NCAA Votes to Allow College Athletes to Profit off Name Image and Likeness

[huskymedic]

>>This much is certain. The biggest meaning of Tuesday's news is that schools are rushing to study up on potential avenues of what could be next. Could car dealers assure that every football recruit gets new wheels? Could that $100,000 corporate sponsorship in the stadium get divvied up to some kind of achievement bonus for players? Could the NCAA figure out a way to allow NLI rights to start when an athlete plays in the first game to stave off unintended consequences on the recruiting trail? Could recruits sue if they can't immediately cash in?

"In theory this all sounds great," said the athletic director. "The challenge is how you apply it and how it really works. My guess is that it ends up in court."<<

 

[the Q]

I’ll be interested in seeing if those guys face bigger tax consequences since they are arguably no longer amateurs.

 

[the Q]

Also curious if you don’t see more transfers to get multiple “endorsement” deals.

Otherwise you better be expecting to Pay yearly....

 

[TheChamps990411]

Does this open the way to getting back my college football and basketball video games?

 

[InKembaITrust]

This is a good step in the right direction.

People are freaking out on this board about short term ramifications, and not looking at the long term big picture. Student athletes have every right to profit off their NIL. They have marketable talents and have been cash cows for their universities without seeing a dime. Big name players who will be recruited using NIL profits are already getting illegal "under the table" payments from coaches, sneaker companies, etc. How's about we do it the legal way and let this new rule iron itself out over the next decade. Let the NCAA implement revised policies to regulate it so it doesn't get out of hand.

Long story short, this has been far overdue and I'm happy the student athletes get a chance to make some money off their talents, and not have to settle for measly stipends.

 

[FartMan69]

Good. If this kills college sports as we know it even better! I know most people in this country love when Institutions with big pockets cut out the actual hard working backbone of that institution but it's time for you to stop bootlicking. A person having the rights to their name is FAR more important than "the pageantry of college sports"

 

[FartMan69]

This is a good step in the right direction.

People are freaking out on this board about short term ramifications, and not looking at the long term big picture. Student athletes have every right to profit off their NIL. They have marketable talents and have been cash cows for their universities without seeing a dime. Big name players who will be recruited using NIL profits are already getting illegal "under the table" payments from coaches, sneaker companies, etc. How's about we do it the legal way and let this new rule iron itself out over the next decade. Let the NCAA implement revised policies to regulate it so it doesn't get out of hand.

Long story short, this has been far overdue and I'm happy the student athletes get a chance to make some money off their talents, and not have to settle for measly stipends.

Folks just hate to change the status quo. That's literally the only argument against it

 

[prankster]

This will be different than most imagine.

Yes, big schools will be able to pay more to more kids....

BUT...... Being able to showcase talent (what image/likeness monetization is really about) will, necessarily be spread more broadly than one might (initially) think.

 

[GHSWolverines]

Was thinking the same thing. What is going to stop this from escalating into bidding wars on recruits? (way more than we have now)

it won't. Too many factors and it will become very messy.

 

[GHSWolverines]

This benefits us because there is genuine strong fan interest in our team and basketball is king here. Sure, boosters at some schools can use this to get money to players, but they will be doing so at a loss. That's not the case here. It would actually be good marketing for a company like Dunkin Donuts to use our players in advertising. That's not the case for SEC schools, they would use football players. Hurley is already recruiting by touting our brand power, this only helps that.

 

[MattMang23]

Good post. Agree.

 

[GHSWolverines]

 

[lav25]

tremendous first post after 6.5 years. what do you mean the boosters will be doing so at a loss? as opposed to what? recruits don't sign IOUs with boosters that become due with interest upon agreeing to professional rookie contracts. and if they did, the only thing this changes is the size of the IOU. kentucky is also in the sec.

I actually didn't even know I had this account until I tried logging in since I just lurk for news. My point is that schools like Auburn that have been pouring money into basketball but lack passionate basketball fanbases are not going to benefit as much. Sure, boosters can use this to openly funnel money to players, but that's small potatoes compared to the big corporations that want to make profits. Corporations have an incentive to use players for marketing purposes in locations with passionate and sizeable fanbases. People say that Creighton has a very passionate fan base. If true, their players could benefit a lot from regional marketing. Of course, the most well-known and popular schools like Duke will do the best. I'm sure Nike will be dishing out a lot of money to the top NBA prospects.

 

[HuskyHawk]

This is the issue. I suggested before that no deals related to name or likeness until they commit to a school. That should be the rule. No offers can be made by boosters until a signed LOI. That needs to be the rule.

 

[the Q]

This is the issue. I suggested before that no deals related to name or likeness until they commit to a school. That should be the rule. No offers can be made by boosters until a signed LOI. That needs to be the rule.

good luck proving it though...

 

[the Q]

This is the issue. I suggested before that no deals related to name or likeness until they commit to a school. That should be the rule. No offers can be made by boosters until a signed LOI. That needs to be the rule.

Also....use this logic for a dual sport kid like Jeremy bloom. Or even say a Chris Weinke type.

I’m not sure it works. But I 100% agree with the spirit of your proposal.