N.C.A.A. Athletes Could Be Paid Under New California Law

from NYTs

It has been a bedrock principle behind college sports: Student-athletes should not be paid beyond the costs of attending a university. California threatened that standard on Monday after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow players to strike endorsement deals and hire agents.

The new law, which is supposed to take effect in 2023, attacks the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s long-held philosophy that college athletes should earn a degree, not money, for playing sports. That view, also under assault in several other states and on Capitol Hill, has held up even as the college sports industry swelled into a behemoth that generated at least $14 billion last year, and as athletes faced mounting demands on their bodies and schedules.

Under the California measure, thousands of student-athletes in America’s most populous state will be allowed to promote products and companies, trading on their sports renown for the first time. And although the law applies only to California, it sets up the possibility that leaders in college sports will eventually have to choose between changing the rules for athletes nationwide or barring some of America’s sports powerhouses from competition.

More here.

, , , ,

46 Responses to N.C.A.A. Athletes Could Be Paid Under New California Law

  1. nicole shubaderov October 1, 2019 at 12:20 pm #

    The line that most affected me in this article was “every single student in the university can market their name, image and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that […] The only group that can’t are athletes.” Truthfully speaking, not every person in the world can play a sport, or make it onto a college sports team. Those who aren’t on sports teams need to pay their tuition somehow and that is through applying to scholarships, getting jobs and using platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok and, YouTube to make money. While these normal students are trying to pay off their tuition, those who are college athletes get scholarship money that helps them obtain their degree, therefore lightening their burden throughout their higher education. Even though I do not believe in paying college athletes in addition to their scholarship, I do find that they should make money off the use of their name through the selling of merchandise and advertisements.

    The one benefit of allowing students to make money off their name is the fact that they could make some extra pocket cash that the school and clothing companies are making off these athletes. This billion-dollar industry is depriving these athletes of the compensation necessary for the use of their names on different platforms. Then, another benefit is that it’s the only way to profit off their name since a hefty fraction of college athletes do not make it into professional sports. Especially if they focused all their time on sports instead of education, they will be screwed for the rest of their lives. I do believe that it is the individual’s choice to join a sports team and choose sports over education throughout college, but some people need the scholarship money from sports or else they may never have gotten a degree in the end—due to family income issues or other impactful issues. Therefore, it would be of help for those students to be able to save up some extra cash from the use of their name in advertising and merchandising throughout college. The final benefit is that students who previously profited from their names before college would now be able to play college sports. With the laws places by NCAA, students who profit off their names from sports before college cannot play sports. Therefore, by allowing college athletes to make money off their names, this allows them to continue playing sports in college and making more money. Once again, my belief is not to pay them for playing sports since they already get paid in scholarship money, food and free merchandise and stuff from supporters. I believe that if these college athletes are good in college and are being profited off by their abilities and names by the school and larger corporations, they should be compensated for that.

    My major concern with this is how it is viewed as unconstitutional to compensate students for the use of their name. If California ends up approving this new law, then what would the effect be on the other states? Would the other states end up trying to change the many NCAA regulations? Would all the states try to follow the new law that California created? How would this be enforced? Additionally, the NCAA organization is currently threatening those schools who enforce the possible new law, which would affect eligibility in competitions which will become large losses for those schools. If there are losses, then the scholarship money for the students may decrease, which will be a loss for everyone rather than the benefit they expected to gain. Overall, I am not too knowledgeable in this situation, but I do want to keep myself updated on this issue and see what happens in the future if California has this new law approved. Especially knowing that California makes a lot of money from sports, I want to see if the NCAA will choose to penalize the California schools and lose a mass amount of profit, or to do the latter and make money.

    • Christopher Bagnell October 4, 2019 at 7:24 pm #

      After reading the article on how college athletes get paid It brought some attention to matters, I didn’t think about. The topic about paying student athletes has been brought up many times over and the result is usually that it would take money away from the school or that the athletes wouldn’t get as much money overall. But having an outside source fund the athletes is a good idea. Athletes could get deals with big companies and make a name for themselves and make the company more well known. A problem might be when competing however. Most schools have uniforms with a brand name on it and the athletes might have a conflict if say Nike was sponsoring them and their uniform was Adidas. The rules in college athletics are that the athletes have to wear the same uniforms when competing and with sponsorships, this could become a problem. On the other hand, it is a very rewarding system. Some athletes last years competing can be in college and they would want to make money off themselves before they lose the opportunity to. It makes sense but for the athletes that don’t preform as well they might not like the idea. There is a plethora of companies in the world and I’m sure just about everyone would be able to sign a deal with one of them. Giving athletes the opportunity for brand deals might flood the market with advertisements and people will most likely learn to just ignore the ads which could be very bad for the companies. It is a double-edged sword in the sense that there are both good things and bad things that could happen as a result of giving college athletes the opportunity to earn money for their athletic abilities.

  2. Corinne Roonan October 1, 2019 at 2:55 pm #

    With this article focusing on college athletes’ ability to receive money from endorsements and advertising including their likeness, I cannot help but think about the way gender will play a role in this. If this is going to become legally acceptable and widespread across the country for college athletes, it is highly unlikely that the male players will receive a higher amount of those endorsement opportunities over female players.
    Just as in major league sports, men will reap higher benefits for lower rates of success than women. If this law is adopted by multiple states, there is going to be large spread inequality between male and female college athletes. Male college athletes are going to be raised to an even higher popularity level on campuses but also across the country while female athletes are going to have to work much harder than the male college athletes to receive even half of the recognition that the male players receive. It already happens on college campuses, but bringing money into the equation is going to lead to a more wide spread gap.
    This widespread gap, though not initially a big cause for worry from universities because it already exists, will cause more issues than currently exist. The drive to play sports in college tends to come from an interest in playing the sport in the future or from enjoyment in the sport on lower levels. If money is introduced into the equation through sponsorships and endorsements, it is no surprise that this will become a motivation for potential college athletes as well. If women going into this, though, know they are not going to receive the same opportunities as the male players, that may become a deterrent. The life of a student athlete is intense as it is, and with money becoming a main motivation for playing a sport in college with the passing of this law, then there will be very little motivating women to continue their sport of choice on a college level.
    Does this mean the law should not be passed? That is a question that many people in authority in the states are considering to be tricky and difficult to truly decide on. A thorough understanding of college sports, the industry surrounding college sports, and figures of compensation that would be available to college athletes if this law is passed are necessary factors in making this decision in each state. This would be a monumental decision that will have an impact on college sports and college campuses, so all factors need to be taken into consideration by those in authority to make such decisions.

  3. Jackson Beltrandi October 1, 2019 at 7:05 pm #

    This a HUGE decision for the sports community. Since its establishment in 1910, the NCAA has founded itself off the principle that D1 athletes are eligible for full scholarships, essentially a free degree, for their participation in athletics. D2 athletes are eligible for partial scholarships, and D3 athletes are hung out to dry. These top tier athletes are required to attend college (NBA, MLB) in order to play professionally. Thus, there is an extra year for them to train, and participate in their sport without getting any compensation, besides a degree, which the top tier athletes do not even get or need. However, only a very small percentage are able to make it professionally in their sport, and miss out on their chance to make money off of their athletic achievements.
    The article mentions that college sports industry made an astonishing $14 billion last year. After wondering how this money would be divided to the millions of collegiate athletes throughout the country, I saw that the bill would allow players to make money off of their name, image, and likeness. I figured that the bill would make the NCAA pay the players by something such as a salary, but the NCAA does not have to pay the players under this bill. It really shows how greedy of an organization the NCAA is, where they believe that their “employees” aren’t allowed to get paid by other people. This bill would simply allow college athletes to sign shoe deals, make money off of merchandise made about them, and even signed merchandise. The bill does not even have to cover sales that large, college athletes can be paid for giving lessons or coaching youth camps. I think it is simply outrageous that a college swimmer wouldn’t be able to be paid for giving swim lessons. Just because they are an athlete, they should still be paid for doing a service.
    Gavin Newsom signed the bill on LeBron James’s online show, The Shop. Many athletes have expressed their constant requests for the NCAA to pay the people who are literally making the money. Although this bill will ultimately be made void due to NCAA rules, it probably opens up the doorway for collegiate athletes to sue the NCAA. Also, if more states join the California bill, it will be hard for a court of law to deny the popularity behind paying the players.

  4. Tiffany Lyn October 2, 2019 at 6:22 pm #

    It makes me happy to see NCAA athletes’ worth finally being recognized. Last semester I made an Oral Communication speech on why collegiate athletes should get paid/profit from their name and most of my peers disagreed with my stance. I understand they are paid in scholarships, unlimited meal plans, free clothing, stipends, etc. but that’s not a justified argument in 2019. Today, athletes have large social media followings. Some college players reach hundreds of thousands or even millions of people through their social media and are unable to monetize their accounts. If athletes created Youtube channels they’d either have to quit the team or delete their account. This limitation seemed unfair especially when these same athletes have generated $14 billion dollars in a single year. Men’s college basketball and football sell out arenas and have millions of fans viewing their televised games. California is opening the door for many other states to reconsider their laws regarding collegiate athletes.
    Although I’m in support of this law, it definitely opens pandora’s box. Do all NCAA athletes get paid per game, per season or only receive the benefit of profiting off their name through private business ventures? Since California is the only state who has passed this law, does this give Californian universities an unfair edge in the recruiting process? I’m sure these issues will come up as time goes on but it’s something to keep in mind. I imagine athletes will be getting paid based on how much money they generate. All D1 sports require hours of work, but a men’s basketball team makes significantly more money than a women’s tennis team. There will be a great pay disparity between different sports, and I don’t see a way of combatting that issue because some sports simply have larger followings than others.
    For years the NCAA has placed limitations on their athletes. Not allowing players to earn money from their talents is ridiculous when every professional in collegiate athletics earns a significant amount of money. These players are being exploited while NCAA administrators and coaches profit from their hard work. Alabama’s head football coach is locked into an 8-year contract worth over $70 million. He even made a cameo in the film, The Blind Side while his players earned nothing. I think the NCAA is fearful of the government placing limitations on them. They reacted quickly by saying these universities will be barred from the NCAA which came off as a way to bully legislators into leaving things as they are. A majority of college athletes do not play on the professional level so getting a head start through endorsements would be beneficial. It will be interesting to follow what direction this law takes college athletics.

