NCAA Moving Toward Student-Athlete Compensation

[greyhammer90]

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...lete-compensation-endorsements-and-promotions

At its meeting this week, the Board of Governors supported rule changes to allow student-athletes to receive compensation for third-party endorsements both related to and separate from athletics. It also supports compensation for other student-athlete opportunities, such as social media, businesses they have started and personal appearances within the guiding principles originally outlined by the board in October.

While student-athletes would be permitted to identify themselves by sport and school, the use of conference and school logos, trademarks or other involvement would not be allowed. The board emphasized that at no point should a university or college pay student-athletes for name, image and likeness activities.

I think most people agree that this was inevitable. It's also likely to grow in the future. Feel free to discuss all of that in here. My primary question though, and what I want to discuss with the board is: How does this impact ND? Should we be happy or be fearful?

Potential Good:
1) The ND brand matters. As a blueblood we are definitely better off from this than 90% of programs out there. (The issue is that it's those 10% that we are competing with anyway.)

2) Market matters. ND is near Chicago. That isn't nothing. We've seen lots of kids who are hesitant to leave their hometown school near Chapel Hill or some other small-market that might be swayed at the idea of being a name in a large market.

3) Less reason for shady backdoor deals that ND boosters never do.

Potential Bad:
1) ND principals. The University will do as little as possible to encourage this activity. (On the other hand, since this is between the player and the third parties, this may not matter.)

2) Our Blueblood competition with less academic hurdles just got that much more dangerous.

3) Market matters for our opponents too. If you thought USC could recruit in their prime before...

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Personally, outside of a small handful of well known players (quarterbacks) I expect the only significant change to be green lighting no-show jobs.

 

[Irish#1]

I have no problem with SA's being allowed to make money off of their own endorsements. However, this ruling is basically giving the bagmen the green light to open up their wallets. You're going to see these guys start paying HS kids in order to get them to enroll at their alma mater with a promise of continued endorsements once they are there.

Now every kid on the team will have a job at the local car dealership. lol

Lots of questions and rabbit holes to go down.

 

[IHateMarkMay]

I'm all for paying student athletes, but I think this could get out of hand. Perhaps they'll find a way to cap it per player?

 

[ab2cmiller]

I have no problem with SA's being allowed to make money off of their own endorsements. However, this ruling is basically giving the bagmen the green light to open up their wallets. You're going to see these guys start paying HS kids in order to get them to enroll at their alma mater with a promise of continued endorsements once they are there.

Now every kid on the team will have a job at the local car dealership. lol

Lots of questions and rabbit holes to go down.

This has a lot to do with the reason the NCAA has been opposed. How in the world can you police it from being legitimate compensation for endorsement as opposed to simply buying a player.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I actually think this levels the playing field to a degree. Places that didn't pay before now can. I see this as an overall positive.

 

[IHateMarkMay]

Wouldn't leveling the playing field mean all universities can pay the same amount? Wouldn't a recruit want to go for the institution who can pay the most?

 

[SouthSideChiDomer]

One thing that will likely hurt us is the income allowed for social media advertising. While we might have a lot of fans, they aren't generally the type who have Instagram to follows athletes. Some of the bigger name players at other schools have more than half a million (over a million in Burrow's case) followers while our guys seem to be in the tens of thousands. A couple years from now that might hurt us, even if we can be about equal in terms of other money. We should probably already be on the phone with NBC about getting players' Instagram usernames on screen during the games to get them more followers.

Edit: Thinking about this some more, while it might hurt us relative to the football factories, it might help us relative to the other academically oriented schools (except for Duke for basketball). So in that case, this might help solidify us as the choice for any recruit who wants both the athletics and academics. The question is if there will be fewer of those now that they can make money in school. The answer might just come down to how much money these athletes will be getting now. If they are pulling in millions, then it might be worth more to the athletes to make their money and invest it and then it doesn't matter as much if they get a good job after football.

