Well, this just quietly slipped out.
Big East commissioner Val Ackerman told SI Now’s Maggie Gray on Friday that the NCAA is reconsidering allowing student athletes to sign endorsement deals.
Under the current rules, student athletes may not be paid for the use of their image or likeness or they would forfeit their amateur status and their collegiate eligibility could be affected. When Gray asked Ackerman why students shouldn’t be able to capitalize on the value they bring to their university, Ackerman responded that the NCAA is considering changing that rule.
“That’s one that’s actually under consideration I believe by the NCAA,” Ackerman said. “It’s actually a time right now where student athlete interests are being closely examined. I don’t have an answer for you on that one today but I will say that and a number of other topics are under review, and I think rightly by the NCAA and it’s very possible that over the course of the next year or two as these these ideas work their way through the legislative system you could see changes.”
Once again, behold the awesome power of the law suit.
While I have no idea what the final version of what the NCAA will propose would look like, it’s an easy move, in that it’s one that won’t cost the schools anything. It’s just too bad they didn’t face up to their stupidity and greed a few years ago, so they could have saved themselves a few bucks and a ton of embarrassment.
Not to mention saving a little more of the careers of AJ Green and Todd Gurley for Georgia fans. Schmucks, every one of ’em.
Get The Picture 
The issue of paying athletes aside, I wonder if the potential suitors know what a minefield they’re walking into. While there’s always a risk in hiring a public face to represent your brand, paying an 18 or 19 yr old to do so brings a whole new level of risk. Imagine the high profile Heisman candidate who decides to rape/batter a woman about a month after beginning to promote Nike or Under Armour.
LikeLike
I imagine there will be dramatic consequences for bad behavior in these contracts. The endorsee will probably have the opportunity to drop a guy like nobody’s business if he gets in trouble.
The big question is whether agent representation isn’t far behind if this ability to trade on name and likeness becomes reality at the college level.
LikeLike
That’s what I was thinking. Wouldn’t even an endorsement deal require representation?
LikeLike
O.J. Simpson. Tiger Woods. Brett Favre. The only difference is in age.
LikeLike
Exactly my point. Most of us tend to do a lot more dumb shit early in life.
LikeLike
I believe Llama was pointing out that Simpson, Favre, and Woods were well past college age.
LikeLike
People young and old will always do stupid things, but placing a cap on earning potential is illegal, and the NCAA should be held accountable.
LikeLike
The problem that will eventually arise is that that Nike, etc., will start deciding where these kids go to school. The university of Oregon will be in great position with this change, if it happens.
Another thing you’ll see are new corporations in Alabama who find that they really like using college kids for promotions. The free market principles underlying the idea are fine, the problem is that there are a lot people with money but without principles who have an interest in college football.
Why can’t we just play college football with college students again?
LikeLike
As soon as you are ready to go back to listening to the games only on radio unless you are a season ticket holder. That genie is already out of the bottle.
LikeLike
I just don’t buy that. I think most of us would be just as happy watching guys like Chris Conley and Terry Hoage as Isaiah Crowell. There are kids that can play football AND be capable students at UGA. If the quality of the talent on the field mattered all of us college football fans would like the NFL even more, but we don’t. The biggest risk in raising standards would be that the Georgia southern’s and Troy state’s of the world would get really good at football. To me that concern is not a sufficient reason to move forward with auburn football players walking around like nascar race cars OR having kids sign with Nike and Nike directing the kids to places where their profit margins can be maximized. At some point you just have to burn it down and start over. The model is going to implode without some reasonable guidance that values something other than a buck.
LikeLike
That is really well said. For what it is worth, I completely agree.
LikeLike
Sure, if you wish to limit the freedom of the athlete. But if you value freedom and especially economic freedom, it is way past time for the student athlete to be able to “make a buck” if that is what he wishes to do with his likeness and skill.
LikeLike
I’m not talking about restricting anybody. I’m saying that this wouldn’t be an issue if we got rid of the mutual exploitation model currently in play. The colleges pretend they’re educating kids who have no business at their school to make money and kids who only see their future in the NFL pretend to be students. It’s a big pile of bullshit with one justification: cash. Kids in every sport, track, tennis, baseball, golf, soccer, decide whether to go pro or to go to college. That’s not restrictive. The truth of it is that Todd Gurley might not be able to make a red cent for his talents the day he walks out of Tarboro High without the forum a college gives him. Todd Gurley the 18 year old freak tooling around NC has a value of close to $0. Todd Gurley, starting TB at the university of Georgia, has a lot more value. Given that should the colleges charge kids who make endorsement deals a fee?
LikeLike
The free market, economic freedom, and commerce are all good things. Its a mutually beneficial system if done within the realm of competition and freedom both for the schools and for the kids. UGA has a greater value with Todd Gurley than without him and the same is true for TG3. He’s more valuable with Georgia than he was in high school. The same holds true for just about every worker out there.
Few people are talking about “going pro” or staying in college in these debates about player pay. IMO, that’s simply a decision about changing employers. However, what we are talking about is kids getting paid for the services rendered and for what they can earn with contracts signed for their own likenesses, marketing, etc. Open it up to the highest bidder for kids.
Now, if the colleges want to forgo the money and go back to a more intramural type system, you’ll see all these lawsuits go away along with the clamor for “pay for play”. But that’s not going to happen. Like any business, the colleges will pay the kids what they are worth on the free market as soon as the courts make them stop colluding with one another.
LikeLike
Just to be clear I’ve never been for the current model without compensation. I simply prefer a different model. If all things remain as they are, my preference would be player compensation. Again, I just wish they’d burn it down and start over.
LikeLike
Damn, something I finally agree with Derek on
LikeLike
First of all, you are correct college football’s main selling point isn’t talent it’s connection with the University whether you attended the school, live in the same state, your parents went there etc. However, if you start watering down the talent in favor of academics then you put a worse product on the field and you start to lose the casual fan, and therefore you lose money. There is reason Duke, Stanford, Yale, and Harvard don’t win football titles.
Think about Georgia football over the past two years. Back to back ten win seasons with two heisman caliber running backs, and Richt gets fired. Talent is a must have because winning matters.
LikeLike
My fondest memories of Georgia football were sitting in a dove field in South Georgia listening to Munson….Ahhhhh… to be there again
LikeLike
It’s hard to imagine what could possibly go wrong when you hand a 20 year old a million dollar endorsement contract while the fullback blocking for him is a preferred walk on that doesn’t even get free schooling.
LikeLike
It would be nice if the average football player could get paid a modest amount to work a camp or something like that.
I remember cases where a star athlete got paid a little bit to appear in a calendar and that was deemed an infraction. That punishes the charity too because nobody wants to buy a calendar with a bunch of accounting majors in it. (BTW I was an accounting major so relax, my fellow debit cops.)
LikeLike
If this happens, will Publix owe Jameis Winston any back gratuities?
LikeLike