The NCAA still doesn't get it

[Titpwhami2014]

Just read this on KSR. Here is their snippet on the NCAA's proposal on "name and likeness" rights for student-athletes;

• Allow student-athletes to make money by modeling apparel as long as that apparel doesn’t include school logos or other “school marks.”
• Allow athletes to make money from advertisements. Athletes would be allowed to identify themselves as a college athletes in advertisements, but would not be allowed to reference the school they attend or included any school marks in the advertisement.
• Prohibit athletes from marketing products that conflict with NCAA legislation, such as gambling operations or banned substances. Individual schools would also be allowed to prohibit athletes from marketing products that do not line up with the school’s values.
• Allow athletes to hire an agent to help procure marketing opportunities, so long as that agent does not seek professional sports opportunities for his or her client during their college career.
• Require athletes to disclose the details of all endorsement contracts to their athletic department. The working group would recommend further discussion about whether a third party should be involved in overseeing these disclosures in a way that prevents endorsement deals from becoming improper recruiting enticements.

So, if passed, the schools can still use the athletes to make millions, but the athletes can't use the school's logo, or identify with the school to make money? And you're letting them associate with agents, and expect the agent to NOT make a pitch for their services once the student-athletes turn pro?

I'm done with the NCAA. Just completely done.

 

[Trinity45]

Just read this on KSR. Here is their snippet on the NCAA's proposal on "name and likeness" rights for student-athletes;

• Allow student-athletes to make money by modeling apparel as long as that apparel doesn’t include school logos or other “school marks.”
• Allow athletes to make money from advertisements. Athletes would be allowed to identify themselves as a college athletes in advertisements, but would not be allowed to reference the school they attend or included any school marks in the advertisement.
• Prohibit athletes from marketing products that conflict with NCAA legislation, such as gambling operations or banned substances. Individual schools would also be allowed to prohibit athletes from marketing products that do not line up with the school’s values.
• Allow athletes to hire an agent to help procure marketing opportunities, so long as that agent does not seek professional sports opportunities for his or her client during their college career.
• Require athletes to disclose the details of all endorsement contracts to their athletic department. The working group would recommend further discussion about whether a third party should be involved in overseeing these disclosures in a way that prevents endorsement deals from becoming improper recruiting enticements.

So, if passed, the schools can still use the athletes to make millions, but the athletes can't use the school's logo, or identify with the school to make money? And you're letting them associate with agents, and expect the agent to NOT make a pitch for their services once the student-athletes turn pro?

I'm done with the NCAA. Just completely done.

They shouldn't be allowed to use a school logo anymore than the NCAA shouldn't be allowed to use their likeness etc. Kids at high profile schools will still make plenty of money if they pass this. Not sure about kids going to smaller none power five schools.

 

[bthaunert]

Meh....there are a lot of restrictions around professional athletes too when it comes to saying who they play for. You’ll often hear or see “professional football player”. This is no different.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Well at least it sounds like they've recognized the problem and are acting reasonably fast to make corrections. Its not like the above restrictions are set in stone.

 

[Mojocat_rivals48469]

Actually, that all strikes me as a giant leap forward. We’ve gone form “no, never” to “you can do that, but here are some rules.” Which is a great development. As I’ve said repeatedly, letting kids make money thru exploiting their own NIL is the cleanest way to get to where seemingly everyone wants to be. The alternative - making every athlete at a school a W-2 employee, getting a paycheck every other Friday - is a mess of complications. Not being able to include a school’s trademarks and logos is perfectly reasonable - the player has his NIL rights, the school its own intellectual property rights, and drawing a line between the two is the right answer. Forbidding an agent to negotiate pro deals, that one’s going to be a little hard to strictly enforce, kinda like the no-tampering rules the pro leagues have, but I understand the need for guardrails there......

 

[Cowtown Cat]

There must be some dirt on duke. This would make it much easier to smooth over. I’m just joking. Or am I?! I still think the whole Bagley/Zion recruitments are extremely shady.

EDIT: I still don’t know how to feel about this, paying college players. It looks good on the surface. I think it’ll do more harm than good in the long run, though. JMO.

 

[BlueBomb]

It all sounds reasonable to me.

