Here it comes.

Get ready… for something.

 

What is Emmert’s latest gambit supposedly going to look like?  According to this ESPN report, here’s where the NCAA’s working group is starting:

  • Allow student-athletes to make money by modeling apparel as long as that apparel doesn’t include school logos or other “school marks.”
  • Allow athletes to make money from advertisements. Athletes would be allowed to identify themselves as college athletes in advertisements, but would not be allowed to reference the school they attend or include any school marks in the advertisement.
  • Prohibit athletes from marketing products that conflict with NCAA legislation, such as gambling operations or banned substances. Individual schools would also be allowed to prohibit athletes from marketing products that do not line up with the school’s values.
  • Allow athletes to hire an agent to help procure marketing opportunities, so long as that agent does not seek professional sports opportunities for the client during his or her college career.
  • Require athletes to disclose the details of all endorsement contracts to their athletic department. The working group would recommend further discussion about whether a third party should be involved in overseeing these disclosures in a way that prevents endorsement deals from becoming improper recruiting enticements.

Before you get too worked up, there are a couple of things to keep in mind.  First, the working group is careful to label that little more than a list of “possible changes”.  Second, as the ESPN article notes, “(t)he working group’s recommendations are not guaranteed to remain the same in the nine months before NCAA leaders are expected to vote on new rules…”.  No shit, Sherlock.

What that leaves Emmert with is the opportunity to talk about robust proposals with a straight face, while pleading behind the scenes with Congress to bail his ass out.  Sounds like a plan!

**********************************************************************

UPDATE:  Man, did I call this, or what?

“As we evolve, the Association will continue to identify the guardrails to further support student-athletes within the context of college sports and higher education,” said Val Ackerman, commissioner of the Big East and working group co-chair. “In addition, we are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education, college sports and students at large.  We hope that modernized name, image and likeness rules will further assist college athletes during these unprecedented times and beyond.”

The board also discussed the potential challenges to modernizing rules posed by outside legal and legislative factors that could significantly undermine the NCAA’s ability to take meaningful action. As a result, it will engage Congress to take steps that include the following:

  • Ensuring federal preemption over state name, image and likeness laws.
  • Establishing a “safe harbor” for the Association to provide protection against lawsuits filed for name, image and likeness rules.
  • Safeguarding the nonemployment status of student-athletes.
  • Maintaining the distinction between college athletes and professional athletes.
  • Upholding the NCAA’s values, including diversity, inclusion and gender equity.

The NCAA should call this “robust guardrails”. It would look good on a t-shirt, right?

*********************************************************************

UPDATE #2:  By the way, if you think this gets NCAA Football back, guess again.

They are scared of group licensing.  And if you want to know why…

A player’s union?  Over their dead bodies.

5 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

5 responses to “Here it comes.

  1. mddawg

    So athletes wouldn’t be allowed to reference the school they attend, but what’s to stop the advertiser from doing so? I’m guessing that the NCAA will try to close as many loopholes as possible before these changes go into effect (if they ever do).

    Like

  2. chopdawg

    Those “robust proposals” actually do sound like a plan.

    Like

  3. I’m surprised by them not allowing the students to rep school marks. Obviously the school would get a cut, but it seems to me it would be beneficial for both the school and the athlete.
    I didn’t read the whole link so maybe there is a loophole somewhere in there I missed?

    Like

  4. Cojones

    “Hi, I’m Marty. I don’t usually make a run, but when I do, I buy at Trulieve, just a small step across the southern border of our state. Prices are easily covered by your COA, plus purchases enough 27% to last for 4 party weekends. “

    Like

  5. 86BONE

    Can I just have my old life back, all this shit is wearing me out

    Like