  5. Samantha Russo October 3, 2019 at 10:40 am #

    In 2023 in California, NCAA athletes can finally be paid for the hard work they put in year after year on the field. My cousin is currently a Division 1 athlete at the University of Pittsburgh. I remember during the summer of her freshman year, she had to travel 6 hours to the Pitt Dance Center where the girls there spent a full week practicing routines, running the mile and lifting weights. When she was lucky enough to make the team, she was basically told that all of her other extracurricular plans had to be stopped in order for her to continue dancing. She willingly did so but that meant that any part time jobs or internships she wanted to pursue in Pittsburgh could not happen because of her dancing commitment.
    My cousin is just a dancer and on the pep squad for her school. She isn’t being potentially looked at by the NFL or MLB for a future in her sport. But like the other players at her school that she’ll cheer on from the sidelines, she puts in the hard work 7 days a week. I’ve seen firsthand how worn down half of the girls are by the time the end of the first semester rolls around. While she puts in so much time and effort for dance, the football and baseball players put in even more work. They are the reasons that future athletes decide to attend those schools. They become the faces of their respective colleges but they get nothing for it. Every year, they put in hard work to be a starter on their team and to hopefully one day have a career in the sport they love. Why shouldn’t they get paid for the work they put into their sports?
    In 2018, Nick Saban, the football coach at Alabama made $8.3 million. He’s led his team to five national champions. He was paid nicely for his hard work in coaching his team to a victory but the athletes who actually won the championship? All they received was a nice trophy and the hope to possibly be drafted in the NFL draft. It doesn’t make any sense for the players who actually bring the championship to their school to not get anything for their year long work and for the coach to make millions of dollars. I already know the NCAA won’t let this bill go much further but it’s a step in the right direction for these student athletes who deserve to get some compensation for what they’ve done.

  6. Tyler Abline October 3, 2019 at 12:53 pm #

    I think it’s cool that California is passing this bill. At the very least it will allow athletes to use their likeness in the same measure as other students, and will allow many athletes to maintain a higher standard of living due to the bill. While other students can work, it is much harder for an athlete as they have to put in more time for school. Other students can have YouTube channels and other such platforms that provide revenue but athletes are not allowed to. Not too long ago there was a college football kicker who had a YouTube channel where he showed off his kicking, and he was forced to either take down his channel or leave the team. This is unfair to him and to other athletes as well, and other states could potentially follow through with this aspect of the bill at the very least. This new bill could also open the door for the revival of the NCAA football video game, which would be a plus.
    My only concern is that athletes may start to get a salary just for playing. College sports are not a job, and should not be treated as such. While I do think that they should be able to use their likeness, they should not be paid by the school outside of scholarships. This does not appear to be what the bill has in mind which is good, as from what I have seen it is about allowing them to use their likeness but does not mention being paid by the school for their services.
    College sports is a very profitable industry, and players should be allowed to receive some benefit from doing it. The schools profit immensely from the performance of these student athletes, so it stands to reason that the athletes should at the very least be able to use their own likeness. I don’t see how a player having a YouTube channel or receiving a marketing deal will negatively impact the industry. If there is a demand for player likeness, they should be allowed to supply it.

  7. Anthony Whelan October 3, 2019 at 4:03 pm #

    I am happy to see significant strides finally being made in regard to athlete compensation in collegiate sports. I have always believed that athletes should be able to monetize their likeness because of the amount of time they spend practicing for their sports that generate over one billion dollars in revenue for the NCAA. The NCAA has long argued that the cost of admission was enough to fully compensate athletes for their efforts. In 2014, the NCAA agreed to add unlimited food and snacks to the list of benefits given to athletes because of growing concern regarding some athletes struggling to buy food on campus. Hopefully the NCAA will consider allowing players to monetize their likeness and seek agent representation as another step forward. Unfortunately, that seems to be very unlikely.
    The article mentions that the NCAA has already deemed this unconstitutional, and the PAC-12 is lobbying against this measure. If this measure does pass, it will be interesting to see how it would impact the recruiting process for college athletes. There is a chance that some athletes who did not originally have larger California universities like Stanford, UCLA, or USC as their top choice might consider attending one of those schools so that they can make money while they play. If this did become a trend, I wonder if the NCAA would consider excluding these teams from postseason play, which would be a devastating blow to these universities’ revenue. The article mentions that if this measure became a state statute, the NCAA would have no legal ground to penalize these universities for complying. I hope that this would then shift the focus to legalizing it across the country, rather than aiming to penalize California schools.
    I think the strongest point made in the article was that every other student on campus can brand themselves, so athletes should be able to as well. This point makes it seem irrational for the NCAA to deny athletes this right. The NCAA has argued that college athletics need to preserve amateurism, but that is already being broken regularly by universities like Arizona and Kansas who have allegedly bribed players to commit to their school. I also think it is good that prominent athletes like Lebron James, who went to the NBA straight from high school, are speaking out in support of this change. James has always held strong opinions pertaining to social issues, and he has the platform to inform people about the situation.

  8. Victoria Balka October 3, 2019 at 11:09 pm #

    California passing the bill to pay its college athletes starting in 2023 will cause many problems if the NCAA chooses to not pay all of its athletes. While the payment of these college athletes has been debated for a long time, people cannot agree on if they believe they should be paid with an education or opportunities to make money. It is no secret that the NCAA makes a lot of money per year, with a near $1.1 billion-dollar revenue in 2017. With all the money that the NCAA makes off of its athletes and their talent, they get nothing in return. While the payment of the athletes as a whole would greatly benefit the people, who are talented enough in their sports to be recruited by these schools, if only the players in California are being paid while the rest are not, there would be a major problem. Since you would be able to get paid for playing your sport in California, most of the great players would want to play there since they can make money. This would make the NCAA extremely unbalanced and ruin schools like Duke who are known for recruiting talented players for a year or two before they go to professional sports. Another result of this bill being pass is the NCAA kicking these California schools out of its association. Doing this would cause harm to both the California schools and the NCAA since they would both be losing a lot of money. California schools may also not be on board with this plan since they do not want to spend their money on their athletes while the schools in other states can keep staying the way they are with not paying their athletes.
    While the idea of paying college athletes is seemed as bad to some people it would be extremely beneficial to the athletes. While some of these athletes come from rich families, some of them also come from poorer families and getting an athletic scholarship is the only way they can afford to go to school. For these athletes from poorer families, the money they can make while playing a college sport can greatly benefit them and their families by giving them more money to afford the things they need. Since the NCAA makes so much money and the coaches of these teams making so much money, they should keep less of the money for themselves and share the wealth with the athletes who are doing most of the work people are paying money to watch. The Alabama football coach is the highest paid public employee making over 8 million dollars a year. Since that is more money than most people can even imagine making, I think it would be a good idea to pay these coaches a little less if it means the athletes can make some money. I believe that there would be a benefit to paying college athletes but, there would be no benefits if the NCAA does not chose to pay its athletes but, California’s college athletes are paid.

  9. Marion October 4, 2019 at 10:26 am #

    At first, I thought that the signed bill would allow Universities to pay their players in addition to the scholarship they receive. This would totally disrupt the current business model of college sports. Universities would award more money to more popular sports such as football and baseball and would underfund the less popular sports such as field hockey. Since the amount universities could pay their players would be unlimited, the richer universities will outperform smaller universities thanks to their excess of funds. If this would be a new law, everything would change for colleges, their athletes, and the entire business behind.
    However, I misunderstood. The bill that Gavin Newsom, California’s Governor, signed allows college athletes to hire agents and make money from endorsements. This means that students at public and private universities in California will be allowed to profit from their images, names, or likenesses. They, for example, will be allowed to sign contracts and deals with advertisers such as Nike or Coca-Cola. Personally, I think that this bill is fair. As Newsom stated, “Every single student in the university can market their name, image, and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that. They only group that can’t are athletes. Why is that?”. As illustrated in the article, the college sports industry generated at least 14 billion dollars last year. The jerseys of the best college basketball players, for instance, are selling at a high price. Yet, the players don’t even get a cent in return.
    As a college athlete, I know how much time and effort we put into our sport every day. Our coaches, university, and fans have extremely high expectations. Therefore, as a team we practice hard, we mentally prepare for every game, we have team activities all the time to bond together, we watch the film, have meetings to see on what we should improve, etc. In other words, we cannot underestimate the student athlete’s effort in their sport. After all the effort comes the success. However, under the NCAA rules, the players don’t get to fully take advantage of their success since they cannot sign contracts, use their name, etc. Consequently, I think that this law is fair since it indeed reduces the exploitation of student-athletes as explained in the article.
    Clearly, this law will awaken and affect other states. If California becomes the only state to pass the law in 2023 then obviously all the good athletes will try to go to a college in California. The college sports industry is too competitive to let that happen. Eventually, other states will pass the same law, which will put more and more pressure on the NCAA. I think now is the right time for an entrepreneur to start a ‘new NCAA’. The NCAA is a monopolist in its field, it has no competition, therefore, they set up every rule they want and can make a ton of money out of it. However, I am convinced that an entrepreneur can attract many people by starting a ‘new NCAA’ with favorable rules for the universities, coaches, and student-athletes. The NCAA is always extremely slow when it comes to changing a rule that becomes a disadvantage for them, people are tired of waiting, they want to see change.

