KTLA: California Law Would Allow College Athletes to Be Paid

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
70,757
50,384
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#43
Holy cow, you're looking for some argument here, with yourself, I guess.

Try rereading what I pasted & it might answer your own question.:thumbup:
And, again, here's how the NCAA responded:

The 1,100 schools that make up the NCAA have always, in everything we do, supported a level playing field for all student-athletes. This core belief extends to each member college and university in every state across the nation.

California Senate Bill 206 would upend that balance. If the bill becomes law and California’s 58 NCAA schools are compelled to allow an unrestricted name, image and likeness scheme, it would erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics and, because it gives those schools an unfair recruiting advantage, would result in them eventually being unable to compete in NCAA competitions.(emphasis added) These outcomes are untenable and would negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes across three divisions.

Right now, nearly half a million student-athletes in all 50 states compete under the same rules. This bill would remove that essential element of fairness and equal treatment that forms the bedrock of college sports.

The NCAA continues to focus on the best interests of all student-athletes nationwide. NCAA member schools already are working on changing rules for all student-athletes to appropriately use their name, image and likeness in accordance with our values — but not pay them to play. The NCAA has consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first, and they should not be employees of the university.

It isn’t possible to resolve the challenges of today’s college sports environment in this way — by one state taking unilateral action. With more than 1,100 schools and nearly 500,000 student-athletes across the nation, the rules and policies of college sports must be established through the Association’s collaborative governance system. A national model of collegiate sport requires mutually agreed upon rules.

We urge the state of California to reconsider this harmful and, we believe, unconstitutional bill and hope the state will be a constructive partner in our efforts to develop a fair name, image and likeness approach for all 50 states.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,054
745
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#44
The article goes on to say that the NCAA won't enforce any ban, & thus, other states will pass a similar measure.
Do states have laws stating college athletes can't be paid? If not, why do you need a law saying they can be paid, other than to stick it to the NCAA. And if the NCAA isn't going to ban anyone over paid players, they might as well drop all their investigations (i.e. basketball). If this is all true, the NCAA is dead as we know it.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,987
527
243
48
Boulder, CO
#45
And, again, here's how the NCAA responded:

The 1,100 schools that make up the NCAA have always, in everything we do, supported a level playing field for all student-athletes. This core belief extends to each member college and university in every state across the nation.

California Senate Bill 206 would upend that balance. If the bill becomes law and California’s 58 NCAA schools are compelled to allow an unrestricted name, image and likeness scheme, it would erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics and, because it gives those schools an unfair recruiting advantage, would result in them eventually being unable to compete in NCAA competitions.(emphasis added) These outcomes are untenable and would negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes across three divisions.

Right now, nearly half a million student-athletes in all 50 states compete under the same rules. This bill would remove that essential element of fairness and equal treatment that forms the bedrock of college sports.

The NCAA continues to focus on the best interests of all student-athletes nationwide. NCAA member schools already are working on changing rules for all student-athletes to appropriately use their name, image and likeness in accordance with our values — but not pay them to play. The NCAA has consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first, and they should not be employees of the university.

It isn’t possible to resolve the challenges of today’s college sports environment in this way — by one state taking unilateral action. With more than 1,100 schools and nearly 500,000 student-athletes across the nation, the rules and policies of college sports must be established through the Association’s collaborative governance system. A national model of collegiate sport requires mutually agreed upon rules.

We urge the state of California to reconsider this harmful and, we believe, unconstitutional bill and hope the state will be a constructive partner in our efforts to develop a fair name, image and likeness approach for all 50 states.

Yes, I read that, thank you.

Once again, I'm not arguing anything here with you.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,054
745
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#46
... The NCAA has consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first, and they should not be employees of the university. ...
From what I've read they wouldn't be school employees (i.e. paid by the school). They can't use the school name, mascot, uniform etc. from what I remember reading. Anyone have a different take on this?
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
8,202
6,809
1,743
Yukon, OK
#48
From what I've read they wouldn't be school employees (i.e. paid by the school). They can't use the school name, mascot, uniform etc. from what I remember reading. Anyone have a different take on this?
I don't see how a players endorsement could be completely separated from the university or how a player could get paid through an endorsement without it having to go through the school or the school getting a cut. That player would be getting paid (endorsed) as a result of a product and image that they display and have created with university resources. If a non-student designs and produces something using university resources do you think the school will just let the student sell and keep the profit?? Only way I see this happening is if they admit that student athletes are held to a completely different standard and follow different rules than the rest of the student body (which, I mean we all know anyways but universities won't admit).
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,987
527
243
48
Boulder, CO
#49
I don't see how a players endorsement could be completely separated from the university or how a player could get paid through an endorsement without it having to go through the school or the school getting a cut. That player would be getting paid (endorsed) as a result of a product and image that they display and have created with university resources. If a non-student designs and produces something using university resources do you think the school will just let the student sell and keep the profit?? Only way I see this happening is if they admit that student athletes are held to a completely different standard and follow different rules than the rest of the student body (which, I mean we all know anyways but universities won't admit).
Good points. I guess you do have pro athletes, though, that'll do ads with a jersey on, but it won't necessarily be a jersey for a specific team.