 

[Irish YJ]

One thing that will likely hurt us is the income allowed for social media advertising. While we might have a lot of fans, they aren't generally the type who have Instagram to follows athletes. Some of the bigger name players at other schools have more than half a million (over a million in Burrow's case) followers while our guys seem to be in the tens of thousands. A couple years from now that might hurt us, even if we can be about equal in terms of other money. We should probably already be on the phone with NBC about getting players' Instagram usernames on screen during the games to get them more followers.

I agree, but I just compared Claypool to Pittman (similar WRs and similar draft position), and Claypool has more than twice the followers. Jeudy on the other hand has 4x more than Claypool.

SEC, SEC, SEC.... lol

 

[ThePiombino]

NCAA Football '21 ???

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

 

[greyhammer90]

NCAA Football '21 ???

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Unlikely. The current plan is to allow players to profit off their names individually, but they can't use uniforms or school logos to do it. This is likely because the schools want to put a buffer in place so that the kids can't claim that they are employees of the schools. So the idea from the schools is: "You're making money off your name, but that has nothing to do with your educational/athletic pursuits as a student athlete and is between you and a third party. We are uninvolved."

It doesn't take any imagination to see how the NCAA video game would hurt the legal separation they are trying to create.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Unlikely. The current plan is to allow players to profit off their names individually, but they can't use uniforms or school logos to do it. This is likely because the schools want to put a buffer in place so that the kids can't claim that they are employees of the schools. So the idea from the schools is: "You're making money off your name, but that has nothing to do with your educational/athletic pursuits as a student athlete and is between you and a third party. We are uninvolved."

It doesn't take any imagination to see how the NCAA video game would hurt the legal separation they are trying to create.

I bet they could put something together from the pool of players with no remaining eligibility from the last X years and then have annual DLCs which add the new players in this category every year.

 

[Southside Sully]

I have no problem with SA's being allowed to make money off of their own endorsements. However, this ruling is basically giving the bagmen the green light to open up their wallets. You're going to see these guys start paying HS kids in order to get them to enroll at their alma mater with a promise of continued endorsements once they are there.

Now every kid on the team will have a job at the local car dealership. lol

Lots of questions and rabbit holes to go down.

This.. Though players may not all be known nationally, it doesn't stop the Car Dealer in Columbus to giving big money to be on local TV to do a promo.

 

[SouthSideChiDomer]

I agree, but I just compared Claypool to Pittman (similar WRs and similar draft position), and Claypool has more than twice the followers. Jeudy on the other hand has 4x more than Claypool.

SEC, SEC, SEC.... lol

Slovis and Daniels both have fewer than Book too. I don't know if that's because interest in football on the west coast is waning or because the NFL teams are drawing interest away from Southern Cal.

And I don't think its just the SEC (or even all of the SEC). Just from a quick look, Justin Fields and Spencer Rattler have a ton of followers, Sam Ehlinger has twice as many as Book, but Shea Patterson doesn't have that many more than Book.

To me, what that shows is that those tier 1, perennial playoff contenders will benefit because their players get the name recognition. So if we want to keep up, we need to leverage whatever we can to keep up, and the NBC partnership should absolutely be something we use to our advantage.

Instead of NBC messing with the camera, lets get some graphics with the players' names and social media usernames whenever they make a play. Whenever they go to commercial, have a QR code fans can scan to bring them to a team roster so they can match the numbers to the players. And then link the social media accounts to the roster so that a fan can see #6 get a sack and then a pass breakup on the very next play, go to the roster to see its JOK, and then decide to follow his accounts.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Slovis and Daniels both have fewer than Book too. I don't know if that's because interest in football on the west coast is waning or because the NFL teams are drawing interest away from Southern Cal.

And I don't think its just the SEC (or even all of the SEC). Just from a quick look, Justin Fields and Spencer Rattler have a ton of followers, Sam Ehlinger has twice as many as Book, but Shea Patterson doesn't have that many more than Book.

To me, what that shows is that those tier 1, perennial playoff contenders will benefit because their players get the name recognition. So if we want to keep up, we need to leverage whatever we can to keep up, and the NBC partnership should absolutely be something we use to our advantage.

