NCAA votes to allow athletes to profit from their name and likeness

[Hoops watcher]

Ultimately it solidifies the dominance of the same Power 5 programs already on top who get the top recruits under the current rules. They still have the same loaded boosters willing to shell out big bucks, at least the athletes will get a small slice of the pie. I'd hate to see them buying players who emerge in lower level programs (ala Dante Olson), but as long as it doesn't affect non revenue and lower level athletics it really doesn't change much of the existing dynamic as far as I can see. To be sure if the NCAA is involved the implementation will be a hot mess.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Ultimately it solidifies the dominance of the same Power 5 programs already on top who get the top recruits under the current rules. They still have the same loaded boosters willing to shell out big bucks, at least the athletes will get a small slice of the pie. I'd hate to see them buying players who emerge in lower level programs (ala Dante Olson), but as long as it doesn't affect non revenue and lower level athletics it really doesn't change much of the existing dynamic as far as I can see. To be sure if the NCAA is involved the implementation will be a hot mess.

You could just keep the transfer rules the same, so a power 5 team couldnt pick off a Dante Olson

 

[PlayerRep]

People are fooling themselves is A) they don't believe that the NCAA will have oversight, and B) they don't believe that the NCAA will make the rules so convoluted that it is near impossible for an individual player to benefit from this and still remain eligible.

You and the NCAA are fooling yourselves if you think states like CA, and others looking at similar legislation, would let the ncaa get away with B. While the ncaa may end up with some oversight, the oversight is going to have to allow the players to get the benefits that states like CA envision. The ncaa isn't going to legislate the CA schools out of the ncaa.

Also, I can't imagine that larger contracts/amounts would be allowed and workable, and smaller things wouldn't. That would seem to not be within the spirit of what is happening.

I'm a believer that this will become a hot mess no matter which way things go.

 

[PlayerRep]

I looked around on the internet. Didn't find much, or any good article. People have different views. The CA law is way broader than what the ncaa seems to be saying. Some thing the ncaa isn't planning to give up much control. Others say the ncaa has its head in the sand, and is going to get run over. The ncaa and Pac-12 told CA that the new law would hurt lesser sports and women. Some believe the new law and new direction, will actually help some women, especially athletes on top of their game. Like some gymnasts, for example.

Some think the ncaa won't be involved in the money flow. Some aren't so sure. Same with the schools. Perhaps some co-licensing necessary.

Many believe this will solidify the dominance of the top conferences.

Nobody seems to like the ncaa. No surprise.

I will keep my eyes open. Some sportswriters must be writing about this.