NCAA out of shirt business

[RichZ]

Thanks to Jay Bilas, no doubt.

We recognize why that could be seen as hypocritical," Emmert said

SEEN AS???? Only a thoroughbred hypocrite could say that with a straight face.

 

[ctchamps]

Thanks to Jay Bilas, no doubt.

We recognize why that could be seen as hypocritical," Emmert said

SEEN AS???? Only a thoroughbred hypocrite could say that with a straight face.

Do you think? Although he could be just plain stupid. But my money is with yours. The guy is just plain arrogant.

 

[upstater]

Are the names on the back of these jerseys? IF not, then I don't understand the uproar.

 

[intlzncster]

Are the names on the back of these jerseys? IF not, then I don't understand the uproar.

Can't use someone's likeness or name to sell your product without there consent. If you are not giving compensation, then yes, it's hypocritical. Especially given the pending OBannon lawsuit.

 

[pepband99]

Are the names on the back of these jerseys? IF not, then I don't understand the uproar.

Because you could search under their name, and get their nameless jersey. It's one thing if you could search "#2 aTm jersey" and get the nameless #2, but when you can search "Johnny Manziel jersey" and get #2, something is very wrong.

The Paterno 400 win shirt search might be the most ridiculous, though.

 

[upstater]

Can't use someone's likeness or name to sell your product without there consent. If you are not giving compensation, then yes, it's hypocritical. Especially given the pending OBannon lawsuit.

Totally disagree with this. Can't disagree more. It's the school's name and colors on the shirt, and a number on the back. No athlete's name anywhere. If school's can't sell shirts like this, it's ridiculous.

 

[RichZ]

If school's can't sell shirts like this, it's ridiculous.

It's the NCAA, not the schools. The same NCAA that says a student athelete can't profit from his skills or the popularity those skill generate. But it's OK for the NCAA to profit from the popularity the student athletes at its member institutions? Sorry. That's bullhockey.

 

[pepband99]

Totally disagree with this. Can't disagree more. It's the school's name and colors on the shirt, and a number on the back. No athlete's name anywhere. If school's can't sell shirts like this, it's ridiculous.

Can you read my reply, or any of Bilas' stuff, before going off the ledge? Geez...

 

[upstater]

It's the NCAA, not the schools. The same NCAA that says a student athelete can't profit from his skills or the popularity those skill generate. But it's OK for the NCAA to profit from the popularity the student athletes at its member institutions? Sorry. That's bullhockey.

I can't believe you're saying this. Those shirts don't have names on them. There's a post on the football board right now about a guy looking for UConn football jerseys. I have multiple jerseys, I don't even know the numbers and how they correspond to players, I know I have an old Marcus White jersey, but I was never a big Marcus White fan. The point is, schools have every right to sell the school's name and a number on the back. And the NCAA is simply an aggregator. A big reason they got out (and they shouldn't have) is that they don't make much money on it anyway. The schools sell their own stuff on their own sites or else at sports apparel sites. And they have every right to.

Again, the names are not on the jerseys.

 

[upstater]

Can you read my reply, or any of Bilas' stuff, before going off the ledge? Geez...

Why would I get upset that fanfanatic (the private firm running the NCAA's site) had such search terms? Once the terms were removed, the problem was solved.

 

[intlzncster]

Totally disagree with this. Can't disagree more. It's the school's name and colors on the shirt, and a number on the back. No athlete's name anywhere. If school's can't sell shirts like this, it's ridiculous.

Actually, the athlete's names were right there in the search database, as Jay Bilas so hilariously proved. They were using athlete's names to search for Jersey's, with this very simplistic implication that this is 'jadaveon Clowney's' official jersey. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that a=b.

When 99.8% of people are unquestionably on one side of the fence, and you are on the other, it's a pretty sure bet you're wrong.

Also, you're riding with Mark Emmert here, which by default, is wrong.

 

[intlzncster]

Why would I get upset that fanfanatic (the private firm running the NCAA's site) had such search terms? Once the terms were removed, the problem was solved.

But there was a problem, hence why people were up in arms. Which is it totally OK? Or an obvious issue?

