Yeah, wherever would we find an educational institution to educate these athletes?

You over estimate the amount of cash that kids at big programs would get for card shows, and appearances at dealerships and malls. Friends of mine have made good five figure money the moment their eligibility runs out lining up for these events. Much of this payment is cash even, and the question is who is going to educate the athletes on the taxes and how all of that works.

You grossly underestimate the 25-30 kids across the country thing. The regional big boys will be paying 25-30 kids at their schools good money. Because the money is out there.

Gene Gene the dancing machine says tosu won't play them. It's in today's Dispatch but I can't find the article to post.

Yeah, because those elite one and done basketball players you guys like to keep talking about take roughly 3-4 classes in there college cateer

The equation is clear. You have two students.

Student A (Susan) is on a full academic scholarship - Compensated by the University for her efforts in the classroom. Beyond brains she is beautiful. She is also involved in a number of volunteer organizations on campus. Very popular. A restaurant in town asks her to be part of an ad campaign. "Paul's Restaurant - Where students like Susan hang out." They pay her $500 - she does the ad.

Student B is Nathan Rourke - on a full athletic scholarship. Compensated by the University for his efforts on playing field. He's successful on the field and in class. Very well known. Very, Very popular - even more so than Susan. A restaurant in town asks him to be part of an ad campaign. "Paul's Restaurant - Where students like Nathan hang out." They offer him $2500 (because he is much more popular than Susan) - The NCAA and the University tell him he is not allowed to do the ad. Paul's says (despite being much more popular) they will pay him what they pay Susan. He is still not allowed to do the ad.

In both and all cases, the University is not paying the student any additional money beyond their scholarship. The free market (capitalism) is. Yet only one student is permitted to be a capitalist.

With the CA laws (and others to follow) this will change.

Good point - that's part of the solution. If Nathan or any athlete accepts money then they forfeit their stipend. Thanks for pointing that out. Makes sense.

We make those decision all the time. I have a job. Someone offers 10% more - but I'd be on the road all the time. No thanks. I have a job. Someone offers me 5% more but it involves much more work and limited advancement. No thanks. The player can have the option of a stipend. No thanks, I'll stick with the stipend or, I'll forfeit the stipend (saving the University money), and take the endorsement money.

And why would you?

How many Susan’s get endorsement deals for anything? And athletes can have jobs, which include modeling. [/QUOTE]Very few Susan’s get endorsement deals because our society doesn’t value academics as much as we do athletics (ever been on the Ohio Engineering Chat Site?). Yes, athletes can have jobs (hours permitting) and they can model - as long as the modeling deal was signed before becoming an NCAA athlete. Then NCAA bylaw called "Continuation of Modeling and Other Non-athletically Related Promotional Activities After Enrollment." requires an athete to have become involved in modeling for non-athletic reasons; forbids any reference to his/her name or involvement in college sports while modeling; doesn't allow him/her to endorse the commercial product; and requires that he/she get paid at a rate comparable to his skills and experience as a model.

Of course, my example was not modeling – it was for endorsement (per your comment).

[QUOTE=Alan Swank]
Big difference. Sports aren't a core part of the university's mission. Education is.

Very few Susan’s get endorsement deals because our society doesn’t value academics as much as we do athletics (ever been on the Ohio Engineering Chat Site?). Yes, athletes can have jobs (hours permitting) and they can model - as long as the modeling deal was signed before becoming an NCAA athlete. Then NCAA bylaw called "Continuation of Modeling and Other Non-athletically Related Promotional Activities After Enrollment." requires an athete to have become involved in modeling for non-athletic reasons; forbids any reference to his/her name or involvement in college sports while modeling; doesn't allow him/her to endorse the commercial product; and requires that he/she get paid at a rate comparable to his skills and experience as a model.

Of course, my example was not modeling – it was for endorsement (per your comment).

While not written into their mission, I think we all appreciate that at OSU, Alabama, etc. sports is a core part of their culture. But this law is not asking the institutions to change their mission. This has to do with the individual making money off the field…off the campus.


Again, the NCAA needs to get themselves at the table, and not just to say, "if they want extra money, there is a McDonalds near every campus" or cry out that this will "allow the boosters that are paying cash to these kids under the table to now be able to do it in the open - there will be corruption."

These athletes have a special skill set and value to the open market. They deserve to realize that potential. Yes, there need to be guidelines and restrictions (endorse alcohol, tobacco, gambling sites, etc.). I doubt the NCAA wants to leave the process of defining the fine print to politicians.

Not many top 10 teams in that group and not one SEC school.