when that athlete graduates from college. If that athlete leaves early to play pro ball or drops out of school, they forfeit their earnings until they have a diploma in hand. It would encourage some to stick around, maybe try harder in the classroom, but also benefit those athletes that have no chance of making a living playing sports.

So, you're not looking to allow athletes the freedom to control their likeness. You want to use it as a tool to control athletes to behave how you'd like to see them behave.
 
perhaps it all needs to go through the school legal department or some other entity. And if somebody goes outside that structure to obtain compensation, then it should be a violation.

Terrible idea. This just allows schools to continue to control an athlete's likeness.

How about we just let athlete's control their likeness, like every other citizen?
 
I don't see the need for significant limitations and administration. In fact, I think that mindset is a mistake.

Yes, the big schools will have bigger endorsements and draw higher recruits. That is already happening. It is a fact of life.

Let the free market decide.

So you would be ok with Notre Dame/Bama/OSu etc boosters paying kids $10k for autographs as a way to attract better athletes? This would make this a booster competition and be nothing like the current landscape of cheating. Smaller programs with a lot of booster money would suddenly be good. The schools that would get the 5 star athletes would be the ones paying the most for autographs, jerseys and promos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlickShagwell
Terrible idea. This just allows schools to continue to control an athlete's likeness.

How about we just let athlete's control their likeness, like every other citizen?

More citizens than you think don't control their own likeness. A lot of decent jobs don't allow you to go out and make money on you own job related likeness. This is the way most corporations and universities operate.
 
There already is an inequity when it comes to paying players that benefits the bigger booster groups. I would rather we bring it above the table so it can be monitored. The fact that a college kid can't make an appearance or sign autographs for money seems pretty ridiculous. Yes, the brand of the college has helped elevate their marketability but no one would "pay" for their autographs unless he was a significant talent. NCAA is a corrupt entity that has benefited from hiding behind the colleges they represent. Make them pay their fair share.

Side note, ESPN almost strictly markets players and coaches for big events. How many times have you seen JT Barrett or Christian McCaffery at the bottom corners of your screen.
 
So, you're not looking to allow athletes the freedom to control their likeness. You want to use it as a tool to control athletes to behave how you'd like to see them behave.

It is a way for the athlete to generate wealth through their likeness, while still benefiting the institution giving them the platform to generate that wealth. If you want athletes to have complete control of their likeness, then do away with any age or eligibility qualifications for professional sports so 18 year olds with no intent to go to school and no desire to earn an education can take their craft to the highest level and see if they make it. I'm fine with a complete free market system, if that's the direction athletics in this country takes, but as long as the NCAA exists and schools claim to have "student athletes", I think it benefits both parties for them to graduate unless they are able to make a living without a degree. If a trust find creates that incentive, so be it. If they go pro and find success, they won't need the money in the trust fund, and if they find a point in life where they do need the money, they are probably likely in a place where they'd benefit by going back to school to finish their degree.
 
It is a way for the athlete to generate wealth through their likeness, while still benefiting the institution giving them the platform to generate that wealth. If you want athletes to have complete control of their likeness, then do away with any age or eligibility qualifications for professional sports so 18 year olds with no intent to go to school and no desire to earn an education can take their craft to the highest level and see if they make it. I'm fine with a complete free market system, if that's the direction athletics in this country takes, but as long as the NCAA exists and schools claim to have "student athletes", I think it benefits both parties for them to graduate unless they are able to make a living without a degree. If a trust find creates that incentive, so be it. If they go pro and find success, they won't need the money in the trust fund, and if they find a point in life where they do need the money, they are probably likely in a place where they'd benefit by going back to school to finish their degree.

I really don't think anyone has a problem with college athletes making money off their likeness. It would be hard to argue against that point, however its the repercussions that it creates is the problem. Just think of the transfer portal game. Guys would just leave one school to go to another because there are more fans and boosters to pay more money for autographs, jerseys, commercials, billboards... you name it.

Just think.."Ann Arbor Toyota Welcomes top recruit/transfer Joe Smith. Go Blue" Heres 30k kid.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkeyes4Life247
So you would be ok with Notre Dame/Bama/OSu etc boosters paying kids $10k for autographs as a way to attract better athletes? This would make this a booster competition and be nothing like the current landscape of cheating. Smaller programs with a lot of booster money would suddenly be good. The schools that would get the 5 star athletes would be the ones paying the most for autographs, jerseys and promos.

Yes, the bigger name schools are going to have the biggest payouts. They already do. I don't think it will alter which schools the players choose to go to.

What are these small programs with big booster money? Those have already become big programs.

The schools that get the 5 star athletes now are the ones paying the most.
 
More citizens than you think don't control their own likeness. A lot of decent jobs don't allow you to go out and make money on you own job related likeness. This is the way most corporations and universities operate.

If your employer doesn't allow you to do it, that is one thing.

But if a bureaucratic consortium made a rule that every company in America owned your likeness as long as you worked for them, people would be up in arms. It wouldn't stand.
 