  10. Emily Rodger October 4, 2019 at 10:54 am #

    I am going to disagree with many of my peers who have commented previously as well as disagree with the choice of the California governor. I personally believe that college athletes should not be able to make money simply for playing the sport. I believe that the main focus of college is to earn a degree so that in the future we can earn a worthy job. In my eyes, playing basketball or football or any sport is just the side activity that a college student decides to take up alongside earning their degree. I personally know exactly what these athletes are going through and how much commitment it takes to play these sports. I have played competitive sports my whole life, and I am aware of how much time and commitment and focus it takes to be apart of programs like these. Although I am aware of what these athletes go through, at some point they have to recognize that college is for maintaining an education and earning a degree. I agree with Michael Pittman Jr. when he stated, “I’m just going to keep playing every week until I reach that level that actually pays me.” College athletes should strive to want to be better and makes those professional leagues outside of college like Pittman just stated he was going to do. Another reason why I do not believe they should be paid is because most college athletes already do not even have to pay to attend the university. Many athletes receive full rides to universities just to play their sport. If the NCAA took it an extra step and let these athletes receive an earning from playing, it would be a huge disadvantage for those who could barely even afford to attend college. Once again as I will state many times throughout these comments, the main reason why students go to college is gain an education and a degree. There are millions of students within the U.S. who struggle to pay student loans or even worse cannot even afford to go to college at all. I believe that it would be unfair for those students because they are most likely working harder than any of those student athletes are just to attain degree. Societies mindsets are too money oriented. Everyone is focused on becoming rich and famous and well-known when more than likely those circumstances will not occur for the everyday citizen. There was one point in the article that stated something along the lines that every other student minus student athletes are allowed to brand and monetize their name mainly through social media sources such as Youtube. I slightly disagree with this statement because their is only a small minority of people who actually become known and monetized off of Youtube or social media. For Youtube, one has to attain a certain amount of subscribers just for Youtube to even consider paying you. This is an extremely hard thing to accomplish, therefore I do not 100% agree with the statement that every student is able to make money by branding themselves. Overall, the main focus of college is meant for an education and to gain a degree for future careers, not for sports.

  11. Zachary Crockett October 4, 2019 at 12:48 pm #

    MY position on this issue is of uncertainty, but if I were to inflict a bias, I believe college athletes should not get paid, but have to. College athletes should not get paid; many claims regarding those who represent their universities athletically to a “higher standard” is a monstrosity. These students maintain their eligibility with a 2.3 GPA. I could not imagine the fear I would have in my academic life if my GPA lingered around these numbers. And these students receive all the help and care in the world to maintain this sub C average. Receiving personalized academic advisors, allowing them first dibs at whatever course they deem, endless tutoring opportunities, and let’s not mention the fraudulent activity being played on throughout these student-athletes academic careers. With new cases arising every year of these growing adults being passed through the system because of what they can provide financially and entertainment purposes. What morals are we passing forth to society in allowing these developing minds to proceed they have a superiority because of athletic talent. We are not giving these young adults an adequate opportunity for equal rights. But, based on the economy aspect of things, regardless of how severe and society altering these previous decisions are college has to get paid. It is modern slavery, these men and women are not held against their will necessarily, but many of them need a college education and the platform the NCAA places to overcome their previous circumstances. The NCAA knows and exploits this, and so making billions upon billions of dollars yearly. And what is given in return? A more or less than $50,000 yearly scholarship to attend their university. It does seem enticing, but there is far more money made by some of these athletes and they are not capitalizing on it at all. The NCAA chains and enslaves them into their business. Athletics can be all a kid has. They may not perform well in the classroom, have minimal, if none existant, connections and ultimately be set up for a failure post-graduation if all does not work out on the next level. There are many situations were athletes, who were making universities millions of dollars, careers ended before even capitalizing on bid paydays professionally. And what if they were compensated in collegiate sports for their hard work and dedication? Would indeed make their lives much easier. All in all, college athletes should not get paid, there is morality and fraudulent tone to how the NCAA is set up and these athletes receive a lot in benefits, considering under 2% of them will compete professionally, but if there is a market and we are in modern times, payment is just a necessity at this point and it is only a matter of time before either the NCAA collapses or pays their athlete-students*.

  12. Lisa Tier October 4, 2019 at 1:49 pm #

    Allowing college athletes to benefit financially from their talents may seem fair, as they work so hard to get to that point in their athletic career. However, this allowance could also have dangerous effects on not only the schools, but also the players themselves. If California allows this, while all other schools prohibit these earnings, colleges in California will have an unfair recruiting advantage against all other schools. This could cause certain schools to lose players to California schools that would have otherwise not went to California if not for the benefit of profiting from endorsements. A conflict such as this could result in major rivalry among schools and even protests from players, coaches, and faculty from colleges suffering a recruiting disadvantage. Colleges even lose current players to California schools, as they would want to reap the benefits of their competitors. This could end up poorly for Californian colleges, as other schools may take legal action against them for “stealing” their players.
    On the other hand, if this law goes into effect nationwide, there could be other drastic consequences. Allowing students as young as 18 to receive monetary benefits from playing the sports they love could have negative affects on the students themselves. These students may become so used to having this easy income, that they do not want to have to work a normal nine to five job for money. But what happens when not all these athletes make it to the professional world? Will they be able to obtain and sustain a normal career in the working world? Students may end up being worse off in the long run if they receive these perks so early on. While college athletes do work extremely hard to play for their schools, their efforts are a right of passage to not only a possible chance in the professional world, but also to the education they are providing while playing.

  13. Arman Ameri October 4, 2019 at 4:26 pm #

    It is no secret that the NCAA is one of the most corrupt organizations in America. It’s about time someone stood up to this powerhouse who has took advantage of college athletes for decades. While they argue that college athletes get paid an education and therefore can not get paid for their name, image, and likeness, a college education is only worth hundreds of thousands of dollars while the NCAA and schools make tens of millions. There is no fairness in this, most college athletes will not make it to the professional level, making college the only time to make a significant amount of money of their name, image, and likeness.
    It will be interesting to see how this pans out, as stated in the article, “but acknowledged that it was not clear whether the N.C.A.A. could lawfully punish members for complying with a state statute.” which means the outcome to this could go either way. If the NCAA could lawfully punish universities for complying with state law, then they will probably ban these universities from the league. It may lead to loss in revenues, but they still have plenty of other big-name schools to make them money. However, if they cannot punish members for complying with state law, then many other states will follow California’s lead and give college athletes the chance to make money off their name, image, and likeness.

  14. Mia Ferrante October 4, 2019 at 4:40 pm #

    The topic allowing student-athletes to be paid in college has been a heated topic over the past several years. At first glance, I thought the title “NCAA Athletes Could Be Paid Under New California Law” was insinuating that colleges and universities in the state of California would start directly paying their athletes. However, after reading the first couple of paragraphs of the article I found that it would not be the colleges directly paying the athletes, it would only apply to brands using the athlete’s name on jerseys and merchandise for money. At the same time, the law also explicitly declared that it was the Legislature’s intent “to avoid exploitation of student-athletes, colleges, and universities.” I agree that a change needed to be made because in my opinion, some college athlete’s names are often used on the back of jerseys to advertise, yet they get no monetary benefit from different brands that use their name. Often for big-time college athletes shoe deals or deals with brands such as Nike, Adidas, or Under Armour take place almost immediately after they declare as “pro” because often declaring as “pro” means one is getting paid. I think the main debate regarding this is that if athletes are now being paid in college does that consider then professional athletes. Another flaw of the law is that if schools lobby against the measure, as several did, the association can declare the school’s ineligible to compete. This means that their teams could not appear in showcase events like the College Football Playoff and the men’s and women’s basketball tournaments, made-for-TV moments that help some universities pull in more than $100 million each year. I know that the law allows for players to be paid, but I think it is unfair for the schools to not be able to compete in arguably, the most important games of the season. Every game during the regular season is played in preparation for the playoffs and the main goal is to win a national championship. I think that is unfair to restrict student-athletes from playing in these games because it is the most important games of the year. There are both pros and cons to paying college athletes, but I think that it was smart for the state of California to implement this law. I think after one or two years of watching how this will impact the NCAA, other states will either follow the state of California and also allow student-athletes to be paid, or completely terminate the law.

  15. Ryan Geschickter October 4, 2019 at 4:56 pm #

    In my personal opinion I don’t think student athletes should earn any money due to the fact that you’re playing for your school as opposed to a professional team. There’s a significant line or difference between college and the professional level and that’s why there is a pay difference. While it would be cool to wear a college players jersey with their name on the back, I think it would allow to much ego into the NCAA and rather create a distraction as opposed to a help. I think that the NCAA is just barely above high school and as a freshman one shouldn’t be getting paid because it can be a distraction to how the player performs on the field as well as in the classroom. NCAA athletes getting paid can be seen as a distraction on the field because of the fact that they won’t perform at the level they are supposed to perform because they could just be playing for money, which is also an issue in the NFL. In addition, NCAA athletes getting paid can be seen as a distraction in the classroom because of the fact that they could show off and not make an effort in their classes because they’re just in it to play a sport and get paid. Overall, there’s many more negatives than positives when an NCAA athlete gets paid and rather than waiting to get to the next level and earn that big contract, student athletes are become greedier every year.
    In all honesty, there should definitely be a divide between student athletes getting paid and professional sports. If an athlete is good enough to get to the professional level than they deserve to be paid once they sign the professional contract and are out of college for their accomplishments and abilities to play that significant sport of interest. However, if one is a normal student athlete who does not make it or does make it, they deserve not to get paid as they are representing their college that is based around academics not just around sports hence the term ‘higher education.’ In today’s world the athletes are gifted in college, but they should rather focus on academics and heightening their game to a professional level before they get paid at all.