 

[upstater]

Actually, the athlete's names were right there in the search database, as Jay Bilas so hilariously proved. They were using athlete's names to search for Jersey's, with this very simplistic implication that this is 'jadaveon Clowney's' official jersey. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that a=b.

When 99.8% of people are unquestionably on one side of the fence, and you are on the other, it's a pretty sure bet you're wrong.

Also, you're riding with Mark Emmert here, which by default, is wrong.

Maybe Uconn should stop selling those jerseys too! This is a brainless position. Come on. The search was run by fanfanatic. They eliminated the search.

So then why did they discontinue the sale of jerseys.

Explain that.

Maybe schools shouldn't use any signage whatsoever. After all, the name belongs to the students. we paid for it.

It's a pretty loony position.

By the way, I disagree with Emmert's position that the NCAA should not sell shirts. You agree with it. I think the only reason the NCAA did this is because of PR (no surprise there) and they don't make much money off of it.

 

[upstater]

But there was a problem, hence why people were up in arms. Which is it totally OK? Or an obvious issue?

Can you clarify this post. I don't understand your questions.

I said there was a problem with fanfanatic that was resolved.

The problem is gone. The schools, the NCAA, have the right to sell their shirts and logos. This isn't hypocritical or unethical in the least.

 

[tykurez]

The problem is gone. The schools, the NCAA, have the right to sell their shirts and logos. This isn't hypocritical or unethical in the least.

Hypocrisy. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

An institution that prevents (and punishes) the profit off of an individual's namesake is in turn profiting from just that. The key is in the verbiage here ... not numbers and logos, but actual player names. They "fixed" it, end of story. An entirely other story (and debate) is whether that's even appropriate (or ethical) to begin with.

 

[ctchamps]

Hypocrisy. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

An institution that prevents (and punishes) the profit off of an individual's namesake is in turn profiting from just that. The key is in the verbiage here ... not numbers and logos, but actual player names. They "fixed" it, end of story. An entirely other story (and debate) is whether that's even appropriate (or ethical) to begin with.

Exactly.

 

[upstater]

Hypocrisy. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

An institution that prevents (and punishes) the profit off of an individual's namesake is in turn profiting from just that. The key is in the verbiage here ... not numbers and logos, but actual player names. They "fixed" it, end of story. An entirely other story (and debate) is whether that's even appropriate (or ethical) to begin with.

What "namesake"? There are no name on jerseys. The search function was eliminated.

If the NCAA started selling the same exact jerseys next week, how would that be hypocritical?

 

[ctchamps]

What "namesake"? There are no name on jerseys. The search function was eliminated.

If the NCAA started selling the same exact jerseys next week, how would that be hypocritical?

It wouldn't. The problem is that the NCAA imposes infractions on misbehavior. So some of us would like to see the NCAA face some sort of sanction when they do things that are wrong even if the wrong was just an oversight.

 

[tykurez]

If the NCAA started selling the same exact jerseys next week, how would that be hypocritical?

It wouldn't be (although all of this is debatable, really) so long as it just contained the logo and numbers. The hypocritical part, as pointed out by the article and Jay Bilas and numerous posters above, is that you could search for the player's name and come up with results for merchandise. The NCAA doesn't allow anyone else this opportunity (and actively punishes it, in fact) so for them to have the feature on their site is, in fact, hypocritical.

 

[upstater]

It wouldn't be (although all of this is debatable, really) so long as it just contained the logo and numbers. The hypocritical part, as pointed out by the article and Jay Bilas and numerous posters above, is that you could search for the player's name and come up with results for merchandise. The NCAA doesn't allow anyone else this opportunity (and actively punishes it, in fact) so for them to have the feature on their site is, in fact, hypocritical.

I know, but they got rid of it. For him to come out AFTER they got rid of it to say they wouldn't sell jerseys anymore is ridiculous on two levels: one, it doesn't impact their bottom line and two, it's a PR stunt so they're not damaged in the lawsuit. There's nothing wrong with selling the jerseys, but discontinuing the sale makes it into a PR stunt.