Yes, the bigger name schools are going to have the biggest payouts. They already do. I don't think it will alter which schools the players choose to go to.

What are these small programs with big booster money? Those have already become big programs.

The schools that get the 5 star athletes now are the ones paying the most.

I see it like this: Lets say Iowa is recruiting against any big program for an athlete. Iowa had decent boosters, but they will never win against those schools. Alot of the big programs will cheat, but not all the athletes will cheat. If paying them in this manner is now legal, they aren't cheating.

IF this happened, Iowa would get robbed in the transfer portal. ND's coach could need a TE and march over to IC and say to their stud TE " come to ND and South Bend Ford will put you on a billboard and give you $30k tomorrow." Oh and our studs make about 100k a year on autographs. What does Iowa give you?

And what coaches are going to be ok with players doing media/autogrpah tours during the off season?
 
Iowa rarely beats big name programs for recruits. So nothing will change there.

The Iowa stud TE will be making good money in IC. Sure, he could maybe make more if he were with ND. But he may transfer to ND and fail to be a starter, or start but not catch many balls. And they have to sit out a year. There is a risk there. I don't think many players will transfer for marginal dollars.

I guess you could foresee more players transferring from G5 to P5 with the lure of endorsement dollars. But there are already transfer rules in place, they have to sit out a year, etc.

Iowa is a 2nd tier program nationally. They'd benefit from such a change probably more than they'd be hurt.

Oh, the coaches will be mad? Well, shit, we'd better not do anything to allow a player to do something their coach doesn't like.
 
Lol at everyone here that enjoys telling 19 year olds how to live their lives. If KF can be paid millions to win 9 games TJ can be paid something too.
 
Lol at everyone here that enjoys telling 19 year olds how to live their lives. If KF can be paid millions to win 9 games TJ can be paid something too.

No one is telling kids how to live their lives, that is a blatant and egregious oversimplification of what’s going on here. These kids chose by their own free will to sign up to play under the current constraints of the ncaa rules. This is not the coercion of downtrodden youth with no options other than to sign up for indentured servitude. They signed a contract to play under specific rules.

Choosing to play a game for a university is a glorious first world choice allowing kids to continue to play a game while getting a world class education for free. Most kids their age leave college with a few hundred thousand dollars in student load debt. Scholarship athletes leave with none.

If the kids don’t like the rules of the ncaa and want to be paid they have a choice to enter the cfl xfl or get another job. Most everyone won’t because interning at the nfl feeder system that is division 1 college football is the best path to success in football.

KF is the longest tenured coach in the country and top 5 in wins in the history of the big ten conference. He doesn’t need to apologize for anything. Period. Apples and oranges comparing a professional with hall of fame credentials to amateur athletes that haven’t proven anything professionally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRingo
No one is telling kids how to live their lives, that is a blatant and egregious oversimplification of what’s going on here. These kids chose by their own free will to sign up to play under the current constraints of the ncaa rules. This is not the coercion of downtrodden youth with no options other than to sign up for indentured servitude. They signed a contract to play under specific rules.

Choosing to play a game for a university is a glorious first world choice allowing kids to continue to play a game while getting a world class education for free. Most kids their age leave college with a few hundred thousand dollars in student load debt. Scholarship athletes leave with none.

If the kids don’t like the rules of the ncaa and want to be paid they have a choice to enter the cfl xfl or get another job. Most everyone won’t because interning at the nfl feeder system that is division 1 college football is the best path to success in football.

KF is the longest tenured coach in the country and top 5 in wins in the history of the big ten conference. He doesn’t need to apologize for anything. Period. Apples and oranges comparing a professional with hall of fame credentials to amateur athletes that haven’t proven anything professionally.

They're looking to change the rules and you're arguing for the status quo. KF doesn't need to apologize, sure, but those who think Hock or Fant didn't deserve some $$$ after all the TV eyes watched Iowa beat OSU in 2017 like to keep their head in the sand. It's all for entertainment and damn were they entertaining.
 
They're looking to change the rules and you're arguing for the status quo. KF doesn't need to apologize, sure, but those who think Hock or Fant didn't deserve some $$$ after all the TV eyes watched Iowa beat OSU in 2017 like to keep their head in the sand. It's all for entertainment and damn were they entertaining.[/QUOTE]

I’m pretty indifferent as far as the rule goes but of some of the discussion has been about people telling kids what to do with their lives. I don’t think anyone really is. All I’m saying is these are the current rules and the players enter into the situation with full knowledge of the arrangement. The implied coercion or wrong doing is what I’m arguing against, and not arguing for the status quo.

Also both hock and Fant just got paid handsomely for excelling, as did a lot of other players that were in that game.
 
I can see both sides. Not fair for a college athlete to see nothing from the sale of his jersey or autographs. But this would be so easy to exploit as a way to pay athletes under the table to attend a school. I think ncaa would need to set a yearly limit, like 20k.
 
ADVERTISEMENT