Should Student-Athletes be paid for their name, image & likeness while scholarships?

[JVShocker]

Anyone familiar with the Employer-Employee-Compensation Laws? Seems like that's what is needed.

So Zion Williamson could sell Tshirts with his likeness on them all day long make money? How many Tshirts does Zion sell his Senior year in high school? How many more tshirts does Zion sell because of his relationship with Duke, and his exposure on ESPN and the NCAA Tourney? A lot more I'm guessing. So is there any chance Duke is like the employer? And they're compensating him with an education (I know, that part may be laughable), room, board, meals, stipends, trainers, coaches and even more to further his development? Is this like an employee just wanting a raise? Or actual cash? Seems like without the "employer", he's just another guy selling tshirts on etsy, ebay, what have you. And all the benefits these players receive, aren't all of these supposed to show up on someone's taxes somewhere? If an employee saves someone from a fire, would an employer have the right to use that info and his image to show what kind of people they employ? And what exactly are the standards for determining additional compensation? Do basketball players get more $$ because their likenesses are used in promo videos for their respective programs? Any Employment Law people here?

Its a simple question for me to answer. No. No $$. Period. You want $$ for your face, go somewhere besides college. Try modeling school.

[mattdalt]

Huh?

Ouch, proof-reading matters. I was asking; Is allowing their images to be used for marketing materials, a part of the scholarship agreement? Or have universities been using the images illegally for years?

[ArtVandalay]

I don't get why you and so many other people think that college athletes have to live in a vacuum where the normal laws don't apply. Anywhere else, you take a photo of someone, slap it on a t-shirt and sell it for money, and you've got to pay that person for the privilege. Anywhere else, you use a person's name and put it on a product, you've got to pay them for the privilege. Anywhere else, you take somebody's number, take their talents, traits, height, weight, age, ethnicity, and everything else about them, quantify those into numbers and shove those into a video game, you've got to pay them for the privilege. Put more plainly, anywhere else, you use someone's likeness and use it to make a buck, you've got to give that person a cut.

Yet somehow companies have been doing that for years with college athletes, and they've go to just grin and bear it because they're getting a "free education?" What the hell does an education have to do with it?

The California law isn't talking about schools paying kids to play; it's talking about making companies (and maybe the school licensing department) pay these kids for using their likeness to make a buck. The reality is the law is probably moreso going to put an end to the practice of marketing these products, except in a few select circumstances, because it's removing the loophole that increased the profit for the product marketer.

The compensation has been laid out: free college education, room/board, meals, trips to Denmark/Spain, etc. If you don't like the compensation, don't agree to it. College is about learning/training for future employment. As my prior post mentions, WSU/NCAA have made many athletes a lot of money in their chosen athletic career, just as WSU has trained it's business/engineering/etc students.

[WstateU]

Anyone familiar with the Employer-Employee-Compensation Laws? Seems like that's what is needed.

So Zion Williamson could sell Tshirts with his likeness on them all day long make money? How many Tshirts does Zion sell his Senior year in high school? How many more tshirts does Zion sell because of his relationship with Duke, and his exposure on ESPN and the NCAA Tourney? A lot more I'm guessing. So is there any chance Duke is like the employer? And they're compensating him with an education (I know, that part may be laughable), room, board, meals, stipends, trainers, coaches and even more to further his development? Is this like an employee just wanting a raise? Or actual cash? Seems like without the "employer", he's just another guy selling tshirts on etsy, ebay, what have you. And all the benefits these players receive, aren't all of these supposed to show up on someone's taxes somewhere? If an employee saves someone from a fire, would an employer have the right to use that info and his image to show what kind of people they employ? And what exactly are the standards for determining additional compensation? Do basketball players get more $$ because their likenesses are used in promo videos for their respective programs? Any Employment Law people here?

Its a simple question for me to answer. No. No $$. Period. You want $$ for your face, go somewhere besides college. Try modeling school.

[WstateU]

The compensation has been laid out: free college education, room/board, meals, trips to Denmark/Spain, etc. If you don't like the compensation, don't agree to it. College is about learning/training for future employment. As my prior post mentions, WSU/NCAA have made many athletes a lot of money in their chosen athletic career, just as WSU has trained it's business/engineering/etc students.

[ShockingButTrue]

What's the cost of a, say, 4 year social studies degree at WSU? How about Stanford?

[wsushockerdude]

Given the fact that other states are now pursuing similar bills, the statement is clear - the current model of the NCAA will not be sustainable; now sooner, rather than later. You can complain about it all you want, but you might want to get on the right side of history here. I know that's been tough for most on this board, but that's the way it's going to be.

[Cdizzle]

Given the fact that other states are now pursuing similar bills, the statement is clear - the current model of the NCAA will not be sustainable; now sooner, rather than later. You can complain about it all you want, but you might want to get on the right side of history here. I know that's been tough for most on this board, but that's the way it's going to be.

There is a difference between being on the side people decided to be on and being on the right side.

[JVShocker]

I just wanna say that "just because its the way it is", that it doesn't make it right *OR* the correct decision. I'm guessing many of these people are a "glass is half empty" type, correct?

I also think many would argue that 75% or more of what happens at the State and Federal level
1. doesn't make sense
2. isn't sustainable and
3. will only lead to bigger problems down the road. You know, a big steamy pile...

[Kel Varnsen]

Given the fact that other states are now pursuing similar bills, the statement is clear - the current model of the NCAA will not be sustainable; now sooner, rather than later. You can complain about it all you want, but you might want to get on the right side of history here. I know that's been tough for most on this board, but that's the way it's going to be.

Make an argument for or against, but the bolded phrase is one I have issues with. It's lazy and also can be applied by whatever majority holds a particular opinion. Clearly, you seem to support this, so lay out why you believe that.

[Shockm]

Make an argument for or against, but the bolded phrase is one I have issues with. It's lazy and also can be applied by whatever majority holds a particular opinion. Clearly, you seem to support this, so lay out why you believe that.

I agree with Kel. The unintended consequences could be HUGE and affect everyone. Government should butt out.

[wsushox1]

The wheels are turning.

[ShockerPrez]

I can't wait to see how this shakes out. In theory, the money the athletic brands give to the universities can now go directly to the players, regardless of what school they choose.

Im sure they will still be closely aligned, but over the years, the bond could loosen.

Or, it could just turn into the wild west with schools funneling money to 3rd parties for athletes to 'Endorse' product.

Fasten your seat belts.

[Kung Wu]

The wheels are turning.

I found this list interesting:

Specifically, the board said modernization should occur within the following principles and guidelines:

• Assure student-athletes are treated similarly to non-athlete students unless a compelling reason exists to differentiate.
• Maintain the priorities of education and the collegiate experience to provide opportunities for student-athlete success.
• Ensure rules are transparent, focused and enforceable and facilitate fair and balanced competition.
• Make clear the distinction between collegiate and professional opportunities.
• Make clear that compensation for athletics performance or participation is impermissible.
• Reaffirm that student-athletes are students first and not employees of the university.
• Enhance principles of diversity, inclusion and gender equity.
• Protect the recruiting environment and prohibit inducements to select, remain at, or transfer to a specific institution.

I emphasized the one that makes me wonder. How exactly can this work?

[ShockerPrez]

I found this list interesting:[/LIST]I emphasized the one that makes me wonder. How exactly can this work?

Maybe its the language that indemnifies them from condoning entity A from paying athlete A for attending X school, or for winning a specific game or scoring x points. After all, they are just earning money for who they are. Not where they go to school or gaining from their status as a student athlete.

(wink wink, nod nod)