This is a likely scenario: A local restaurant approaches a UK athlete (let's say Anthony Davis) and asks for an endorsement. AD does a TV commercial. In that commercial, he's holding a basketball, but no UK apparel. He says, "Hey, I'm Anthony Davis, and when the coach doesn't impose an early curfew, me and my teammates love to come down to Bob's Sub Shack. Good food. Good prices." Blah, blah.

People will pay good money for that. Everyone will know the player. It's Kentucky after all. It's not like he'll need to explain who he is. However, the frosh probably won't get opportunities early in the season, since people might not immediately recognize them.

 

[Titpwhami2014]

They shouldn't be allowed to use a school logo anymore than the NCAA shouldn't be allowed to use their likeness etc. Kids at high profile schools will still make plenty of money if they pass this. Not sure about kids going to smaller none power five schools.

But doesn’t the NCAA, ESPN, et. al make money any time an athlete puts on a jersey (with team name and logos) and plays in front of a crowd and/or live TV audience? The answer is “yes” so why are they still proposing restrictions? Who cares if Terrence Clarke films a Paul Miller commercial wearing his UK jersey? To me, it’s the NCAA still trying to flex its power over the student-athletes.

 

[RoyKent]

But doesn’t the NCAA, ESPN, et. al make money any time an athlete puts on a jersey (with team name and logos) and plays in front of a crowd and/or live TV audience? The answer is “yes” so why are they still proposing restrictions? Who cares if Terrence Clarke films a Paul Miller commercial wearing his UK jersey? To me, it’s the NCAA still trying to flex its power over the student-athletes.

schools cannot use players in advertisements or use their images to make money.

What are they supposed to do, black out their faces on TV?

The things people get worked up about are weird.

 

[uk78_rivals88018]

Not sure why the O.P. is so upset or what aspects not liked. Absolutely, they should not have the school logo or do you want a million promotions for Duke? The idea if a player is popular at a program including Kentucky, fine go buy a shirt with their name and number on it. Everyone would have known that Anthony Davis was at Kentucky. But, you add the logo and now the University wants a cut or what if Whitney after he left was able to use the logo in some sarcastic way?

There are some practical problems in what is written above with the hiring of Agents perhaps the most dicey of them all. But, just like kids jumping to the G league and may get short term money and long term misery, you need some type of compensation system or forget about any decent recruits ultimately coming to play colllege ball. The whole thing sucks, but unless the NBA is controlled there is no other choice.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

The school owns their own logo and image and to allow players to use a school logo or name, youd have to have the schools be a party to the marketing deals (or else you'd have trademark violation). NCAA doesn't want schools involved in the marketing deals, and schools I'm sure have their own exclusive marketing deals that would prevent that. This prevents a lot of headache.

 

[Swimcat20]

When in the hell are they going to do something about Louisville? They were caught red handed paying a recruit $ 100,000 while on probation. It's been three years and they haven't done a thing.

 

[kentuckykowboy8_rivals]

You usually don’t see pro athletes wearing their team uniforms in promos. They are usually a generic uniform that has a similar look to the team’s color scheme.

 

[Blueaz]

They shouldn't be allowed to use a school logo anymore than the NCAA shouldn't be allowed to use their likeness etc. Kids at high profile schools will still make plenty of money if they pass this. Not sure about kids going to smaller none power five schools.

 

[Blueaz]

You usually don’t see pro athletes wearing their team uniforms in promos. They are usually a generic uniform that has a similar look to the team’s color scheme.

Yep, Op is overreacting.

 

[Blueaz]

But doesn’t the NCAA, ESPN, et. al make money any time an athlete puts on a jersey (with team name and logos) and plays in front of a crowd and/or live TV audience? The answer is “yes” so why are they still proposing restrictions? Who cares if Terrence Clarke films a Paul Miller commercial wearing his UK jersey? To me, it’s the NCAA still trying to flex its power over the student-athletes.

Check the all the other pro player commercials. Unless approved by team or league you don’t see Lebrun in a lakers uniform.
NCAA and teams are just like NBA and those teams... they have sponsors and products they are already signed with and endorse.
Think about it... Duke has Gatorade but Zion in a Duke uniform is drinking Powerade, in a commercial.
You making too much of deal about this.

 

[Titpwhami2014]

You usually don’t see pro athletes wearing their team uniforms in promos. They are usually a generic uniform that has a similar look to the team’s color scheme.