  16. Walter Inocencio Dingwall October 4, 2019 at 6:44 pm #

    If something can make someone money, something will make someone money. Most students at university can take the things the are doing and learning at school and then translate it into money, either by finding a job requiring those skill, or by selling something of their own creation. A student in the marching band can go around playing clubs and recording their music. A cosmetics student can put together makeup tutorials. A student could even sell their athletic skills and knowledge, as long as they aren’t doing so on an NCAA team, where athletes have the greatest exposure and are able to derive scholarship money from their performance.
    This is such a restraint for these college athletes that, due to their time spent with team activities, cannot afford the time to take on a job, or project, to make money during their time at school. An argument can be made that these athletes earn great sums of scholarship money from their sports, but, similarly, academic achievement may rake in scholarships for non-athletes.
    The non-athlete students do not put themselves at risk of injury in their extracurricular endeavors in their pursuit of strengthening their future employment in a field. As well, those fields do not come with an employment future with the short lifetime of an athletic profession.
    Statistically, an NFL career lasts 3 years on average. An NBA player would last 5 years. Their window of employment is so small due to the difficulty in maintaining the athletic capacity of a professional athlete. The risk of injury, the deterioration of metabolism and muscle growth, weakening bones and ligaments. These are all working against employability for athletes, in addition to the fact that they must be able to either help their team, or overcome individual competitors, to keep relevance.
    Even before employment, there is already a minute chance that any athlete becomes a professional, leaving most athletes’ time playing in university as their last outing in well-organized sports.
    To put this into a perspective, my father was able to work as an electrical designer for 31 years, and he did not start until he was 33 years old. There was no risk of unemployment due to physical abilities. There was not such a small group of people in the profession that he had to outperform. And, he could have gone to school concurrently while employed, as many his younger colleagues did.
    I myself could go out an intern at a bank, thus, putting my education from the business school to monetary use before graduation.
    The top young athletes in the nation do not have the time to pursue business ventures based on their collegian activity, although they take part in one of the most lucrative businesses at many universities. They get to be put on display in front of large crowds in the stands and the even larger television audiences. All of this is done while facing a very uncertain future that will often end in without ever making a dollar with these athletic talents.
    Allowing California University NCAA athletes to make money from their performances in sports is what is just. By doing so, the door is opened for the rest of the NCAA athletes. For all the risk associated with their activities, it should be so clear that these students deserve this allowance.

  17. Sean Distelcamp October 4, 2019 at 6:50 pm #

    What is most interesting about this to me is the response by the actual student athlete Micheal Pittman who would probably have been able to make money had the law taken effect during his time playing, “I think it would be great for players to get paid, but honestly, that’s way past me.” He could not care less about whether student athletes get paid or not because it won’t effect him anymore. This to me shows why Large Universities and the NCAA have been able to take advantage of student athletes for so long. These students are only attending for four or less years and they all have so much on their mind for the next step in their careers that they just put up with it a few years and then no longer care. It’s not like these students can really organize and demand pay nor would they want to because a collegiate career is so fleeting for student athletes. The best players who could really have leverage are too worried about jeopardizing the millions of dollars they could potentially make in a year. This is why I think it is good that lawmakers have stepped in to try to rectify these injustices.
    For some athletes who wouldn’t be able to make money off endorsements and are actually getting a real education this system works well. However, the student athletes who make the most money for their schools are often pushed through the education system just as a means to get them on the field. I remember reading a tweet from Texas Football’s social media account that they were so proud they had the highest GPA ever in the team’s history that semester, it was 2.8. The other way universities say they help student athletes is that they give them the recognition needed to move on to the next level and make millions. What other multi billion dollar corporation pays it’s most valuable associates in exposure? That would be like every Hollywood actor being required to do their first two movies for free. And for most athletes, they are just one unlucky landing away from never playing the game again. A player who reached the peak of their fame in college and then gets a significant injury will never have been able to properly monetize their talents. There are also the countless stories many professional athletes have of winning their national championship on live TV in front of millions without a penny to their name. New laws letting student athletes make money through endorsements would definitely disrupt the industry significant, but it is still the most fair thing to do.

  18. Nicholas Hicks October 4, 2019 at 7:05 pm #

    I think this is a promising first step for student athletes as a whole across the nation. California is answering the calls for student athletes to have more mobility in utilizing their image and position for monetary gain outside of their student account. It has been a subject of discussion for years now if the current methods of student athlete scholarship compensation are a fair process in the current state of College Sport. Many people, not least of whom are student athletes, have noticed that these schools are reaping benefits worth much more than a partial or even full scholarship. College sports have been rising in popularity this past decade and with that larger colleges are seeing a rise in revenue from sporting events. It seems only fair that if the school is seeing monetary gain then the players themselves should be able to earn monetarily as well. But despite many people sharing this opinion there are still legal requirements upon student athletes that restrict them from utilizing their image or performances in any way. Branding opportunities for these athletes, who sometimes reach national recognition on the same level as professionals, could serve as financial support for the student or student’s family who do not directly benefit from scholarships. Many students pursue athletic careers at the collegiate level because they view it as a way out of poverty. While originally it was thought that these athletes were paid with the value of a college education this can come under reconsideration as the value of a college degree decreases even as the college sport industry continues its upward climb. With this consideration of how their current ‘payment’ is devaluing while the product of the athlete is increasing in value to the institutions I think it is only fair to rework the system to a more fair and harmonious one.

  19. Kathleen Watts October 4, 2019 at 7:23 pm #

    I would say probably half of the discussions about college sports in society have something to do with Money. Just last week, I worked with Seton Hall’s Sports Polling group. One of our questions had to do with this exact issue. Most people agreed that, not only should college athletes make money off of the use of their likeness, but that states should actually take the lead in deciding this issue and not the NCAA. Now, of course the polls that I did are not necessarily indicative of the outcome of the entire poll, but they were very interesting to me. It would seem as though some people, at least, care about these players as more than just college athletes, they are professionals. Many people are aware that the NCAA makes billions off of the backs of these young stars, yet they get none of it. One person I polled even compared it to indentured servitude, which, in a way, is true. Some of these athletes are lucky that they joined the sport they did at the right time. A lot of them probably would not be able to afford college without the scholarships they are gifted for their hard work. Therefore, they are basically working off their debt while the NCAA makes enough money to bail Cambodia out of their reported 2016 external debt and still have $5 billion to spare.
    Every year, collegiate coaches get huge pay increases, only adding to their often multi-million dollar salaries. Kevin Willard, Seton Hall Men’s Basketball Coach makes over $2 million dollars a year based on how his expertise have driven the Pirate’s to great victories, which are projected to continue. However, their star player, Myles Powell, is simply gifted free college and not much else. The two of them have had near equal impacts on the prosperity of the Seton Hall men’s basketball team, yet there is a basically $1.9 million difference in pay. No is saying these athletes should be making millions of dollars, but they deserve more than free college. These students basically have full time jobs along with going to school full time. I know plenty of people who have full scholarships from their schools who work alongside it. The difference is, it is legal for them to get paid while going to schools. These athletes, however, risk getting ejected from their teams if they make any money off of basically anything having to do with their athletics. On top of that, they have basically no time to get and keep a part time job.
    However, this law may very well find a hiccup in the interstate commerce clause in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. The California teams in question often travel outside of state, invite teams from outside to play at their schools, and take part in national broadcasts of their games. All of which these colleges and universities make money off of. However, this does not mean that laws like this won’t take precedence. If the NCAA moves to fight this law, they may take it down, but they may also inspire congress to pass a similar bill, one which they cannot really fight. If they make it to the Supreme Court and they decide that the law does in fact violate the clause, there is a high chance that federal law will take up a similar claim. Still, that is not to say that they will win with such a claim.
    The moves California is now making could either ostracize them from the collegiate athletic community or start a domino effect and change the face of college sports.

  20. Kevin Orcutt October 4, 2019 at 8:05 pm #

    College sports have been the backbone to professional leagues for decades upon decades. These are mostly the athletes that we will one day see paying on TV for major league teams that are the last and final step athletes can go in terms of their career. Many people in the past have wondered why these athletes don’t get paid since what they are doing, professionals get paid for. The think is however is that they do get paid. Most of the big name stars that are in college sports were sought out by the colleges. This means that they were given scholarships that covered their entire tuition, or most of the cost to attend the school and entice that kid to come. If we take Seton Hall for an example with a cost around forty thousand dollars a year to attend without room and board, that is an immense amount of money. A lot of kids will spend the better part of 10 years of their life trying to pay off the loans they took out to get the same education that the college athlete is getting for free. An education in today’s society is crucial to getting a job if you do not plan on starting your own business or doing more service based jobs like Uber which are on your own devices. These athletes also get room and board for free which many kids don’t get to even experience because of the price. In my opinion, on the contrary to what California thinks, paying college athletes is just going too far. They have enough money coming to them that they just can’t spend, giving them more would be a waste of school money. On another note, this would turn college sports into a pay to win game just like major league. Most of the time, if you have the most money, you are able to assemble the best team. With the best team, you are able to win more games. This would make college sports based more upon money than skills of the players, coaches, and schools. I do not know what California is thinking, but I wish they had thought about this better.

  21. Nicolas Mateo October 4, 2019 at 8:46 pm #

    In my opinion, College athletes should not be directly paid by their school for playing a sport, outside of tuition and getting team gear/awards. However, I do believe that students should see profits on their own jersey sales. The NCAA has restricted students from receiving any compensation from their schools, and therefore restricting schools to sell player-specific apparel. However, having a regulated system like the bill passed in California, which allows students to market their names with personal apparel, is fair and does not affect University budgets. Gov. Newsom made a great point in his interview with NY times, when he said “Every single student in the university can market their name, image and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that.” (Blinder1) This is an issue that the NCAA has held a tight grip on, leeching in all of the profits from students’ hard work. It’s interesting to see how this situation will play out considering the fact that the bill is only going to be active in California as of now, and how the NCAA will react in regard to possibly barring schools from competing in their league. NBA stars like Lebron James have already spoke up on the situation, siding with college players, which goes to show that clearly people agree these athletes should see the profits of their own name. In the real world, anything you put your name on should be your money, however the NCAA has prevented this from happening, until now. I love how Gov. Newsom takes charge for these players, and essentially dares the NCAA to try and ban students and schools from playing. Another great point he brought up was the fact that California is too large of a state and holds too much value to the NCAA to ban every school. One major downside to this bill however, is that now students all over the world will want to go to California schools over any other state, simply because that’s the only place they can get paid for their work. In the near future, we’re either looking at a war between Governor Newsom and the NCAA, or we’re going to see lots of states passing similar bills.

