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

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

I didn't know realize Lebron was involved.

I love taking advice on how to run college sports from a guy that never played a college sport, has no sports administration background, doesn't have a day of financial schooling, has exactly zero financial experience other than counting the benjamins which fall from Heaven above, and probably struggles to spell univershitty.

He's certainly more qualified and closer to the issue than 'Run a Fan Site" guy.

[kcshocker11]

According to Dan Patrick, 5 or six other states already to jump on board.

[ShockerFever]

He's certainly more qualified and closer to the issue than 'Run a Fan Site" guy.

How so?

[insaneykaney]

Should athletes be paid for the use of their image and likeness, beyond scholarships? Yes.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Fox was just discussing this subject this morning. Many questions brought up including that athletes would now be employees with one of the questions being,

“Can you fire employees?” The implications and questions are endless. Many of the people like Lebron who are involved in pushing this agenda don’t even care about college athletics or college athletes. He just thinks about how he would have fit in and he is a 1 in a million player.

Just because they're receiving compensation doesn't make them employees. They could very well be considered independent contractors. The line dividing employees and contractors is razor thin, though, and it's been litigated countless times in the court system. I imagine what's happening now will ultimately be litigated as well.

The key, I believe, to this issue and related issues is to get the NBA to eliminate the one and done rule. Getting the pro-ready guys out of college entirely, and making their millions legitimately as soon as possible, greatly reduces (albeit doesn't eliminate) the pressure and opportunity for athletes to make big money while in college.

In basketball at least, if all the players are 4 year guys--or at least 2-3 year guys--with only a hope instead of an expectation of NBA greatness, there's less hype and therefore less money to be made. In essence, they are, you know, student athletes, not NBA guys biding time and sitting out their one year, all the while anxious to get their paycheck.

Football? Well, that's another story--this could spell the end of non-P6 conferences in FBS.

[ShockTalk]

I guess I'm a bit of a curmudgeon about all this. I look at athletic scholarships as a way for thousands of kids to get help in getting higher education. If student athletes (very few would really benefit) want money for their image, GO PRO, and if one feels they need a college education later, they can go about it like everyone else does. Frankly, I could care less about the big time schools than can afford this. It's all the other schools I'm concerned about. It simply makes the big schools bigger and the other schools farther behind. Such a bill's affect on student athletes at a large majority of schools would be minimal (they simply won't use the athletes' images) except that it concentrates the talent even further.

Next step (or is this also included) is their image being use on TV count? In other words, they're not really amateur athletes.

[Kung Wu]

The key, I believe, to this issue and related issues is to get the NBA to eliminate the one and done rule. Getting the pro-ready guys out of college entirely, and making their millions legitimately as soon as possible, greatly reduces (albeit doesn't eliminate) the pressure and opportunity for athletes to make big money while in college.

But why would the NBA players union ever agree to allowing younger competition?

[Kung Wu]

He's certainly more qualified and closer to the issue than 'Run a Fan Site" guy.

Hey, if you want to pay a consultant with no experience to analyze your business, I'll take your money.

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

Hey, if you want to pay a consultant with no experience to analyze your business, I'll take your money.

Now you're just being silly.

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

I guess I'm a bit of a curmudgeon about all this. I look at athletic scholarships as a way for thousands of kids to get help in getting higher education. If student athletes (very few would really benefit) want money for their image, GO PRO, and if one feels they need a college education later, they can go about it like everyone else does. Frankly, I could care less about the big time schools than can afford this. It's all the other schools I'm concerned about. It simply makes the big schools bigger and the other schools farther behind. Such a bill's affect on student athletes at a large majority of schools would be minimal (they simply won't use the athletes' images) except that it concentrates the talent even further.

Next step (or is this also included) is their image being use on TV count? In other words, they're not really amateur athletes.

Would you rather get a Dexter Dennis/Erik Stevenson Carlos O'Kellys commercial now or wait 2 more years until they graduate. This is nothing about schools paying athletes to play basketball.

[im4wsu]

Would you rather get a Dexter Dennis/Erik Stevenson Carlos O'Kellys commercial now or wait 2 more years until they graduate. This is nothing about schools paying athletes to play basketball.

Absolutely correct. It's not about paying individuals to play basketball, it is about pouring millions of dollars into these kids' lives and families so they will play basketball at THE SCHOOL YOU CHOOSE!

[Dan]

Absolutely correct. It's not about paying individuals to play basketball, it is about pouring millions of dollars into these kids' lives and families so they will play basketball at THE SCHOOL YOU CHOOSE!

This will create millionaire college players, no doubt about it. Not a lot, but there will be millionaire college players.

[abdullah_sharif]

i don't have a problem with it as long as the athletes take that money and pay for their tuition and fees, books, food, and transportation.

[im4wsu]

The superstars have a choice now. They can choose to go the NCAA route, receive an gift-equivalency of $50,000 (just making up a number) per year, receive free coaching to enhance their skills and marketability, receive free advertising for themselves, free mentoring for transitioning to the next level in their career, be introduced to and rub noses with countless successful people in the business community , be shepherded through the process of managing your own time and schedule, building relationships with teammates, coaches, staff and boosters that will be arourd after your palying days are exhausted, and not even take advantage of the educational opportunity. OR, they can instead choose to market themselves to non-NBA, non-NCAA organizations and compete with others, for whatever salary they can negotiate for, without the above benefits of attending an NCAA institution.

If somebody buys a shirt with the player's name on it, should the player benefit financially? The player didn't make any financial investment in developing, creating, promoting or marketing the product. Their mom and dad gave them their name; the school gave them their number and allowed the manufacturer to use the schools logo. What does the player "invest" in the process? His athletic ability? That's what earned him the opportunity to plan at an NCAA school. No need to double-dip!

[Aargh]

The Sunflower has a rather good article about this. The PAC-12 hates the law that passed in Cali.

https://thesunflower.com/45103/sports/california-governor-signs-fair-pay-to-play-bill-to-allow-college-athletes-to-profit-off-of-their-name-and-likeness/?fbclid=IwAR1RhMBDp8VY7VOAprRB3x2R79ijD3x94CMlkeMAtrcY6Dil8QNDjj4sshI