NCAA to allow student athletes to profit off of their name, image, and likeness

[dobbles]

So the Adam Fox Norris win got me thinking about the recent change the NCAA made finally starting to allow student athletes to get their piece of the multi billion dollar pie.

I was wondering what you guys thought the impact would be as we have already seen the NCAA route create friction with drafting and players waiting out their college career and bypassing their drafted team.

Certainly basketball and football players would have the most to gain from their very high profiles in North America, but could this trickle down to give hockey players more of an incentive to go the NCAA route? Would more top tier NCAA players cause instances like Fox, Vesey, etc to occur? If it becomes more problematic will the NHL have to change its rules?

Just wanted to get your guys thoughts on the matter. Here is a link in case you haven't heard the news:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/28/10101...les-to-keep-up

Following Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear's executive order allowing college athletes to be compensated for the use of their name, image and likeness — known by its abbreviation "NIL" — at least seven states will put into effect NIL laws, on Thursday. The laws allow athletes to make money for things like endorsement deals, signing autographs and social media content.

That's been prohibited under NCAA rules, but now, the organization is in the process of reforming those rules. Especially after the recent Supreme Court decision weakened the NCAA's long held, but increasingly outdated, notion of amateurism in college sports.

[alan21]

It's about time they start getting compensated. Long overdue.

[looooob]

its a pretty interesting story I've tried to follow as a parent of a soon to be NCAA1 athlete (admittedly in a low profile sport)


clearly the idea is that football and basketball and maybe hockey in some places will benefit, but perhaps anyone with social media savvy


https://www.espn.com/womens-college-...fluencers-ncaa

[Locke]

Did someone take the NCAA President Hostage?

[stemit14]

I’m not sure how much hockey players in the NCAA would make off of their image/likeness. However, if it’s a decent amount… I think this could only make finishing off their 4 years of college hockey more desirable. This could make some teams more hesitant to draft some college players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Geeoff]

I think a big part of this is that they want to make NCAA video games

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by stemit14

I’m not sure how much hockey players in the NCAA would make off of their image/likeness. However, if it’s a decent amount… I think this could only make finishing off their 4 years of college hockey more desirable. This could make some teams more hesitant to draft some college players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody who’s good enough to play any sport professionally would stay in college to be an influencer. If they were that good and that influential, that scales with the exposure that comes from a major pro league.

However, since 95% of college athletes aren’t good enough at sports or influencing to go pro at either, they should be able to make a little on the side through appearances, autographs etc while they finish their degree.

[simmer2]

Originally Posted by Locke

Did someone take the NCAA President Hostage?

A book came out maybe around 2015 ish?

The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football

I suspect this brought a lot of things behind the scenes to the forefront.

[Weitz]

I’m not an expert but a podcast I listen to (biggest sports podcast afaik) seemed to mention its not as cut and dry as players get to make a ton of money. But it certainly changes things. I don’t think it will change much of anything for hockey though.

[D as in David]

Does this ruling end up allowing NCAA athletes to start signing contracts while remaining in college?

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Does this ruling end up allowing NCAA athletes to start signing contracts while remaining in college?

no, simply allows athletes in the NCAA to do what any person over 18 (and under with a parent's consent) do, which is to benefit from their name and likeness.

The idea that a kid on a full music scholarship can teach piano in the summer but a college ball player couldn't coach at a BBall or football camp over the summer is flat out stupid.

I think the NCAA allowing their leagues to become de facto farm teams (which is what they are to some degree anyways) for the pros is a hill they'll die on

but hey, amateuri$m

[transplant99]

I know people think this should be a cut and dried issue, but it has huge implications as well.

Sure football and some basketball programs make a ton of money. Most of that money is already going to supplement other sports at those schools though in the form of Title XIIII requirements.

You start having to pay players from merchandise etc, that money is no longer available for those other sports and you will see programs getting scaled back in a big way if not completely eliminated.

Most of the bigger schools should be OK but the vast majority will start to feel the pinch pretty quickly.

[browna]

Yeah all this is doing is making legal, and more accessible, the stuff that was already going on for top tier athletes. Sure there's the "basketball camps hosted by Browna" to pay Browna, even if Browna just shows up to say hi to the kids with 10 minutes to go.

But it's more for Browna and his family to get paid by Nike on a shoe deal, paid for autograph sessions and getting also paid for Browna ice cream bars while still a junior or sophomore at USC.

The trickle down effect will be that the some money will go to lesser athletes on individual deals, or, as mentioned getting something for having their name in EA Sports video game franchises, and, the boosters of these big schools who footed the bills and payoffs for these athletes, dont have that obligation any more and will have more cash flow for recruiting.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I know people think this should be a cut and dried issue, but it has huge implications as well.

Sure football and some basketball programs make a ton of money. Most of that money is already going to supplement other sports at those schools though in the form of Title XIIII requirements.

You start having to pay players from merchandise etc, that money is no longer available for those other sports and you will see programs getting scaled back in a big way if not completely eliminated.

Most of the bigger schools should be OK but the vast majority will start to feel the pinch pretty quickly.

Might be time to brush up on your roman numerals.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Might be time to brush up on your roman numerals.

I knew it looked wrong...fine

Title 9.

[1qqaaz]

You know something is long overdue when the Supreme Court whips out a unanimous decision with ease. It almost seems like Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were insulted by the silliness of the NCAA arguments.

[GordonBlue]

it's about time.
the NCAA and the high profile schools made so many billions off these kids who got nothing.
I really was starting to hate the fact the kids couldn't legally make a dime but the AD's and coaches were making tens of millions off their labour.

the scales really needed to be evened a bit.

[looooob]

not so fast international students


https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...ensation-money


I don't think its in this article, but another one I read listed the sports that had the highest international flavour- I think tennis and soccer were highest, - hockey was up there but not as high as several others. football obviously is one of the lower ones ( although there are some Canadians and some kickers)

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

it's about time.
the NCAA and the high profile schools made so many billions off these kids who got nothing.
I really was starting to hate the fact the kids couldn't legally make a dime but the AD's and coaches were making tens of millions off their labour.

the scales really needed to be evened a bit.

Well they do get a free education that many of them would otherwise never be able to afford.

I've been listening to ESPNU (SiriusXM 84) which is probably my favorite channel and obviously this topic has been one of the major discussion points for many months now. There's many interesting takes and some of them are interesting. Aside from football players the consensus seems to be the major 'winners' in this will be female athletes and athletes who compete in 'Olympic' sports. The US Olympic team draws much of it's talent from the universities and there could be some pretty lucrative deals with sponsors for those athletes that were previously off limits to student athletes.

Longer term because I think this is a crack that will further widen, if compensation of other types becomes acceptable that completely changes how Canadian hockey players could look at their development. No more having to make a choice between NCAA or Major Junior hockey. That could have implications for the CHL.

[Scornfire]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I knew it looked wrong...fine

Title 9.

I'm even more confused now