I admit that I am ignorant when it comes to licensing, trademarks, etc. But athletes do sometimes wear their jerseys in commercials, as Damian Lillard is here. You can clearly see “PORTLAND” on his jersey. Why is this ESPN commercial different than a State Farm commercial? Not trying to start a war, I am just curious as I’ve seen some comments stating the NBA has restrictions. They obviously don’t restrict all of them, so why should the NCAA?

 

[DelkBowl]

It’s no longer amateur sports if you pay the players. At 18 let them go pro and get paid. Until then they shouldn’t receive money. They benefit from all the free training starting in elementary school and no one ever goes back to pay those coaches. That’s what amateur sports is about.

 

[zannmann]

Does ESPN get to endorse players? Zion would have been on a commercial every break.

 

[ScrooDook92]

I don't think they should even be allowed to hold a basketball with the school's logo on it, when doing these advertisements.

 

[Titpwhami2014]

Check the all the other pro player commercials. Unless approved by team or league you don’t see Lebrun in a lakers uniform.
NCAA and teams are just like NBA and those teams... they have sponsors and products they are already signed with and endorse.
Think about it... Duke has Gatorade but Zion in a Duke uniform is drinking Powerade, in a commercial.
You making too much of deal about this.

Check the all the other pro player commercials. Unless approved by team or league you don’t see Lebrun in a lakers uniform.
NCAA and teams are just like NBA and those teams... they have sponsors and products they are already signed with and endorse.
Think about it... Duke has Gatorade but Zion in a Duke uniform is drinking Powerade, in a commercial.
You making too much of deal about this.

I’m not overreacting, I just wanted to discuss. Obviously I’m not a lawyer, or claim to know anything about marketing contracts. I appreciate people educating me on “brand clashes” or whatever you want to call it. I’m just done with the NCAA. They murdered college sports, and are still trying to keep up the ruse as they continue to get rich. The collegiate model is dead, and it ain’t coming back. It was napalmed when all of this TV money started flowing in, and the salaries — coaches, AD’s, etc. — skyrocketed. The college presidents started bringing in businessmen to run their department to achieve profit; as opposed to you know, trying to graduate kids. The NCAA let it go, because they too were getting rich. It’s not about education, no matter how much the NCAA and schools tout stuff like APR. So yeah, as much as I cannot stand him as analyst, book me a ticket on the Jay Bilas Student-Athlete Rights train. I’m all for the floodgates opening.

 

[Trinity45]

But doesn’t the NCAA, ESPN, et. al make money any time an athlete puts on a jersey (with team name and logos) and plays in front of a crowd and/or live TV audience? The answer is “yes” so why are they still proposing restrictions? Who cares if Terrence Clarke films a Paul Miller commercial wearing his UK jersey? To me, it’s the NCAA still trying to flex its power over the student-athletes.

You just don't understand copy right infringement etc. my question is why does the student athlete need to use the school logo, to make money, face it this is not going to be an equal system, first schools like Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Kansas are going to have an advantage right out of the gate, second do you think the Kicker for UK would have made what lets say Lynn Bowden would have made. The key will be can say a basketball player make more money going to college under this plan than say the G-league.

 

[Titpwhami2014]

You just don't understand copy right infringement etc. my question is why does the student athlete need to use the school logo, to make money, face it this is not going to be an equal system, first schools like Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Kansas are going to have an advantage right out of the gate, second do you think the Kicker for UK would have made what lets say Lynn Bowden would have made. The key will be can say a basketball player make more money going to college under this plan than say the G-league.

I have this argument all the time with my dad. The bluebloods will always eat first. Look at how many Clemson/Alabama/LSU/Ohio State players were taken in the first 3 rounds of the NFL draft. Paying players would not change this reality much, if at all.

