New CA law allowing player’s to profit off their likeness

This topic has 22 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 2 months ago by Staples.

Viewing 5 reply threads

Author

Posts
- 09/12/2019 at 3:26 PM #104061
  3
  
  Dwight89
  Participant
  
  What does everyone think the fallout will be if CA ends up signing this new law onto the books allowing players in the state to profit off endorsements and such?
  
  Will the NCAA move forward with their threat to ban CA schools from participating in collegiate athletics? Will they fold and change their rules to level the playing field nationwide?
  
  I think we need to hope and pray that either the NCAA capitulates or the law doesn’t get signed. If everyone holds firm and the CA schools get cut out of the NCAA it would be a death kneel to the PAC 12. I think that’s unlikely, as the NCAA would stand to lose a ton of money from TV viewing rights and other endorsements if they went that far.
  
  Any other insights or thoughts?
- 09/12/2019 at 3:43 PM #104062
  3
  
  Anfernee
  Participant
  
  No way California Gov signs it. Too much potential $$$ loss.
  - 09/12/2019 at 3:48 PM #104064
    
    Rick
    Participant
    
    Exactly. I don’t think their higher education system can absorb such a loss. Hell, UC Berkley will likely never be able to pay for the stadium rennovations they put on their atheletics department.
  - 09/12/2019 at 4:04 PM #104066
    1
    
    PlainsUte
    Participant
    
    You’re assuming NCAA won’t cave. Other states are considering this and it there will be a groundswell of support. NCAA is way slow (duh) and Calif and other states will force them to address this.
    
    What I don’t like is that it could create a disparity between large market and small market schools. Marketing endorsement and appearances will pay better in large markets than small. Even more recruiting advantage for places like UCLA and USC, even Washington and Cal. Disadvantages for OSU, WSU, etc. More disparity between the 5* “skill” position players (QBs, RBs and WRs) and their OL and defense counterparts.
    
    To get good prices for endorsements wouldn’t players want an agent? What happens with that? To get all college players paid for a video game won’t they need a union or player’s organization to negotiate the terms?
    - 09/12/2019 at 4:34 PM #104068
      2
      
      Central Coast Ute
      Participant
      
      What you’re laying out there makes it a professional league instead of amateur. And if they’re pros, they can be cut and lose their scholarships. Not sure if that’s in the best interest for all college players.
      - 09/12/2019 at 4:56 PM #104070
        
        Stone
        Participant
        
        Agreed, this will absolutely benefit schools in larger markets. Ideas like this get spun in California as “benefitting the little guy,” but it actually hurts the little guy and benefits the big guy.
        
        Also, anything that is pro-union in California is as good as gold.
      - 09/12/2019 at 5:40 PM #104078
        2
        
        PlainsUte
        Participant
        
        Pro means earning a salary you could live off. No, this would be so the players could make some scratch money. They’re very limited nowadays from even having a part time job due to the time commitments even in the off-season for weight training and conditioning. How do they handle Olympic athletes signing endorsements with shoe companies and such? They’re still considered amateurs.
        
        I’d be most worried about the major disparity that could be introduced by a few star players getting shoe contracts rather than the more common deals where a player will sign autographs at a car dealership to generate foot traffic for a few hours on a Saturday afternoon in the off-season. If I were king of the NCAA maybe I’d set dollar limits on annual income from endorsements in order to stay eligible. Might be hard to enforce, but still better for the players than zero now.
        
        09/12/2019 at 6:10 PM #104082
        
        Central Coast Ute
        Participant
        
        Exactly, and a college kid with no tuition and a shoe contract, could easily live off that. If CA goes with this, the NCAA is going to have to change things up. I doubt they want to lose the LA market.
      - 09/13/2019 at 11:42 AM #104167
        
        Staples
        Participant
        
        Honestly I could easily see that happening with the Power conferences. Do away with scholarships and the premise of the student athlete and instead college football becomes a true minor league for the NFL. Salaries would essentially be the same value as the scholarships but the athletes could decide if they wanted to avail themselves of the college experience or just pocket that money. Heck, they’d be making more than minor league baseball players.
  - 09/12/2019 at 4:19 PM #104067
    
    Dwight89
    Participant
    
    Based on how it basically went unchallenged in the senate and house of the state it looks like the legislature will have the votes to override a Governor’s veto, unfortunately.
  - 09/12/2019 at 8:54 PM #104106
    
    Utahute72
    Participant
    
    No way California Gov signs it. Too much potential $$$ loss.
    
    Oh that idiot will sign it, he’s absolutely clueless.
- 09/12/2019 at 3:47 PM #104063
  3
  
  UM4G
  Participant
  
  My first hope would be that the NCAA capitulates, as it would possibly pave the way for a new NCAA Football video game, but I know not everyone cares about that.
  
