Serious? It's a multi billion dollar industry. It's far from dead. Same with any other sport. The difference is, a lot of people are watching it on TV.
Let the chaos begin... CA gov signs pay for play bill
- Thread starter HailToPitt725
- Start date
That is possible. Michael Jordan refused to join the NBPA because he wanted to sell his own image to video game companies separately from the union. But if you have enough big sponsors, I think the vast majority of players would get on board. The biggest stars in the college sport are the coaches, not the players, the players would benefit more from a collective licensing agreement.
Didn't the Northwestern football team try to unionize a few years ago but it didn’t work out? I forget the story.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Imagine a world where there are big schools that dominate the landscape every season because they have a great brand and a ton of wealthy donors and the organization in charge struggles to enforce the rules.
Didn't think of what you posted but yes that will happen. You're right there will be all kinds of "work arounds" which will make this as bad as the current illegal process.
I would think if some superstar pulls down a lot of money someone will have to figure out what a lot equals he or she should give up the scholarship.
They tried to form a union through an NLRB union election (it's a private school.) The NLRB said they could not because they are not employees. Most college football programs are state schools and therefore would be covered by state labor relations boards, not the federal labor board (which covers private sector employees.)
So that's the short version. But I could imagine something other than a traditional employees' labor union -- more of a professional licensing association that negotiates their images/names to members who join it to Nike, EA, etc.
Politicians in CA think they know something that others don't.......... In reality they do not!
That's the nature of politicians, not California.
So what is the real world application here? If PA passed a similar law, Kenny Pickett could get paid $10,000 from #1 Cochran to do TV commercials? A women’s soccer player could get paid $1,000 to appear at a kids camp? I’m sure there are bigger rabbit holes, but on a non- conspiracy theory level, this seems reasonable and fair to me and may not necessarily bring the entire system down if the NCAA relents and works with government officials to implement a fair system.
CA politicians are not like any other. They want climate change yet have yachts and private jets. They talk about economic inequality yet they are rich themselves. Why not just donate their money to the poor? They are totally hypocritical.
Given to blanket hyperbole much? (By the way, to the Romper, I mean Locker Room in 5, 4, 3 . . .)
To be honest with you IMO PITT has noone who would make a dime under this new law.
I don't think appearing a soccer camps is one of the included events. I believe it comes down to likeness, image, shirts, media, commercials, etc.
If the new law included events boosters could run events and hand the player $ 100k. I don't think this is the intent.
I doubt Conner would have benefited for this new law. It applies to larger college sports personalities who have national appeal like Zion.
In that scenario, how are they going to distinguish the paid from the unpaid?
That’s not going to happen, the NCAA is going to kick and scream about this but once other states pass similar laws they’re pretty much checkmated.
There is a reason the law doesn't go into effect until 2023. Everyone involved in the bill has stated that the main purpose is to force the NCAA to take action. The NCAA has repeatedly stated that they want to update their rules, but has done nothing.
The NCAA created the Independent commission on college basketball to make recommendations on how to restore integrity and modernize the NCAA rules. This only happened IN RESPONSE to the FBI investigation.
On Name, Image, and Likeness the commission states
This was released in April of 2018. The NCAA didn't create a working group to investigate NIL until May 2019 in response to the California bill picking up steam. The working group announcement states in its first line
The NCAA had no interest in taking up this issue until a state took the first step and forced the issue. If California legislators didn't act, the NCAA would have ignored the issue indefinitely. The actual bill was amended to include
The NCAA created the Independent commission on college basketball to make recommendations on how to restore integrity and modernize the NCAA rules. This only happened IN RESPONSE to the FBI investigation.
On Name, Image, and Likeness the commission states
This was released in April of 2018. The NCAA didn't create a working group to investigate NIL until May 2019 in response to the California bill picking up steam. The working group announcement states in its first line
The NCAA had no interest in taking up this issue until a state took the first step and forced the issue. If California legislators didn't act, the NCAA would have ignored the issue indefinitely. The actual bill was amended to include
They aren't trying to do this alone, but to allow other states to enact similar laws and force the NCAA to act. New York, Washington, Colorado, South Carolina, and North Carolina all have similar bills in the works. Let's see the NCAA ban all California schools, UNC, Duke, Clemson, South Carolina, Washington, Colorado, and Syracuse from post-season football and basketball games.
