Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This is a whole big ball of hurt that is going to have some pretty wide implications, in my mind. I have mixed feelings/unanswered questions about it, but lean toward this being a good thing.
 
I am curious on how they are going to enforce the name, image, and likeness of say a jersey? Will the teams all of sudden start having jersey's with no name on the back?

Just curious... I have a few more questions that like the post above me has..
 
There is some thinking that this is a lot of lip service from the NCAA and it won’t go far enough.
 
And on cue, something stupid from a congressperson...

http://kentsterling.com/2019/10/29/...ard-burr-regresses-into-ignorance-and-racism/
From this point forward, let’s refer to that rule as the Burr Razor.

The problem with Burr’s idiotic counter measure to the NCAA’s acknowledgement that college athletes should be able to profit from their own likeness is that the NCAA is steadfast in its refusal to classify student-athletes as employees.

The NCAA reiterated again today in the document that spurred Burr’s tweet that students are not employees. Because the students are not employees, the scholarships are not income. That seems fairly straight forward.

What also seems straight forward is that coaches and administrators make obscene amounts of money for participating in what the NCAA would like everyone to believe is a purely educational endeavor. The compensation for student-athletes and their families is that they do not have to pay tuition or room and board. They also receive a cost of attendance stipend.
 
The NCAA is trying to get ahead of states creating their own laws. They don’t want athletes to get paid so they are just making a feel good attempt to defuse the situation.
 
There is some thinking that this is a lot of lip service from the NCAA and it won’t go far enough.
Because that's exactly what it is. The NCAA realized as other states were going to follow California's footsteps, those other states had a vice around the NCAA's testicles, so to speak. The NCAA giving in on this means that other states wouldn't go further and it'll be a long time before student athletes would want anything else.

Best to concede now than be stuck making concession after concession.
 
Because that's exactly what it is. The NCAA realized as other states were going to follow California's footsteps, those other states had a vice around the NCAA's testicles, so to speak. The NCAA giving in on this means that other states wouldn't go further and it'll be a long time before student athletes would want anything else.

Best to concede now than be stuck making concession after concession.
The NCAA is throwing out a bone with no meat on it. They can say they did something but not give it any teeth.
 
I am curious on how they are going to enforce the name, image, and likeness of say a jersey? Will the teams all of sudden start having jersey's with no name on the back?

Just curious... I have a few more questions that like the post above me has..
For one it should allow student athletes to work without the lengthy paperwork, and if they want to do paid meet and greets at local establishments they can be paid for their time as the business is using their likeness via license from the student athlete agreeing to do it. It will also, I believe, allow student athletes to command higher rates for jobs where their skill is directly in line with the job. D1 baseball players coaches at a baseball summer camp for skilled youth athletes. They can be paid market rate and not base rate.
[automerge]1572418943[/automerge]
The NCAA is throwing out a bone with no meat on it. They can say they did something but not give it any teeth.
Except they've already let the cat out of the bag. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. The NCAA won't sanction student athletes if they choose to work or make money off of their likeness, nor will they require paperwork to be filed before they can say yes/no to a job. Nor will the NCAA be able to make stretch arguments to imply a position is somehow influenced by the student athlete's likeness.
 
For one it should allow student athletes to work without the lengthy paperwork, and if they want to do paid meet and greets at local establishments they can be paid for their time as the business is using their likeness via license from the student athlete agreeing to do it. It will also, I believe, allow student athletes to command higher rates for jobs where their skill is directly in line with the job. D1 baseball players coaches at a baseball summer camp for skilled youth athletes. They can be paid market rate and not base rate.
[automerge]1572418943[/automerge]

Except they've already let the cat out of the bag. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. The NCAA won't sanction student athletes if they choose to work or make money off of their likeness, nor will they require paperwork to be filed before they can say yes/no to a job. Nor will the NCAA be able to make stretch arguments to imply a position is somehow influenced by the student athlete's likeness.
From ESPN:
However, Smith said Tuesday that the NCAA's new rules would not follow the "California model" of a virtually unrestricted market. He said the working group would remain involved in sorting out the details of how to implement new rules and that the NCAA would likely stay involved as the group in charge of regulating future endorsement deals.
The NCAA is still going to stall just enough.
 
From ESPN:
The NCAA is still going to stall just enough.
And doesn't prevent states from still following through. As I see it, student athletes will now elect to go a California school if they rank high enough. I can see major midwestern states pulling the same laws to make sure they still make a ton of money.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.