For a current example, I'd think Trevor Lawrence would be endorsing everything under the sun right now in S. Carolina.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,054
745
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#50
I don't see how a players endorsement could be completely separated from the university or how a player could get paid through an endorsement without it having to go through the school or the school getting a cut. That player would be getting paid (endorsed) as a result of a product and image that they display and have created with university resources. If a non-student designs and produces something using university resources do you think the school will just let the student sell and keep the profit?? Only way I see this happening is if they admit that student athletes are held to a completely different standard and follow different rules than the rest of the student body (which, I mean we all know anyways but universities won't admit).
Easy. They get paid for using their name and likeness. The example I've been using is they appear in a local car dealership commercial. "I'm Joe Bob Linebacker for your local crimson and cream team. Buy your car at Bob's Buicks." He gets paid. Who cares if anyone knows who he is. Or he could just appear in the background of the commercial and doesn't have to say anything.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,054
745
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#51
The NCAA has argued that they're not employees for awhile now.
I get that, but with a slight twist it looks like the NCAA is saying "SHOULDN'T" be employees. What I read in the California bill would not make them employees. The NCAA has investigated and punished universities, sometimes harshly (SMU anyone) for paying players. This California bill will give their universities a pass for what got SMU the death penalty.

And, again, here's how the NCAA responded:
...
The NCAA has consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first, and they should not be employees of the university.
...
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
8,034
3,770
743
49
#53
Instead of the California-proposed bill;

Would you support a law that disallowed all scholarship students from earning outside wages?
Only if they were all given stipends and food for free. And given special tutors...... And......

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Aug 16, 2012
1,833
995
743
56
#54
Instead of the California-proposed bill;

Would you support a law that disallowed all scholarship students from earning outside wages?
They can work outide of the sport. Not sure why that misconception is so prevalent. When I worked for student services-maintenance, there were a good dozen-plus football players working that summer including Mitch Nash and Curtis Luper. Well, work is subjective as those two had a habit of crawling into the over-closet/dresser cabinets and sleeping. Many work with FCA. Not working is a common misconception.
 

OSU79

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 22, 2009
10,956
10,700
1,743
Back home in God's (Green) Country
#55
They can work outide of the sport. Not sure why that misconception is so prevalent. When I worked for student services-maintenance, there were a good dozen-plus football players working that summer including Mitch Nash and Curtis Luper. Well, work is subjective as those two had a habit of crawling into the over-closet/dresser cabinets and sleeping. Many work with FCA. Not working is a common misconception.
FYI (everyone, not pointing fingers), Nash ended up serving 20+ years in the military. He used to play a little basketball with us when he was home on leave in the early '90s. Was still quick, couldn't shoot a lick (contrary to his own opinions).
 
Oct 30, 2007
3,494
3,083
1,743
#56
They can work outide of the sport. Not sure why that misconception is so prevalent. When I worked for student services-maintenance, there were a good dozen-plus football players working that summer including Mitch Nash and Curtis Luper. Well, work is subjective as those two had a habit of crawling into the over-closet/dresser cabinets and sleeping. Many work with FCA. Not working is a common misconception.
It's a little bit more complicated than that now. Student athletes aren't allowed to work during semesters that they are competing in. This typically only leaves the summer for employment, and most sports have various summer conditioning & practice programs. So a student athlete is greatly hindered from being able to work.
 
Oct 30, 2007
3,494
3,083
1,743
#57
Instead of the California-proposed bill;

Would you support a law that disallowed all scholarship students from earning outside wages?
This is my proposal. During a semester, the typical scholarship athlete devotes about 20 hours per week to their sport. I've always believed that their living stipend should be about the same as what they would make working 20 hours per week at a minimum wage job. This comes out to about $5K per year per athlete if you exclude the summer months.

Most sports don't give out full scholarships, so this would cost schools less than $1 million per year. That's very feasible at most schools, and it wouldn't give larger schools an advantage. Student athletes would still retain their amateur status because living stipends aren't considered pay-for-play. I hope they end up doing something like this instead of turning collegiate athletics into semi-professional sports.
 

NotOnTV

BRB -- Taking an okie leak
Sep 14, 2010
8,560
6,406
743
Gondor
#58
You can bet your sweet azz that I will NOT be supporting a system where California is allowed to stockpile all the best athletes.