I believe it because I see it! Reality is what actually happened and not idealistic or hunches. CA politicians tell you to do things that they themselves do not do. Question authority
I happen to live in Assembly district 37 and State Senate district 35, and am personally acquainted with both representatives, and can tell you that they don't have any yachts. I'm not as familiar with the local Congresswoman, but she doesn't strike me as the yacht type either.
Could make schools in big urban markets more attractive to recruits that could get endorsement deals.
The long term impact is that this will further differentiate schools with the greatest resources from everyone else. So, I could imagine a league of just 25 or 30 schools that are beyond the P5...operating as a semi pro league.
The long term impact is that this will further differentiate schools with the greatest resources from everyone else. So, I could imagine a league of just 25 or 30 schools that are beyond the P5...operating as a semi pro league.
Boston College is in a big urban market, yet I doubt this will help them one bit.
I see it helping schools with big fan bases, regardless of the size of the city where the school is located.
Clemson, SC has less than 15,000 residents, and I'd guess players would be able to make a whole lot more money there than in Boston.
Even closer to each other is Winston-Salem and Clemson. I'm going to guess the Wake Forest players wouldn't touch the money Clemson players might have available to them if this passes.
The bottom line is the rich will get richer, because it won't be an equitable distribution of money.
You have an incorrect understanding. This law would make it OK to pay an athlete to come sign autographs some afternoon at the local car dealer. It would make it OK to pay an athlete to appear at and/or endorse your soccer camp or football camp or whatever.
So if I'm a rich car dealer, I can make it be known that starters on the Pitt basketball team will get paid $10,000 or $20,000 or $50,000 or whatever to come out to my dealership and sign autographs a couple times a year. Or that skill position football players will get $50,000, non-skill guys will get $25,000 and backups will get $10,000. And it would all be legal.
And you can bet your butt that there are boosters at Alabama and Ohio State and Penn State and a few others that would jump on that with both feet.
Agreed, that certain schools will just get richer. But since you bring up Boston, what would happen if all those wealthy Harvard and Wall Street connected alum start using various business vehicles to pay athletes?
Harvard v. Alabama in the National Championship Game?
There may be all kinds of unexpected outcomes when athletes are paid outside of just pocket money from their schools.
Yep. Would be just a free market for the programs with large donors and fanbases to openly pay to recruit. The bagman will no longer be needed. Schools like pitt wont have a chance. Even a smaller one they do now.
Sure, if some Harvard guy wants to pay the players big money, and if the best players want to go there, it could happen. Not likely at all, but it could happen. On the surface, there doesn't seem to be anything to stop it if this passes.
Would Nevin Shapiro's antics at Miami now be legal?
Now, that would open a can of worms.
At least with this we can end the admin is cheap routine. People will finally really see how small a do or base and business support we have.
Right, but now Shapiro has more competition.
Stanford is the West Coast version of Harvard, at least academically. Not far fetched that if Harvard wanted to play big time football or maybe just basketball, they’d have the resources beyond even SEC schools. I’m really just illustrating what begins to become possible once players can be paid outside of their own institutions. (And Stanford (Google), Washington (Microsoft), and Oregon (Nike), could become juggernauts.)
And of course, Pitt (Clark Bar and Primantis) would have the same opportunity for player endorsements and sponsorships.
Last edited:
You’re really overestimating those amounts, 99.999% of the players in that scenario are getting $5,000, $2,500 and $1,000. Sure a Zion Williamson type is going to get a great payday but that’s basketball, football is a different animal and trying to gauge how even a 5 star recruit is going to pan out is going to keep the checkbooks in check.
It just amazes me that so many people get upset about players getting paid in the name of "amateurism". Especially people that cite our "9 national championships" despite the fact that the University was openly paying a salary to the players for 8 of those National Titles. Pitt was paying players $500/year +tuition and books at a time when the average house cost $2-3k.
