NCAA to allow athletes to profit from image and likeness

[Tom Paris]

It's about the value an individual player brings to the table vs. what they are being compensated for. If a player like Justin Fields value to the university/ncaa is $500k/year (that's a lowball estimate in my mind) and he gets "perks" that are around 60-70k per year... how is that justified? There's no collective bargaining and he can't just go "find another job within football" because there are restrictions on going to professional leagues. Nobody is forcing the universities or NCAA to pay players in this scenario, it's just saying they have a right to make money off of their image, name, and likeness - which grants them autonomy for the hard work and fame they've garnered for themselves.

For **** sake, the NCAA booted a kid who had a popular YouTube channel because it got monetized, that's ridiculous. Amateur athletics waved bye bye awhile ago once football became a money making monster.

This is the thing...you think Justin Fields is bigger than Ohio State Football. Their fans are going to show up no matter who the players are. Justin Fields brings in 500K...give me a break.

 

[BringIt2017]

My post was spot on correct if you read the post I was commenting on. That poster basically said it was unfair that executives make all the money while those responsible for generating the income get very little. Why are those that feel sorry for spoiled athletes not concerned about the poor hard working Walmart employees that need government assistance to survive? And Amazon doesn’t pay their fair share in taxes. Some people’s sense of fairness is all screwed up.

BS. That analogy makes no sense.

I guess you’re trying to say the contributions of someone stocking shelves at Walmart are proportional to the TV ratings that Duke got last year with Zion on the team? Do I have that right?

More importantly there’s nothing stopping Walmart from paying that person more money.

It sounds like you guys want to keep these people from getting paid because it somehow robs you of some phony rush you get watching underpaid talent compete. I find it ridiculous.

 

[BringIt2017]

I also have no problem with how much these coaches and other employees get paid. THEY ARE JOBS. The athletic departments put millions into these kids. It continues to baffle me how people delittle all the perks athletes get...like they mean nothing. It's going to be comical when some of you people pay money to go watch amateur college athletes making hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe more. They will be paid more than what the people who go watch them play earn. This is all crazy to me. Again, those poor, poor athletes.

To be clear - I don’t pay to watch. I haven’t bought a ticket to an Iowa game in years

 

[Razorhawk2]

To be clear - I don’t pay to watch. I haven’t bought a ticket to an Iowa game in years

If you’re watching on TV you’re paying.

 

[Razorhawk2]

BS. That analogy makes no sense.

I guess you’re trying to say the contributions of someone stocking shelves at Walmart are proportional to the TV ratings that Duke got last year with Zion on the team? Do I have that right?

More importantly there’s nothing stopping Walmart from paying that person more money.

It sounds like you guys want to keep these people from getting paid because it somehow robs you of some phony rush you get watching underpaid talent compete. I find it ridiculous.

Zion benefited more from Duke than Duke benefited from Zion. If Zion was playing at Missouri State he wouldn’t have got the publicity he got playing at Duke. If future Zions want to go pro than go pro and quit using colleges to showcase your talent. If you don’t think Pandora’s Box has been opened you’re not seeing the bigger picture. Also you’re naive to think Duke made more money because the TV ratings may have jumped a bit because of Zion it doesn’t work that way.

 

[Razorhawk2]

BS. That analogy makes no sense.

I guess you’re trying to say the contributions of someone stocking shelves at Walmart are proportional to the TV ratings that Duke got last year with Zion on the team? Do I have that right?

More importantly there’s nothing stopping Walmart from paying that person more money.

It sounds like you guys want to keep these people from getting paid because it somehow robs you of some phony rush you get watching underpaid talent compete. I find it ridiculous.

You guys who keep saying these players aren’t getting paid or compensated is BS. Tuition at Duke is $60,000 not counting all the perks regular students don’t get or have to pay for. By my calculations that’s in the neighborhood of a quarter million dollars to play at Duke for 4 years. Also just so you know the average Walmart employee makes $13.46 an hour with no benefits...not that you care.

 

[BringIt2017]

Zion benefited more from Duke than Duke benefited from Zion. If Zion was playing at Missouri State he wouldn’t have got the publicity he got playing at Duke. If future Zions want to go pro than go pro and quit using colleges to showcase your talent. If you don’t think Pandora’s Box has been opened you’re not seeing the bigger picture. Also you’re naive to think Duke made more money because the TV ratings may have jumped a bit because of Zion it doesn’t work that way.

That’s a different argument. Who contributes to profits more - Zion or a Walmart employee?

I agree that being a college athlete is a pretty sweet deal. I just don’t think that deal is a fair market value. I Also don’t know if this is the best solution or even a good one, but something has needed to be done.

Even if it’s boosters buying the best teams and only a few teams have a chance to compete for titles...... how is that any different than today?

 

[Razorhawk2]

That’s a different argument. Who contributes to profits more - Zion or a Walmart employee?

I agree that being a college athlete is a pretty sweet deal. I just don’t think that deal is a fair market value. I Also don’t know if this is the best solution or even a good one, but something has needed to be done.

Even if it’s boosters buying the best teams and only a few teams have a chance to compete for titles...... how is that any different than today?

Since Walmart doesn’t pay their employees a living wage I’d say they contribute more to profits. That’s why the Walmart family is the richest in the world.

As far as how boosters buying players will be different than today is that today that is illegal. Does it happen I’m sure but the consequences of getting caught is high and keeps the majority of teams from doing it and I don’t believe every blue blood program cheats.

What’s to keep a big booster from buying a blue blood program in the future. If Nike wants to pay $1,000,000 per player to Oregon who’s to say no? I just can’t see this benefiting college athletes and what’s next paying high school athletes or junior high athletes?

 

[BringIt2017]

Since Walmart doesn’t pay their employees a living wage I’d say they contribute more to profits. That’s why the Walmart family is the richest in the world.

As far as how boosters buying players will be different than today is that today that is illegal. Does it happen I’m sure but the consequences of getting caught is high and keeps the majority of teams from doing it and I don’t believe every blue blood program cheats.

What’s to keep a big booster from buying a blue blood program in the future. If Nike wants to pay $1,000,000 per player to Oregon who’s to say no? I just can’t see this benefiting college athletes and what’s next paying high school athletes or junior high athletes?

We will just have to disagree about Zion having the same value as a Walmart employee......

 

[ANYCHawk]

If you’re watching on TV you’re paying.

Especially when you watch Iowa's offense