  22. Nia Carrasco October 4, 2019 at 8:59 pm #

    It has always been a long-held debate on whether or not college athletes should get paid, outside of coverage of a university’s tuition, room and board, and books. It has always been a principle of the NCAA, National Collegiate Athletic Association that anything outside the cost of attendance was against the rules. California threatened that rule on Monday after Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill that would allow players to arrange endorsement deals and hire agents. The law, which is said to go into effect in 2023, goes against the NCAA’s philosophy that the main focus of a college athlete should be earning a degree, not money. It takes away from the love of the game, and students will start to see it as nothing more than a paycheck. Other states on Capitol Hill have been working to take the NCAA down as the collegiate sports industry is raking in up to $14 billion a year. With the stress caused to athletes physically and mentally due to their packed strenuous schedules, the states feel that they deserve a monetary compensation for their work.
    Aside from the physical overuse student-athletes have to go through, they have so many restrictions that come with it. Aside from missing out on the normal college experience, they can’t use their name, likeness, or talents to produce any revenue for themselves. This seems extremely unfair when a regular college student can simply turn on a camera, post a video to YouTube, and monetize it.
    Being a college athlete myself, I see both sides. I see why people want to keep the focus of college athletes on school and not a paycheck. After all, if an athlete gets hurt, they’ll always have their degree, not their sport to fall back on. They want to keep intentions of the athlete pure and they want them to play simply because they love the game and want to continue at a higher level with more competition. On the other hand, adding a paycheck to the list of pros for a college athlete would just up the ante. The sports would become faster and more competitive, as players would be fighter harder for a spot where they could make more money. But at the end of the day, the school we choose and whether we play or not should be for the right reasons. Despite everything I and my fellow athletes go through, we do it because we want to play, not because we want to get paid and it should stay that way.

  23. Alen Del Valle October 4, 2019 at 9:22 pm #

    I think that athletes deserve to be paid more than their tuition. Being a college athlete can be exhausting and a lot of people would compare them to full-time jobs. Between meetings, practice, study hall, and competitions, that is a lot of time and takes up pretty much all the athletes’ time because they also have classes to attend. Being a college athlete is not for everyone and it is hard to get on a college sports team in general. I know athletes usually get scholarships to help with tuition, but if the coaching staff believes that the athlete should be compensated for their performance, then the coaches should be able to pay him what he deserves. These coaches make these athletes push their limits and work really hard in order for their athletes to get better.
    In my opinion, if an athlete can market their name, they can also bring some popularity to the university by posting on Youtube and Instagram about their day at the university. If I was thinking about the future of a sport’s program at these universities, I would have no problem with this law and will be on-board the whole way. Also, with being able to post Youtube videos of the athletes at these great universities, they could help other athletes in high school see what their facilities look like and see what their daily day consists of. In terms of finding recruits, some high school athletes might just want to go to that college just because they think it looks cool. These coached would appreciate their athletes help with recruiting high school prospects.

  24. Liam H October 4, 2019 at 10:40 pm #

    As an NCAA athlete, I am very aware on this debate and why we college athetes deserve to be able to be paid. As a college athlete, school and athletics take up the majority of your day and any small amount of time you have to yourself is spent doing homework or catching up on sleep. The new California Law being processed allows athletes to be paid for endorsements for products and companies, which is something that has grown tremendously with the advancement in technology. I think it is more than fair to let college athletes have agents and endorse products and companies because many of them gain a strong following base throughout their time in college from being on national television.
    The article states when arguing the purpose of college athletics, the NCAA’s philosophy is that “college athletes should earn a degree, not money, for playing sports.” The first reason why this law is not relevant to that philosophy is because it encourages college athlete to stay in school and finish their degree because they are not missing out on the money they could be making if they were to leave college early to become a professional athlete. The second reason the law doesn’t relate to the philosophy is because these college athletes are not making money for their skill in the sport but rather the fame they receive from being on national television. This law should be implemented in all 50 states because it is the start of rewarding athletes for their hard work in the classroom and in athletics.

  25. Joseph M. October 4, 2019 at 10:58 pm #

    The NCAA has long had a chokehold on college athletics, raking in money off of the hard work of student athletes. The NCAA makes over one billion dollars annually. Though college athletes can receive scholarships and certain equipment for free, they get nothing from their successes as athletes. California took the first step in correcting this wrong by passing a bill that would allow athletes to profit off of their likeness. This is only fair as the schools and the NCAA already do make money off of them. Though I fear the blurring of the lines between what is considered professional sports and what is still amateur, I believe so long as the students are not paid a salary in anyway from either the NCAA or their school, then it is fine.

    For the NCAA to try to stop these efforts to give the students what they deserve and to threaten to remove California schools from competition is ridiculous. The amount of potential revenues lost from the many strong bases in California who would no longer watch due to their teams not being included in events like March Madness is far too much for the measure to be seriously considered. The NCAA should acknowledge that in today’s media centric society it only makes sense to allow players to profit off of their own likeness and allow for the wealth to be spread more evenly.

  26. Trinity Holland October 6, 2019 at 11:14 am #

    I truly do hope that California is able to get this new law passed, and I hope that in doing so, other states will follow suit. Paying college athletes has always been a very controversial topic. College students who are not athletes believe that all athletes get their tuition paid for, and so they deem it unfair. That is far from the truth however. A very small percentage of student athletes get full tuition scholarships, and in my experience it’s usually reserved for the larger sports such as football and basketball. Moreover, the law does not state that student athletes will just receive compensation for being an athlete. All it does is lift the rule against student athletes being able to use their name and status to market themselves and receive compensation for it. ““Every single student in the university can market their name, image and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that,” Newsom said. “The only group that can’t are athletes. Why is that?”.

    Personally, as a Division 1 student-athlete I know the struggles of being a student-athlete first hand. I believe that if people really knew what it was like being an athlete, not just what they see on TV, they would understand why this law is so important. Just because you are an athlete does not mean you are exempt from academic requirements. Some professors may be understanding, but many are not. Student-athletes are required to do the same amount of homework, quizzes, exams, and studying all while going to practice, weight-room, and competing. Though some athletes receive scholarship money, it goes towards tuition, and unlike other students, athletes don’t have the time in their schedules to get a part-time job for money to be used on basic necessities and other wants. “People are just so aware of the fact that you’ve got a multibillion-dollar industry that — let’s set aside scholarships — basically denies compensation to the very talent, the very work that produces that revenue,” said Senator Nancy Skinner, a Democrat, who wrote the legislation. “Students who love their sport and are committed to continuing their sport in college are handicapped in so many ways, and it’s all due to N.C.A.A. rules.” I’m glad that there are people who recognize that this is a problem and I hope that by 2023, this law is passed and in effect.

  27. Maeve Lersch October 6, 2019 at 1:35 pm #

    As a college athlete, the topic of student athletes being compensated for their sport is something I have thought about on many occasions. This article brought up many points that I have not considered in the past which made me understand the side of being paid for playing; however, I do not see a large enough justification for this law. In the article, they talk about how athletes are being exploited for their talent which I do see in some regards if their jersey number is personally being sold; however I believe in college the purpose is to pay for the team not for yourself and adding this law creates a competition mindset of paying for yourself and not your team which is not the purpose of college athletics. I think this is a major component to consider because adding compensation for athletes will change this framework of what is means to be a college athlete completely, and not in a good way. In college, being a student-athlete is usually stressed, and I think that by compensating athletes it is taking the student part out of the equation and stressing athlete too much and would make it more like playing pro.
    In the article they also talk about how the NCAA amateurism rule denies compensation for their talent, but it is their talent that is granting some full rides to school which means they are being paid upwards of $50,000 usually a year which most other people have to buy themselves or take out loans. I don’t think that the fact that they are getting incredible scholarship opportunities can be overlooked when they talk about athletes being paid. From personal experience, although I am not at the level of some people on a full ride who are viewed by millions, athletics has made it possible for me to be able to attend school in an affordable manner which I see as compensation for my work. Furthermore, I believe one main issue that was not really brought up in the article that needs to be addressed in this issue is that the majority of athletic departments across the country are operating at a loss. In the article, they talk about how these athletes have millions of followers, but even with all the viewership there is not enough to cover the costs of college athletics for many which I believe is a reason towards not paying athletes.
    Although I do not agree with most of the reasoning behind this law, I do understand the aspect of if your name is being used explicitly, you should be able to get some sort of compensation for it. I don’t think it needs to be as far as agents and things of that nature because I think that is what going pro is far; however, I do think it would be fair to see some sort agreement for royalties for your name being used or jersey to promote the school if that is making a profit.

  28. Shamar Kipp October 6, 2019 at 3:04 pm #

    As an average college student who is pursuing a degree solely, I believe that a better opportunity to higher education with free amenities should not be the limit but should be enough/sufficient for college athletes who have been recruited by these elite universities. College athletes being paid for their hard work and dedication to sports that create billions in revenue on an annual basis has been a topic of debate forever. Many people are overlooking the fact that the bill that Governor Gavin Newsom signed only lifts the restrictions that were created and enforced by the NCAA. The bill does not state that the NCAA and the universities that recruit these student-athlete HAVE to pay them for playing. It simply ALLOWS them to make money off their name and likeness with endorsements and deals from other billion dollar companies. The ability to make money off your name and likeness is a right that I believe every person should have regardless of their hobby or occupation. If you have a craft that you excel in and it drives and inspires others to do something or buy something in this free capitalistic society then you should be able to be compensated for that. If I, hypothetically speaking, became the best mathematician in the tri-state area and the university that I was attending was making money off my likeness and name then I should have the ability to make money from that. It is because Mathematics isn’t a major billion dollar company that it is overlooked. Being a collegiate athlete who is also a major sports prospect is not for everyone. Like the author states, the college sports industry has swelled into a behemoth of an industry worth 14 billion dollars. This money is not from the sales and revenue of people buying “NCAA” shirts and antiques. It is from the media coverage, marketing, and selling of the athletes’ reputation and skills in their respective sport.
    For example, most NBA prospects who go to college are usually “one and done”. This means that they literally only go to college for one year because it is not permitted for them to go straight out of high school. They should be able to hire agents and accept endorsements so they can have a foot in the door of the professional life earlier. All the restrictions and bans that are placed in front of these athletes are just barriers to a life that is already granted to them.