 

[docholiday51]

In a perfect world allowing the players to make money off playing basketball at the college level is a good idea.In the real world it is a bad idea because

1.The NCAA can't/won't fairly regulate the game as it is now
2.If you think the shoe companies are a problem now,they just getting started bro
3.If Coach Cal benches Johnny 5* for some reason it will hurt his bottom line so he goes public with his displeasure or files suit
4.The disconnect between 5*'s and role players will be a team killer
5.Who runs the teams,agents or coaches
6.Will Duke payers get their own commercial on ESPN during NCAAT

There are so many unforeseen consequences we are on the verge of blowing up the college game,I assume the rule will apply to football,basketball,baseball and every other NCAA sport

If kids want to go pro let them,if they choose to play college sports give them a scholarship and let them be college players.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

Just read this on KSR. Here is their snippet on the NCAA's proposal on "name and likeness" rights for student-athletes;

• Allow student-athletes to make money by modeling apparel as long as that apparel doesn’t include school logos or other “school marks.”
• Allow athletes to make money from advertisements. Athletes would be allowed to identify themselves as a college athletes in advertisements, but would not be allowed to reference the school they attend or included any school marks in the advertisement.
• Prohibit athletes from marketing products that conflict with NCAA legislation, such as gambling operations or banned substances. Individual schools would also be allowed to prohibit athletes from marketing products that do not line up with the school’s values.
• Allow athletes to hire an agent to help procure marketing opportunities, so long as that agent does not seek professional sports opportunities for his or her client during their college career.
• Require athletes to disclose the details of all endorsement contracts to their athletic department. The working group would recommend further discussion about whether a third party should be involved in overseeing these disclosures in a way that prevents endorsement deals from becoming improper recruiting enticements.

So, if passed, the schools can still use the athletes to make millions, but the athletes can't use the school's logo, or identify with the school to make money? And you're letting them associate with agents, and expect the agent to NOT make a pitch for their services once the student-athletes turn pro?

I'm done with the NCAA. Just completely done.

Will you not watch anymore UK games?

 

[CatOfDaVille]

It all sounds reasonable to me.

This is a likely scenario: A local restaurant approaches a UK athlete (let's say Anthony Davis) and asks for an endorsement. AD does a TV commercial. In that commercial, he's holding a basketball, but no UK apparel. He says, "Hey, I'm Anthony Davis, and when the coach doesn't impose an early curfew, me and my teammates love to come down to Bob's Sub Shack. Good food. Good prices." Blah, blah.

People will pay good money for that. Everyone will know the player. It's Kentucky after all. It's not like he'll need to explain who he is. However, the frosh probably won't get opportunities early in the season, since people might not immediately recognize them.

Agree. I also hope that the market for endorsements in a place like Lexington will keep some of the fringe NBA players around for longer.

Would someone like EJ stay for another year if he could make a few hundred thousand his junior year on endorsements vs going undrafted or playing in Europe? I think he might.

 

[UKWildcatT]

I honestly thought there would be these crazy rules, but like others have pointed out, this is all reasonable to me. Actually, it’s way more reasonable than I ever thought it would be.

Not sure why the OP is frustrated with anything about it. I’m shocked it’s so reasonable.

 

[HoldMyBeer]

In a perfect world allowing the players to make money off playing basketball at the college level is a good idea.In the real world it is a bad idea because

1.The NCAA can't/won't fairly regulate the game as it is now
2.If you think the shoe companies are a problem now,they just getting started bro
3.If Coach Cal benches Johnny 5* for some reason it will hurt his bottom line so he goes public with his displeasure or files suit
4.The disconnect between 5*'s and role players will be a team killer
5.Who runs the teams,agents or coaches
6.Will Duke payers get their own commercial on ESPN during NCAAT

There are so many unforeseen consequences we are on the verge of blowing up the college game,I assume the rule will apply to football,basketball,baseball and every other NCAA sport

If kids want to go pro let them,if they choose to play college sports give them a scholarship and let them be college players.

NCAA basketball is a multi billion dollar machine. The players are the backbone of that machine. The players need to be COMPENSATED for helping build that multi billion dollar organization. A scholarship is not compensation, it's a benefit!

When you join the military they give you the Montgomery GI Bill (money for school), while in the military you get free schooling. Guess what, on the 1st & 15th you still get a pay check.

The charade of "amateur sports" has rightfully been exposed. Adapt or die.

 

[mc140]

This makes it a lot easier for a school with a rich alum to buy a good team. We should be seeing one or two bad programs with a billionaire alum become good.

 

[kb22stang]

What they should do is either turn college football and basketball into minor league sports or simply treat them as they treat all students, including admissions standards. But the NCAA wants to have its cake and eat it to. They want to claim amateur status for it's athletes even though they run a multi-billion dollar enterprise and they do nothing to make them like regular students, except to allow the player to benefit.