Instead of NBC messing with the camera, lets get some graphics with the players' names and social media usernames whenever they make a play. Whenever they go to commercial, have a QR code fans can scan to bring them to a team roster so they can match the numbers to the players. And then link the social media accounts to the roster so that a fan can see #6 get a sack and then a pass breakup on the very next play, go to the roster to see its JOK, and then decide to follow his accounts.

I will bet $ that last names get on the jerseys permanently within the next five years.

 

[Irish YJ]

Slovis and Daniels both have fewer than Book too. I don't know if that's because interest in football on the west coast is waning or because the NFL teams are drawing interest away from Southern Cal.

And I don't think its just the SEC (or even all of the SEC). Just from a quick look, Justin Fields and Spencer Rattler have a ton of followers, Sam Ehlinger has twice as many as Book, but Shea Patterson doesn't have that many more than Book.

To me, what that shows is that those tier 1, perennial playoff contenders will benefit because their players get the name recognition. So if we want to keep up, we need to leverage whatever we can to keep up, and the NBC partnership should absolutely be something we use to our advantage.

Instead of NBC messing with the camera, lets get some graphics with the players' names and social media usernames whenever they make a play. Whenever they go to commercial, have a QR code fans can scan to bring them to a team roster so they can match the numbers to the players. And then link the social media accounts to the roster so that a fan can see #6 get a sack and then a pass breakup on the very next play, go to the roster to see its JOK, and then decide to follow his accounts.

How about we just put their Twitter ID on the back of their jersey?

 

[greyhammer90]

I bet they could put something together from the pool of players with no remaining eligibility from the last X years and then have annual DLCs which add the new players in this category every year.

There's always been lots of ways to make it work, I think whether it makes enough money to deal with the headache of jumping through those hoops is the sticking point. And, keep in mind, it's not EA that's making that call. EA wanted to continue making the game. It was the conferences and some schools that got cold feet and pulled their licenses.

 

[snoopdog]

I would love to get hired as a pizza taster for a 100k a month.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Wouldn't leveling the playing field mean all universities can pay the same amount? Wouldn't a recruit want to go for the institution who can pay the most?

Levels it in that all players can be paid now, not just southern ones.

 

[SouthSideChiDomer]

I will bet $ that last names get on the jerseys permanently within the next five years.

If the university if smart, they will test to see what gets the players more follows and engagement: names on the jerseys so viewers know who the players are, or something like my online roster idea that can link directly to social media accounts. Maybe it ends up being the case they put names on for away games when they don't have NBC helping but then use the classic blank plate with other graphics to make up for it during home games.

 

[317Irish]

I will bet $ that last names get on the jerseys permanently within the next five years.

This was one of my first thoughts too. It’s all but guaranteed soon IMO.

 

[Irish#1]

This has a lot to do with the reason the NCAA has been opposed. How in the world can you police it from being legitimate compensation for endorsement as opposed to simply buying a player.

This is why the NCAA developed the current rules in the first place. They've basically opened it back up and taken any liability away from themselves. Now the lacrosse player can't demand the same pay as the QB because the school isn't the one paying.

The one positive is the new rule requires payments and sponsorship fees to be made public so everyone will see just how much money Bishop and Tommy have been paying Nick's boys. Somehow though, I don't think everything will get reported.

 

[ulukinatme]

NCAA Football '21 ???

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Unlikely. The current plan is to allow players to profit off their names individually, but they can't use uniforms or school logos to do it. This is likely because the schools want to put a buffer in place so that the kids can't claim that they are employees of the schools. So the idea from the schools is: "You're making money off your name, but that has nothing to do with your educational/athletic pursuits as a student athlete and is between you and a third party. We are uninvolved."

It doesn't take any imagination to see how the NCAA video game would hurt the legal separation they are trying to create.

I bet they could put something together from the pool of players with no remaining eligibility from the last X years and then have annual DLCs which add the new players in this category every year.

There's always been lots of ways to make it work, I think whether it makes enough money to deal with the headache of jumping through those hoops is the sticking point. And, keep in mind, it's not EA that's making that call. EA wanted to continue making the game. It was the conferences and some schools that got cold feet and pulled their licenses.