  29. Stephen Hoffman October 6, 2019 at 8:56 pm #

    This new law is a fascinating development in an ever-present issue. The issue of paying college athletes is one that has been long debated and is one that has many sides to consider. The issue spans many different concerns, as it is important enough that it was even included on the Seton Hall sports polling questionnaire this month. As I was administering the poll, many of the responses from this questionnaire were passionate and charged, as many people across the country have strong opinions on the subject. One of the most popular opinions was the players should be allowed to be paid for their likeness, allowing them to profit off of advertisements, endorsements from apparel and merchandising brands, and signatures or public appearances. Currently, the NCAA prohibits such payments from being made as they mandate the players do not profit, as they considered “student-athletes”. This has resulted in considerable rule adjustments from both the NCAA and professional leagues, as they have re-evaluated the amount of time players are required to stay in college before entering professional sports, and have also attempted to account for the players going overseas to play professionally in foreign leagues, bypassing college in exchange for the profit of foreign professionalism.
    This California law brings into question an additional element to the issue of paying these student-athletes. There is a potential that larger schools with more established athletic programs and the most impressive endowment could potentially pay their players considerably more than smaller schools. This issue could lead to less parity in college sports and the rise of the dominant “blue blood” schools completely controlling the college sports landscape. With the recent allowance of gambling on sports and the increased support of paying college athletes, the issue is one that is clearly not going away. California’s move has also raised the question of jurisdiction, as the NCAA and state governments are forced to decide who will legislate over this issue. California is making a clear statement that they believe it should be up to the states, while the NCAA’s reaction to this contradiction of rules is sure to conflict with this ruling. If the NCAA overrules the ruling, there is a chance that it forces the choice onto the schools themselves, potentially even forcing them to become independent of the NCAA. This presents considerable issue, as these players would likely lose any chance of advancing to the professional level in the given sport. This issue needs clarity, and the NCAA is failing at providing it.

  30. Danielle Blanco October 8, 2019 at 10:10 am #

    I was surprised when I saw this topic in the news this week. As a student athlete, this news left me shocked. I have been around the collegiate athlete background ever since I was 14 practicing with my local university or when college athletes would come practice with us. Now as a college athlete, I have heard this controversial discussion many times and each time, people always find the pros and cons. There are athletes that are bound to go pro in the early stages of their college careers but have been restricted to get an agent. Also, college athletes at major universities bring in large amounts of money but do not receive any commission from this. Colleges pay athletes in terms of their scholarship and believe they should not make additional money for their performance. However, many athletes need additional money to live comfortably and we do not have the time to work like other students because being a student athlete is a full- time job. However, granting additional money to student athletes or letting them acquire an agent takes away from the NCAA’s mission. Their mission is for student athletes to participate in the sport they love will be given the opportunity to get an education.
    To me, I believe that you cannot pass this law into one state and not the others. Knowing what I know about recruiting athletes, it is very competitive and this law only being applied in California will result in many athletes to go to school in California because they have an advantage. Also, once you get an agent, you are considered a professional athlete which goes against many rules of the NCAA. When entering the NCAA portal, which is where every athlete must register in order to eligible to participate in NCAA sports. In the portal you must answer many questions to see if you are eligible to participate. A large chunk of these questions asks whether you have ever been paid to play because that is against the NCAA rules. It is wrong to apply this standard in some states and not others. Also, the law states that California athletes can acquire an agent to help with their pro career, just like how a student could promote themselves for their future career. However, this is unfair to the other athletes who do not have this access. I believe that getting my school paid for by playing sports is more than enough. All though I am not going professional like other athletes, I still do not see the point of the need to get an agent right now. If you are bound to go professional then the agents will be there when the time is appropriate.

  31. Tiffanny Reynolds October 9, 2019 at 4:58 pm #

    If collegiate athletes can accrue monetary benefits from playing college sports, then collegiate actors/dancers/technicians/etc. should be getting paid for their performances/work on productions in college. When visual art students have their works presented in university art galleries, they should receive compensation for their work.

    I find this law to be quite ridiculous, and further the point that I have exhibited most of my life, being from a sports-heavy small town in southern Indiana, that the sports industry is deemed as the only important avenue of entertainment, and now it is seeping down into the collegiate atmosphere. (Yes, I realize this topic strays a bit from the legal discussion of the article, but hear me out, as the argument I present is briefly discussed in the article, which I believe is the more important argument to be discussing.)

    College athletes/performers/artists/etc. are not athletes/performers/artists/etc. first; they are college students first!

    From the article: ““People are just so aware of the fact that you’ve got a multibillion-dollar industry that — let’s set aside scholarships — basically denies compensation to the very talent, the very work that produces that revenue,” said Senator Nancy Skinner, a Democrat, who wrote the legislation.” (Blinder) Yes, that’s the point in regards to collegiate training. The point of college is to receive an education. This education comes in multiple formats: lectures, hands-on experiences, reading, writing, etc. What students who partake in extracurriculars are doing (whether they be sports, arts, etc.) is adding to their learning environment, and thus giving more tools to succeed once they graduate and enter the professional world. If they were good enough to be working professionally, then they need not go to college. If they decided to go to college regardless, then the work needs to take a backseat.

    Being in the performing arts department at Rider University, I have seen first-hand instances of students skipping classes and/or rehearsals to go audition for regional/touring/Broadway productions. Of course, the faculty become upset by this, because if one is attending college to learn how to act/dance/sing, etc. then they should not be going into the professional world and auditioning with those who have already had their extensive training. (And admittedly, some truly are that talented, and may either drop out or take a gap year and return to finish their degrees. After all, attending college is a financial burden, and being able to obtain money as well as professional credits and experience are valuable assets to have.)

    Michael Pittman Jr. says it best from the article stating: “I think it would be great for players to get paid, but honestly, that’s way past me. I’m just going to keep playing every week until I reach that level that actually pays me.” (Blinder) He is essentially stating what I have above, that student athletes/performers/etc. need to earn their way up to pay, and not be expected to receive it while they’re still studying, learning, and growing (whether it be in the classroom, on the field, on the stage, etc.)

    The last quote from the article I want to address states: “Only a fraction of college athletes eventually turn professional, and for the rest, “college is the only time they have to profit off their hard-earned athletic successes…”” (Blinder) And some actors/dancers/etc. don’t always become professionals, yet to the rest of society that seems “normal”, hence why people frown when students pursue the arts. Why is it that one is deemed as, “let them profit on it while they are good enough for college but not the professional world”, and another is “well if they aren’t good enough for the professional world, then they just are not good enough period?” Talent is talent, whether it be sports or the arts. However, college is also college. It is a school, a university, an educational setting. Yes, networking occurs in both sports and the arts in these settings, but it is still while the athlete/performer/etc. is a STUDENT. Just let them do that first. This bill just sounds like a way to further exploit college athletes and make their already stressful lives even harder when they have to include endorsements and agents into their lives of schoolwork and training.

  32. Griffin Smith October 10, 2019 at 7:46 pm #

    As a current student-athlete I think this bill being passed is just the beginning of more to come, I believe every state will follow in California’s footsteps and also pass similar bills allowing student-athletes to accept sponsorship money for their likeness. Right now the big debate going on is that more high school star athletes are going to begin accepting scholarships with schools in California because they can make money for their family and make their lives much better off. I think the only way this bill and law will be affective is if the rest of the country follows the state of California so that athletes will not prefer any college over another because of what state the college resides in. The great thing about college sports at the moment is that athletes will commit to schools because of their academics or because of how great the coach is, not just because the school is in the state of California and a agent is offering the athlete advertisement compensation. I don’t want this perspective to change, and don’t want star high school athletes deciding which school they go to based off bribes from different agents for more money.

    This will also be the first step to taking apart the dictatorship which is the NCAA, over the past 5 years the NCAA has made over a 10 billion dollar profit, and these students who work so hard day in and day out don’t see a cent of that money. The top 10 highest earners that work for the NCAA corporation all have annual salaries over 50 million dollars, and I don’t think it is right that these men and women can go home to their massive mansions and great lives, when the kids that they are making their money off of have to go back to their families who often come from poor and try and find a way to make it professionally. I understand that their needs to be structure when dealing with collegiate sports but I don’t think that the people running the corporation should be making the amount of money they are, and as a student that doesn’t receive a jacket or shoes for the sport that I play I feel as if the money the NCAA makes can be reallocated throughout the athletics programs that aren’t as privileged as a powerhouse school.

    In my opinion I don’t believe every athlete deserves compensation, I am a Division 1 golfer and my likeness is not used at all so I don’t think I should be paid, but these big names such as Reggie Bush and Zion Williamson throughout the years should have made money off of how much these big sports programs use their image and name. I understand that most of these star players will end up becoming professionals and they will make a lot of money that way, but just incase something happens such as a freak injury, or anything that takes the game away from them I think there should be a way to compensate these kids who are putting their heart on the line every game day.

  33. Connor G October 11, 2019 at 3:16 pm #

    It is very interesting to see that California’s new bill is openly defying the bylaws of the National Collegiate Athletic Association. It is a murky and unclear position to be in, whether one is an athlete, a coach, a politician, or an NCAA employee. As a former division one athlete, this is a very hard concept to wrestle with as there are two very clear sides to the argument. For a while, I had believed that college athletes should not get paid as they are in school to earn a degree, not money. I held this to be especially true for athletes who attend a university on an athletic scholarship. However, recently my view has changed. Since getting to college, I learned the demands placed on an athlete especially at the division one level. On top of normal classes and homework, many athletes put in upwards of twenty-five hours per week of team related activities whether that is practicing, exercising, reviewing film, etc. Athletes at the collegiate level constantly remark that their athletic endeavors are the equivalent of a full-time job on top of classes, which I can fully agree with.

    According to the article, the college sports industry last year alone generated over fourteen billion dollars in revenue, one billion shy of that of the National Football League. The NCAA has received much backlash in recent years over its bylaws preventing athletes from making money off of their athletic talents, and has been a very vocal opponent of the new California bill, which is designed to take effect in 2023. The bill will allow athletes to hire agents and seek endorsements, representing products and brands as a result of their talents. California, being the most populated state, has the largest number of collegiate athletes and the results will be felt rather quickly once the bill takes effect. One issue of the past regarding the paying of athletes has been where the money would come from. The issue seemed to have stalled before this in that if a public university were to pay athletes, then those athletes would become state employees. This would bring to light a controversy in attempting to determine if those athletes would be eligible for state benefits, especially related to health as athletes are constantly putting their bodies to the test and pushing them to near-breakdown, without even taking into consideration some of the career-ending injuries that some suffer.