  If they don’t capitulate I do think it would kill the PAC12 – but I think the non-California teams would form a new West Coast Conference and maybe pick up a few top G5 teams to stay at 10 to 12 teams and remain a P5 conference. They would lose 4 California teams, so add Boise State and Utah State or maybe even make an argument to add BYU, or look at poaching some teams from other conferences.
- 09/12/2019 at 5:01 PM #104072
  2 3
  
  RedRocks
  Participant
  
  I think it’s a home run(or touchdown…. whatever).
  
  I think it is ridiculous that the NCAA has any power to prevent players from making money outside of getting paid to play. Players should be able to get whatever job they want, endorse whatever product they want, and get paid for whatever they want outside of school.
  
  California has way too much influence to get screwed by the NCAA. Everyone wants a piece of what California has, whether they admit it or not. California would likely take the NCAA to court before they were ever shut out of participation. Additionally, I imagine other states would attempt to join the effort.
  - 09/12/2019 at 5:36 PM #104077
    4
    
    gUrthBrooks
    Participant
    
    The University spends 100 million in stadiums, coaches, practice facilities, uniforms, brand, fan connection to alums. Whose likeness is it? The teams or the players? In some instances Johnny Football comes through and its definitely his likeness, other times it’s the University at the forefront in likeness, IMO. When your best player transfers to USC because of endorsements, it is no longer an amateur sport and probably should be broken away from the state.
    - 09/12/2019 at 7:05 PM #104095
      2 3
      
      RedRocks
      Participant
      
      I think you are extrapolating this a bit too far.
      
      The large majority of college players, especially in Utah, will not be marketable mega stars. I doubt that someone, eg. Zack Moss, would transfer from Utah to USC with the hope of making money on relatively small marketing/promotion/likeness deals. If he wanted to do that, he’d probably make more by doing it in the NFL.
      
      There are plenty of college stars who flame out in professional sports. Why shouldn’t they be able to capitalize on their fame while still in college? I got paid to attend school because I had something that someone wanted (good academics). I was free to profit in any way that I wanted outside of school. Athletes should be free to do the same. Let’s stop acting like it is different.
- 09/12/2019 at 5:22 PM #104074
  3
  
  gUrthBrooks
  Participant
  
  Let’s say Wilmore is at Utah and plays well his sophomore year….transfer portal time, I’m going to LA to play ball next year and get paid., right?
  - 09/12/2019 at 5:45 PM #104080
    
    PlainsUte
    Participant
    
    Are you saying there won’t be any opportunities to “get paid” in SLC?? Agreed potential income might be higher in LA, but not if Wilmore is on the bench or otherwise an unknown. Also competition for endorsement $$ is highter in LA due to pro players and other who make much bigger splashes than a college running back who is not OJ or Reggie Bush.
    - 09/12/2019 at 6:11 PM #104083
      2
      
      Central Coast Ute
      Participant
      
      Let’s face it, there’s more boosters and more money in LA to be made. A bokster can say to Wilmore, I want to sponsor you to be the face of my company and make x amount of dollars. He’ll get more in LA than he ever will is Salt Lake.
      - 09/12/2019 at 6:17 PM #104086
        1
        
        Chidojuan
        Participant
        
        Just read “bokster,” which was an innocent typo, as “borkster.” I’m still a teenage boy at heart.
        
        09/12/2019 at 6:30 PM #104091
        
        Central Coast Ute
        Participant
        
        🤣
        
        09/12/2019 at 8:05 PM #104100
        2
        
        ironman1315
        Participant
        
        What does the Swedish Chef have to do with this?
      - 09/13/2019 at 9:12 AM #104153
        
        PlainsUte
        Participant
        
        Agree, but think this is less of an issue from a transfer from Utah than someone who is well known for being a high profile recruit and/or freshman starter at UCLA or USC. Granted, Wilmore is from Inglewood originally.
- 09/12/2019 at 6:20 PM #104087
  
  Toopup
  Participant
  
  While the focus is on football, this will have an effect on all sports. How much more could a top gymnast make at Utah vs. UCLA or Florida? More? Less? I don’t know.
  
  Top skiers? I would think Utah skiers would make more than they would at Vermont or Montana.
  
  I’m not certain this is a bad thing for Utah football. Is most markets with NFL and/or NBA teams, the professional athletes will get the endorsement dollars not the college kids. In Phoenix, Larry Fitzgerald will get the endorsements, not NKeal Harry. In SLC, that football endorsement money (while much smaller) would go to the likes of Moss, Covey, Love or Wilson. Since most of the PAC schools are in “professional” markets, I think SLC is the largest market in the conference without a professional football team.
  
  If this is the beginning, the big winners will be the SEC, Notre Dame, the ACC and the Big 12. Losers will be everyone else.
Author

Posts