Jax Husky
Larry Taylor did nothing wrong
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,958
- Reaction Score
- 4,440
They are allowing Leonard Fournette to auction off his jersey from the South Carolina game to donate to the SC flood victims. Sounds nice right? Well, this brings up a lot of interesting questions:
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo.../leonard-fournette-jersey-ncaa-south-carolina
"This is unquestionably the right decision, whether it's meant to be an exception or a loophole interpretation. But it also raises a significant legal issue for the NCAA. Is it really about to admit Fournette's jersey has unique value?
The NCAA's long-standing argument is that the names and likenesses of players have no individual value (it claimed in court that ESPN pays for the right to show football stadiums, not people playing football), and that it would be dangerous to find out whether they do. That's why you don't see names on the jerseys the NCAA and its member schools sell — people are buying LSU No. 7 jerseys, not Fournette jerseys. That's why EA Sports stopped making college video games."
and....
"Also notable is that the NCAA decided this cause was worthy of a player profiting off his likeness (as long as the profit doesn't go to him). But this is an extremely arbitrary interpretation of amateurism, and it looks more like the NCAA is just making things up as it goes.
Why is this the only worthy cause? What if a player is flat broke and people want to help him or her out because of who he or she is? Is that still a violation? What if a player wants to donate money to his or her mom?
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo.../leonard-fournette-jersey-ncaa-south-carolina
"This is unquestionably the right decision, whether it's meant to be an exception or a loophole interpretation. But it also raises a significant legal issue for the NCAA. Is it really about to admit Fournette's jersey has unique value?
The NCAA's long-standing argument is that the names and likenesses of players have no individual value (it claimed in court that ESPN pays for the right to show football stadiums, not people playing football), and that it would be dangerous to find out whether they do. That's why you don't see names on the jerseys the NCAA and its member schools sell — people are buying LSU No. 7 jerseys, not Fournette jerseys. That's why EA Sports stopped making college video games."
and....
"Also notable is that the NCAA decided this cause was worthy of a player profiting off his likeness (as long as the profit doesn't go to him). But this is an extremely arbitrary interpretation of amateurism, and it looks more like the NCAA is just making things up as it goes.
Why is this the only worthy cause? What if a player is flat broke and people want to help him or her out because of who he or she is? Is that still a violation? What if a player wants to donate money to his or her mom?