    A major reason why colleges, even those in California, and the NCAA are objecting to this new bill is that these athletes help generate a tremendous amount of money. Division one football teams pull in millions upon millions of dollars every season, so if the NCAA were to declare a college ineligible to compete, then the school would suffer an unrecoverable loss of money that could help to impact the other sports at the university.

    Even if this bill does not work the way it is intended to, it has reignited the debate over paying college athletes for making money for universities. As a former athlete, there should be something done in the way of compensation for the athletes who are constantly representing the school and generating money. While this is a good start, it may not be the final step in the process for athletes to be compensated fairly for their time and abilities.

  34. Colby Richardson October 11, 2019 at 5:55 pm #

    College athletes for many years now have been fighting for their rights to be paid while playing sports in college. College make hundreds of thousands even millions of dollars from the sports that they have. But yet, the players themselves have never seen a penny from playing. Everyone has a right to market themselves, and try to earn money while in college. But yet, any collegiate athlete is not allowed to do so. Now there are two sides of the story. On one side, without these players, the schools would not make any money from sports. So it would make sense for these players to get a cut of the money that is made. On the other side, most of these players are going to school for free. The top schools have high tuition rates that are waived due to the scholarships that the players receive. So if they are technically playing for free since they do not have to pay massive amounts of money to go to those high ranking schools.
    When playing these sports, some might argue that these players should skip college all together in hopes of going pro. Since when playing basketball or football, there is always that risk of injury. So if a top prospect has a life changing injury, they might’ve ruined their chances of making money in the professional leagues. They are putting their health on the line to play a sport for free. Why risk the chance of getting hurt when you’re not even getting paid to do so. If I was in their shoes I don’t know how I would feel. While it is a team sport and I would want to win. If I was a top draft pick, it would be hard to play towards the end of the season. I might want to preserve my health for when I am getting paid.
    If the students were to get paid there would be issues with bribery for sure. Some schools could afford to pay more than others. So it would be tempting to go to one school over another just due to the amount of money that they give you. Students should play for schools where they are growing and going to have the best chance at making an impact. It should not be about what school offers you the most money to play for them. There will always be those students who get full rides for college, but this doesn’t hold the monetary value. Getting paid thousands more from one school over another would be one hard thing for an eighteen year old to turn down.

  35. James Koerner October 11, 2019 at 6:02 pm #

    Perhaps one of the biggest debates that has been going on for years, the decision for the NCAA to pay college athletes or not has sparked discussions among athletes, coaches, politicians, and every day citizens alike. Governor Newsom of California recently signed a bill that would allow college athletes to be endorsed and receive a form of compensation for all their hard-work that they put in to playing their sport. According to the article, the NCAA takes in roughly $14 billion a year in revenue. Besides scholarships, there is nothing else that the NCAA spends its money on, while it makes close to a billion dollars from the Division 1 Basketball tournament alone. On top of that, the NCAA is the only collegiate athletic association there is. In a way, they are a monopoly, as there is no other league that can college athletes can compete under. The NCAA obviously knows that they are the only ones that provides the services that they do, so they essentially make their own rules and do whatever they want.
    Many people believe that the NCAA should allow athletes to receive some sort of compensation. The article makes a great point that anyone on any college campus can upload a video of themselves doing anything and make money off that. They can also create their own brand and sell products if they wanted to do that. The everyone pertains to everyone except college athletes. Athletes cannot market themselves as players, profit off their own actions, or hire an agent for themselves. Essentially, the NCAA owns them and places all of these restrictions on the athletes. College athletes sacrifice so much of their time, energy, social life, and their own body to perform at the college level. Being a full-time student in college is already a full-time job. Adding college athlete on top of that is really two full-time jobs, which is certainly a ton of work. The article says that only a small percentage of athletes actually end up going professional for their sport to begin with. Once college is over, these athletes will most likely never actively compete in their sport again. What’s even worse is that some athletes will never compete again because they get so badly injured in college; college athletics takes a massive toll on them physically and mentally.
    Again, this debate has reached the political stage as far of how important it is. What is rather nice is that the issue isn’t so bipartisan like gun laws or climate change would be. Republicans and Democrats are choosing both sides since this has become such an important topic to discuss. Professional athletes have defended the idea of college athletes being paid, such as Lebron James. When you have someone as influential and as excellent as what they do as Lebron James arguing for your cause, it certainly puts pressure on the NCAA to amend some of their current rules. Personally, I believe that college athletes should receive some sort of compensation for what they do. Having to perform well in all my classes without being an athlete is challenging for me. I couldn’t imagine having to figure out to do well in school while focusing on getting better at the sport I’m playing as well. The biggest thing to me is that athletes are always missing classes to travel for a game and are so limited on time during the day since usually they have practice twice a day. How do we expect them to get great grades like everyone else if they have so much more on their plate? On to top of that, the majority aren’t even going pro, so they still need to rely on maintaining a solid GPA to get a job. At the very least, the NCAA should give every athlete some sort of stipend for how difficult college athletes have it.

  36. Wyatt Slone October 11, 2019 at 6:04 pm #

    This whole article makes me sick to think that many collegiate athletes will begin to benefit from signing with agents and monopolizing off their success, when they already are benefiting by receiving full scholarships to their choice of university to study whatever they want. Hayley Hodson a former collegiate Volleyball player says, “college is the only time they have to profit off their hard-earned athletic successes.” This statement aggravates me because a majority of athletes use their skills athletically to earn themselves access to a great university and to earn a great education while still performing at an elite level for a passion they love. As a former athlete and now performing artist, this whole article infuriates me because majority of performing arts majors are bound by contract to their school program to not seek agencies nor outside sources for success or employment until spring of their senior year. Summer employment for a performing artist is usually underpaid and for experience only, while athletes are already debt free and working in their off season while training.
    I do not agree with their statement that these athletes do not get the same opportunities as normal college students. They receive even better opportunities. What I do not like about this N.C.A.A agreement that it does not state that it is open towards Dance Team or cheerleaders, they put in the same amount of work and are present the same amount of hours to dazzle the crowd and make the team look even better. And yes although it goes against my paragraph above, these boys and girls are also on a heavy partial or full scholarship. So why do football players in California get the level up on the endorsement game.
    All opinions aside, I do see this as a great profit for a college student. Although I am jealous, I see the benefits and only wish them for myself. Many athletes do not have a very long career due to physical ailments so many of them look to benefit from forming a platform and campaign to propel them into coaching. That reasoning behind seeking agencies I can get behind but not for sheer profit and narcissism.

  37. Dominic Caraballo October 11, 2019 at 7:01 pm #

    While I agree that there are some rules that need to be changed regarding college athletes and money, I don’t believe that allowing students to hire agents and creating brands for themselves is the answer. Perhaps there are other ways of allowing college athletes to make money. For instance, the majority of athletes play sports as if it’s a full time job to make themselves good enough to play sports at the college level. This dedication hinders their ability to take on a job on top of their already busy schedule, maybe figuring out some sort of wage to compensate them is one avenue to explore. For example, people who work as tutors at universities get paid for their sessions, maybe athletes could get paid for their practice & game times. Furthermore, I argue that it would take away the competitive nature of the game. Many people prefer college sports for the sole reason that the students are playing hard every second whereas, there are instances in professional sports when players don’t play with that same demeanor simply because they are concerned about their contracts and endorsements more than the game.

    I continue my argument by stating that this law will drive more attention to students generating money than it will for them earning a degree. I think it would be a distraction from students going to practice and studying by spending more time interested in how their image is being portrayed on social media. There would be no healthy balance and the students would be caught up in earning money for their own benefit and not values like team-building. In addition, I believe it would open up a very large jar of worms because I believe it isn’t as simple as if athletes are playing sports than they should be able to market themselves. Considering this proposed law would only be applicable in California for the time being, and there would be push-back regarding eligibility statuses for those living in the state, which is a problem in and of itself. In addition, if athletes are getting paid then that also means scholarships could be null because schools can argue that the students have the ability to pay for their education. This could cause harm to those who don’t make enough to pay for their own education and need scholarship assistance. Another matter that I believe is often overlooked is the fact that there is no question as to what the scholarship money is going toward [but] cash… could be spent on wants rather than necessities, potentially leading the athletes into a debt they would not have with the benefit of a scholarship. All in all, yes changes need to be had for college athletes, but I am not sold that allowing college athletes to generate their own means of income is the answer.

  38. Louis Priolo October 11, 2019 at 8:14 pm #

    California’s governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow college athletes to make money through the hiring of agents and receiving endorsements. The new law is slated to take effect in 2023. The college sports industry generated about $14 billion last year, and this new law could affect the business model of college sports.
    As a college athlete, this is certainly interesting. Receiving payment for playing would be cool, but it does present a potential problem. For years young adults aspire to play sports in college in part to get an education at a discount, or for free, and possibly play at the professional level to make money playing the sport one day.
    While paying college athletes may be justifiable and proper, it could change the way games are played. Student athletes would be playing to earn more money and not to win. College sports are known to be fast-paced and high energy in comparison to professional sports. Introducing pay for college athletes could make the college game less entertaining and more similar to the pace of professional sports games as a result.
    As with most things, there would be pros and cons to introducing pay for college athletes, and it will be interesting to see what the proposed legislation will do for college sports.

  39. Javier Tovar October 11, 2019 at 8:38 pm #

    There are many things I like about this. As a student in college, I don’t really agree with college athletes getting paid a salary because at the end of the day these athletes are still attending many of these big universities for free. Someone like me doesn’t have the privilege of being six foot five and amazing at a certain sport. I had to academically work hard to be where I am today. Even though there is a huge argument about student athletes not having any money because they are busy with school and sports, trust me when I say this they are not alone. I too have a little amount of money as a fellow college student; and I have student loans to pay after college, where they might have no debt because of an athletic scholarship they received. I’m not saying they don’t deserve athletic scholarships, but I believe the last thing they should be complaining about is getting paid a salary to play a sport at a collegiate level. I think playing sports at this level is a privilege. I would love the chance to play soccer or baseball at a division one school. With should college athletes receive a salary for a privilege; no.
    Thankfully that’s not what this new California law is allowing. The law allows thousands of student-athletes in America’s most populous to promote products and companies, trading on their sports renown for the first time. Athletes will also not be restricted from being paid for the use of their names, images or likenesses, whether in connection with lucrative shoe contracts or modest endorsements for local restaurants. I think this is something that can be beneficial for the athletes who are all out superstars; these athletes deserve the ability to build their name and brand without schools barring them of that privilege. Therefore, the law is not directly pushing for colleges to start paying their athletes but is stating that they won’t be able to restrict the money that they can make off their names and brands. The NCAA has snubbed an enormous amount of profit from athletes because of the argument that they are receiving an education and not an athletic career. Which is why I think athletes receiving the ability to make money off of their hard work is a good thing, as long as the school isn’t paying them a salary, I am all for the law.