When the Administration denied the players' demand for 10% of bowl revenue and a vacation, Pitt players refused the invitation to the Rose Bowl. The University responded by rescinding the stipends and athletic scholarships, dooming Pitt to obscurity for 40+ years.
See, who said I'll never use what I learned in my Pittsburgh history course.
When the Administration denied the players' demand for 10% of bowl revenue and a vacation, Pitt players refused the invitation to the Rose Bowl. The University responded by rescinding the stipends and athletic scholarships, dooming Pitt to obscurity for 40+ years.
See, who said I'll never use what I learned in my Pittsburgh history course.
Time to get the Golden Panthers up and running. We have 3 years to get our base and be ready for when this thing opens up. It will be interesting how this plays out on the team dynamic level when your unpaid o-line is blocking for a highly paid RB and QB. Are the kids going to share their new wealth with their teammates? Hard to gain 1,000 yards if I keep missing my block. It’s going to be real interesting to see how this impacts play.
I dont mind what so ever players getting paid. It's the entire recruiting aspect and how it can get even more tilted towards the bigger schools with this that bothers me.
This.
I don't care one way or the other, so long as it's equal for all.
This will create something I no longer want to follow, if it turns out that a kid can choose a school because it has a larger fan base, and he can sell more jerseys.
If it turns out that every kid gets the same "X" amount of dollars, then have at it.
That will never happen that each kid gets the same amount of $.
They great players who can sell jerseys will get a ton of money while others get very little and most get zero.
Lets say Zion W was on PITTs team last season. He'd have an agent, a shoe co, a shirt co, and make money.
Noone else on the PITT team would attract an agent or be able to sell jerseys except to maybe a few PITT fans.
The players who benefit from this law are big time nationally recognized players.
Again, nothing has changed. If #1 Cochran wants to pay Kenny Pickett $10,000 to do a commercial tomorrow, they certainly can. Its not against the law. However, it is against NCAA rules so he would be rules ineligible. Just because something is legal, does not mean the NCAA will allow you to do it. If I decided to buy Pickett a new pair of shoes, I am not breaking any federal, state, or local law and neither is he. However, its against NCAA rules so he would be ruled ineligible.
Right now, this is nothing. What this CA law could do is turn the tide of momentum toward the NCAA allowing players to be paid but we arent there yet.
Right now, this is nothing. What this CA law could do is turn the tide of momentum toward the NCAA allowing players to be paid but we arent there yet.
That's what I don't like about it. It is a significant recruiting advantage for the schools with a large, rabid fan base.
Teams like Pitt normally miss out on the big time 5 and 4 stars. It will be how the smaller schools compete for the 3 star where it will all get jostled around. You’ll have some schools step up and have boosters who will throw a few grand here or there and those that will not. In that way if your fans aren’t willing to pay to play it will be easy to see with your team’s results on signing day. Gone will be the days when the smaller school steps up and beats out a bigger school for a kid.
Lots of room for abuse if boosters tell a kid we'll get you an agent deal don't worry come to PITT we have connections and you'll make 100k.
The problem isn't going to be promising a recruit money, the problem will be that people will make it known that they will pay the stars and other starters cash. Because pretty much every recruit thinks that's going to be one of them.
The local car dealer is going to make it known that he pays star players tens of thousands of dollars, and the recruit that thinks that he's going to be a star will think that he's going to get that money. And if he does become the star, he will get that money. You aren't going to need to pay people up front, you are only going to have to make it known how much you are going to pay them once they get here.
And if you don't think that there isn't some rich former offensive lineman from someplace like Alabama that isn't going to make sure that it's widely known that he pays the Alabama starting offensive linemen ten grand a year or something like that then you must not follow this very closely at all.
The second this happens and players are paid the majority of college football programs that break even or lose money will fold up the tent and focus on other college sports.
I would bet PITT would be near the top of the list of programs that give it up.
IMO the 130 or so D1 teams would shrink to maybe half.