 

[CoachKcursesAlot]

And we still can’t get the great EA sports College Football game back.Would love for my son to get too play that game. He is 13.

 

[KyFaninNC]

When in the hell are they going to do something about Louisville? They were caught red handed paying a recruit $ 100,000 while on probation. It's been three years and they haven't done a thing.

LSU, Arizona multiple times, Auburn, UNC, Kansas etc, and no penalties. But the gates of hell open up when UK gives Cal a basketball celebrating 500 career wins. A freakin basketball. Only the NCAA can get it so screwed up.

 

[docholiday51]

NCAA basketball is a multi billion dollar machine. The players are the backbone of that machine. The players need to be COMPENSATED for helping build that multi billion dollar organization. A scholarship is not compensation, it's a benefit!

When you join the military they give you the Montgomery GI Bill (money for school), while in the military you get free schooling. Guess what, on the 1st & 15th you still get a pay check.

The charade of "amateur sports" has rightfully been exposed. Adapt or die.

I don't disagree with you in principle,just pointing out how greed and the me first mindset will screw a good thing up.If a byproduct was that the NCAA ceased to exist in this new age I would be all for it,level the playing field by turning it into the wild west and roll with it.

 

[docholiday51]

LSU, Arizona multiple times, Auburn, UNC, Kansas etc, and no penalties. But the gates of hell open up when UK gives Cal a basketball celebrating 500 career wins. A freakin basketball. Only the NCAA can get it so screwed up.

That basketball was completely over the top,it posed a clear danger to the intent and spirit of NCAA basketball after all UNC players can't even count to 500.

 

[kybassfan]

No money. NO MONEY!!!

This is amateur athletics. Period. The NCAA can’t deal with corruption now. Add this to the mix and it will be 1000 times worse.

NO MONEY!!!!!!!

 

[Cowtown Cat]

No money. NO MONEY!!!

This is amateur athletics. Period. The NCAA can’t deal with corruption now. Add this to the mix and it will be 1000 times worse.

NO MONEY!!!!!!!

I have to agree. It’ll be a MESS! JMO

 

[Cowtown Cat]

NCAA basketball is a multi billion dollar machine. The players are the backbone of that machine. The players need to be COMPENSATED for helping build that multi billion dollar organization. A scholarship is not compensation, it's a benefit!

When you join the military they give you the Montgomery GI Bill (money for school), while in the military you get free schooling. Guess what, on the 1st & 15th you still get a pay check.

The charade of "amateur sports" has rightfully been exposed. Adapt or die.

I have to also agree here as well. I’m kinda on the fence. I just don’t know how they would regulate it.

 

[Oboro3_rivals101424]

All of this is bad idea. Recruits will be going to the school who has the alums with the biggest pockets who will be willing to pay the players. Recruits will be creating a bidding war among colleges. I can hear the recruiting pitch now..."If you come to our school, I can guarantee that you will make $1 million because Joe Bob at Joe Bob's Car dealership, who is an alumni by the way, will pay you $1 million to endorse them. Wait, what?...That other school says they have an alumni wanting to pay $1.5 million to endorse their product?...Well, then, let me get on the phone to line up some more endorsements for you..."

Like I said, this is going to be a very bad idea...

 

[bereaboy]

The stupidity in this post is just astounding.

No money. NO MONEY!!!

This is amateur athletics. Period. The NCAA can’t deal with corruption now. Add this to the mix and it will be 1000 times worse.

NO MONEY!!!!!!!

 

[bereaboy]

You do realize that rich people just don't give away their money like this? Nothing much will change in recruiting.

All of this is bad idea. Recruits will be going to the school who has the alums with the biggest pockets who will be willing to pay the players. Recruits will be creating a bidding war among colleges. I can hear the recruiting pitch now..."If you come to our school, I can guarantee that you will make $1 million because Joe Bob at Joe Bob's Car dealership, who is an alumni by the way, will pay you $1 million to endorse them. Wait, what?...That other school says they have an alumni wanting to pay $1.5 million to endorse their product?...Well, then, let me get on the phone to line up some more endorsements for you..."

Like I said, this is going to be a very bad idea...