  40. Rahul October 11, 2019 at 9:46 pm #

    This article was very thought provoking and brought a lot of insight to the argument whether or not college athletes should be paid. In my personal opinion, college athletes should be paid. From the amount of money, they bring in to college universities alone, they should be fairly compensated. Through their athletics, college athletes are able to gain more recognition to a school as well as gain more attendance to their athletic events. All of these help the college or university gain revenue. In the NFL, for example, in reference to college football, they get paid an abundance of money to play, whereas, college athletes are required to go to school, get good grades, and play football at a competitive level. The only benefit without pay for college athletes is that they have to focus on school and try to get good grades, so that they can get their degree and have a backup plan in case the sport they are involved with doesn’t acquire them a full-time job in athletics. This article applied to me on a personal level because my brother was a college athlete at a prestigious university where the tuition was very high. If he was able to be compensated for his athletic commitment while going to school, it wouldn’t have been so hard to pay for school and he would have had more disposable money to get through school as he was living in New York City. One question that came up to me as I was reading this article was how other states would interpret this and how they would respond. Also, who would be the ones paying these athletes? If the colleges are the ones that need to pay the athletes, this could cause an unfair relationship between the college administrators and the athletes. This would have to be justified in the terms of the law that is set forth by the state of California and other states if they do end up passing a law to pay college athletes. Another big reason to pay college athletes would be for proper nutrition. A lot of college campuses do not supply good, nutritious meals for their athletes. From going to a division 1 university and seeing the type of food they have available to all students and athletes, if college athletes were payed they would have the income to support a healthy and nutritious diet.

  41. Kevin Dougherty October 13, 2019 at 8:21 pm #

    This article is about college athletes and whether or not they should be paid in a value that is more than just the typical scholarship they get. Previously to reading this article I thought the college students should have the opportunity to be paid. While yes they do generate a lot of money to the schools they go to they are still either pursuing a degree presumably with a full ride or they are there just to hit an age limit or gain experience before going pro. This article was for the college athletes and that they deserve to be getting paid or having some sort of compensation.
    After reading this article my opinion did change a little bit. For starters there are a lot of college athletes in the country. Most of these athletes will not go pro for whatever the reason may be. The reason ranges from lack of skill, lack of motivation, injury, or lack of interest. This being said there are college athletes out there who are superstars and are being abused by college. This article said that this new bill passed in California allows these athletes to hire agents and make money from endorsements. This will allow college athletes to market their name and image to make themselves some money.
    This is where I start to agree. College athletes in my opinion don’t deserve to have a salary per say. They are going to school for an education in which most will get a full ride for. This compensation I believe is more than enough for them considering they are also improving themselves and learning a lot about their sports while playing in college. What I love about this law is that it allows them to market themselves as individuals. I believe it should be a right that college athletes are able to use their names to make money off endorsements, advertisements and so forth.
    For example in college basketball there are always players that are exceptional. This past season Zion Williamson comes to mind. He was a super successful player who did get drafted into the NBA. This being said even though he is making a ton of money now in the NBA he could have marketed himself in college as well. These athletes make up a multibillion dollar industry in college sports. Some of the athletes get so well known that they are more popular and influential then profession athletes in the sports. While I agree with some points the article makes I do agree that they deserve the right to have an agent and get endorsements.

  42. Preethi Dwarasila October 14, 2019 at 1:56 pm #

    This article is really interesting and it talks about college athletes getting paid for what they are performing and if this should be more then just a scholarship. I personally think that students who play sports should get paid because they go through so many different things and through a lot of stress. I really thought that the athletes got paid because they generate and make their universities get a lot money. But I have been reading that the athletes do not get anything from that and they get a scholarship to help out but that is a small portion of what they should be getting. This article brings up many important things and that athletes should be getting money for what they do for the colleges they play for.
    I think that there are a lot of factors that come into this topic. Because not all sports in colleges bring in money to colleges. And there are so many athletes and to make them are paid would be such a huge problem. This article brings up these problems and gives both sides. There are so many people that say that everyone should get paid but that would involve so many things to it. And not all sports go pro and everyone is in a different pace which could mean that they are really great or do not have the right skills. But at the same time if a college can use a student’s image to make money, that student should get some kind of profit.

  43. DeVante M. October 16, 2019 at 2:50 pm #

    This article hit on many good points. This has been an issue for decades. The NCAA generates billions of dollars every year. This money is collected from tv deals from televised college sports, they collect a portion of the ticket sales for games, March Madness, etc. Their business model is very effective and lucrative. The NCAA claims that most of the money they receive goes directly back into the universities and colleges for scholarships for student athletes. This money also goes to team travel, food, and lodging. Now surely all the money they distribute doesn’t add up to what their revenue is. Also there are people who work for the NCAA so they need to be paid too. But the biggest issue is that students do not see enough of this money. You may notice that when a nationally televised college game is being promoted they will show the star players for each respective team. These star players are a big reason why the team is so entertaining to watch. The revenue rises as more people \watch and attendant games. These star players are directly responsible for the NCAA’s profit, yet they are not allowed to receive any compensation besides scholarship money. This is an issue because most big time college athletes (especially in basketball) only stay one or two years anyway. So in essence what they are receiving is useless. There are many instances where these athletes could really use the money. We often here about how sports are the only path of success for many young athletes. While their in college they can essentially earn no income due to the grueling schedule of a college athlete, and they can receive no monetary compensation from the NCAA. This leaves the athletes family in a tough situation.
    The bill presented in the article is going to have a lot of ramifications. I can almost guarantee that the division 1 california schools will not be allowed to compete for the national title. The article mentioned that these schools may not even be allowed to participate in march madness. This would be devastating as colleges and universities bring in more than $100 million just from being in the tournament. For example, after Villanova won their most recent college basketball championship their enrollment increased. Just being in the tournament itself is big for schools.
    Another more issue is a moral one. When a student athlete decides to join a college or university it should be because they genuinely want to be apart of that culture. With the addition of compensation for athletes in the mix many students will be following the money instead of their heart. Which leads to another issue; California schools will have an unfair advantage because more players would clearly want to play for schools that pay them. This will lead to the nations best student athletes attending colleges and universities in California. This is just another reason why I do not believe college athletes will be able to be compensated in the NCAA.

  44. Anthony Freda October 17, 2019 at 10:35 am #

    The debate regarding whether college athletes should be allowed to earn a profit off of their name has been ongoing for several years now. The new California law is a game changer for all collegiate athletes. The NCAA has often been compared to as a monopoly and has been called out for not being concerned about its athletes. We’ve seen professional athletes such as LeBron James, Todd Gurley, and Nigel Hayes speaking out against their hate for the NCAA. The ability for students to earn a profit sounds like a positive ideal, but can result in something negative. I feel as though there are more negatives than positives that come out of the passing of this bill. I’m not saying they shouldn’t be allowed to earn a profit but it may hurt the college sports world in the long run.
    College athletes getting paid would be a great thing for the athletes themselves. Everybody should be allowed to profit off of their name, this is the United States. If a person wants to make a profit legally by all means they should be allowed to. A large portion of college athletes who play football come from poor households who struggle to make a living. The athletes would be able to help their families financially. This law may also begin to end the corruption within the NCAA. They are only concerned about the cash that’s in their pocket and not the wellness of the athletes.
    The cons of athletes earning a profit are stronger in my opinion. My first reasoning is because it may take away from the game itself. Athletes will start to become more self oriented than team oriented. We see athletes all across professional sports chase the money and be self oriented. Taking away from the team mentality can cause a less enjoyable sport. Games will be more about personal achievement for self gain. Not all athletes are going to be able to profit off of their name. There are a handful of big names across the NCAA and I think athletes think they are going to earn a set profit. College athletes such as Clemson quarterback Trevor Laurence, or our very own Myles Powell are going to be the athletes earning a profit. Another reason why I think they shouldn’t earn a profit is because of the amenities most athletes have at their university. A majority of the athletes who would be earning a profit are attending their university for free or very little. A free education with amenities such as private training facilities, team memorabilia/ free clothes, private locker rooms, and food deals should be enough. Tuition rates are higher than ever and these spoiled athletes are enjoying amenities no other students across the country have access to.

  45. Cole October 18, 2019 at 9:11 pm #

    According to the NCAA athletes should not be paid beyond the cost of attending the university, but recently California’s Governor Gavin Newman signed a bill to allow players to take on endorsement deals and hire agents. The new law is supposed to take effect in 2023, and directly contradicts the long-held NCAA rule that college athletes should not earn a degree and not money for playing sports. The bill passed by the California Governor has some support from other states, and even Capitol Hill. The reason for all the attention is the fact that the college sports industry has generated at least $14 billion last year. The complaint from athletes are that there are massive demands on their bodies and on their schedules. The new California measure thousands of student-athletes will be allowed to promote products and companies, trading their sports renown for the first time.
    As a student athlete I support the bill, now before everyone shouts, ‘Of course you do!’ I play a non-revenue generating sport. This bill right now only helps those athletes who promote products for companies, and companies do not look for unpopular sports like swimming. But if you put yourself in the shoes of those athletes who are being profited off because of universities’ use of their likenesses. You would feel shortchanged too, but now imagine you are months away from being a professional athlete and then you have a career ending injury. You would be missing out on millions of dollars, while the university makes millions. The biggest concern for me would be the implications that non-revenue generating sports because this would force the NCAA to change their rules and regulations, because if I have learned anything from compliance meetings is that athletes must keep their amateur status.

Leave a Reply