I don't care what they have to do to clear the red tape, I don't enjoy Madden all that much. It pains me that we don't have a college football game on the current generation of consoles, let alone one that has the playoff system in place. Made some deals, do what needs to be done, this needs to happen.

 

[Irish#1]

Just found this.

To do so, the NCAA will have sort of regulation system to determine fair market value for an athlete appearing in a commercial or tweeting something on social media. That means an Alabama booster couldn’t pay a star player $50,000 to appear in a local car commercial if the normal value for such a spot would be $5,000.

I like how Alabama was mentioned. Freudian slip?

 

[GATTACA!]

There's always been lots of ways to make it work, I think whether it makes enough money to deal with the headache of jumping through those hoops is the sticking point. And, keep in mind, it's not EA that's making that call. EA wanted to continue making the game. It was the conferences and some schools that got cold feet and pulled their licenses.

They should have just made a generic "collegiate football 18" game and left it open to be fully customizable. Include whatever conferences are willing to be included and let fans do the rest. It doesn't make any sense because EA is the most greedy POS company around, yet they refuse to take any of the easy options for a college football game that would be like printing money.

I don't care what they have to do to clear the red tape, I don't enjoy Madden all that much. It pains me that we don't have a college football game on the current generation of consoles, let alone one that has the playoff system in place. Made some deals, do what needs to be done, this needs to happen.

I agree Madden sucks. I'm worried that if we ever do see a release of a new NCAA game it's going to be much more like the current madden games with their stripped down franchise mode and bullshit loot boxes vs the classic NCAA 17 which for my money is still the greatest football game ever created. Even at that time NCAA shit all over Madden. Now it's not even questionable.

Also side note isn't EA's exclusivity contract with the NFL up soon? Maybe there's a light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[greyhammer90]

I agree Madden sucks. I'm worried that if we ever do see a release of a new NCAA game it's going to be much more like the current madden games with their stripped down franchise mode and bullshit loot boxes vs the classic NCAA 17 which for my money is still the greatest football game ever created. Even at that time NCAA shit all over Madden. Now it's not even questionable.

Also side note isn't EA's exclusivity contract with the NFL up soon? Maybe there's a light at the end of the tunnel.

Until fully fledged semi-pro becomes the norm in CFB, I don't think EA would have the ability to loot box NCAA in the same way as they have Madden. So that's the good news.

The bad news is that the amount of money they make on loot boxes and ultimate team is staggering, and the fact that they can't really monetize this game in the same way might be part of the reason EA seems so disinterested in pushing for the game to come back at this time.

 

[ulukinatme]

Until fully fledged semi-pro becomes the norm in CFB, I don't think EA would have the ability to loot box NCAA in the same way as they have Madden. So that's the good news.

The bad news is that the amount of money they make on loot boxes and ultimate team is staggering, and the fact that they can't really monetize this game in the same way might be part of the reason EA seems so disinterested in pushing for the game to come back at this time.

They may not be able to do loot boxes for players, but even in NCAA '14 they had extras you could buy for added revenue. Alternate uniforms, boosts to school characteristics like Campus Lifestyle for recruiting purposes, and I think there was even a version of Ultimate Madden or whatever it was where you could build a roster of past players. The thing that always got me was the campus extras. Some school characteristics like Academic Strength were ridiculously impossible to raise on your own, if not impossible. If you wanted to max a school out it's almost as if they were trying to force you to purchase upgrades. I never did, but it always irked me.

 

[condoms SUCk]

Ok, if this is the direction we go fair enough.
The kids must report ALL income and pay taxes. You wanna be paid like an adult, then thems the rules.

 

[greyhammer90]

Ok, if this is the direction we go fair enough.
The kids must report ALL income and pay taxes. You wanna be paid like an adult, then thems the rules.

Well... yeah?

Did you think the IRS rules weren't going to apply?

 

[ab2cmiller]

Well... yeah?

Did you think the IRS rules weren't going to apply?

I couldn't tell if he was insinuating that all of the scholarship money should be taxable as well.