goTULA.NEt

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/c ... story.html

Good, bad, or indifferent to Tulane's future success?

I don't see a negative for TU nor do I see a huge upside.

But I will enjoy the battle between NCAA (Emmert) and California (USC, UCLA, UC, etc.), and their (CA.) media market.

McWave wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:27 pm https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/c ... story.html

Good, bad, or indifferent to Tulane's future success?

I don't see a negative for TU nor do I see a huge upside.

But I will enjoy the battle between NCAA (Emmert) and California (USC, UCLA, UC, etc.), and their (CA.) media market.

A ways off 2023. But if it holds up it will force other states to act as well to keep recruiting level. I’m sure getting paid to play will steer some to California from other states without pay.

We need to attract athletes that are good enough to land endorsement deals for this to affect us. Yes, I know it's California, but you know if it goes through other states will follow to protect their flagship programs.

And screw the sanctimonious NCAA, they've been making millions off of college athletes for decades.

California is falling apart, and their politicians screw around with this. To allow endorsement income would create a ripe environment for alumni abuse. Any high heeled alum could pay huge amounts of money to his alma mater's team. If Univ. of Oregon adopted this, I guess Nike would ensure that they get all the 5 star recruits every year. It would destroy the competitive landscape, and create a massive bidding war for athletes. It also would likely bring Cowen's vision for Tulane into reality.

DfromCT wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:29 pm We need to attract athletes that are good enough to land endorsement deals for this to affect us. Yes, I know it's California, but you know if it goes through other states will follow to protect their flagship programs.

And screw the sanctimonious NCAA, they've been making millions off of college athletes for decades.

Millions, ha. The NCAA tourney alone is around $700m.

HoustonWave wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:45 pm California is falling apart, and their politicians screw around with this. To allow endorsement income would create a ripe environment for alumni abuse. Any high heeled alum could pay huge amounts of money to his alma mater's team. If Univ. of Oregon adopted this, I guess Nike would ensure that they get all the 5 star recruits every year. It would destroy the competitive landscape, and create a massive bidding war for athletes. It also would likely bring Cowen's vision for Tulane into reality.

Cali is falling apart. Cause there isn’t constant growth? The state is the fifth largest economy in the worth tmk.

mbawavefan12 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:22 pm

HoustonWave wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:45 pm California is falling apart, and their politicians screw around with this. To allow endorsement income would create a ripe environment for alumni abuse. Any high heeled alum could pay huge amounts of money to his alma mater's team. If Univ. of Oregon adopted this, I guess Nike would ensure that they get all the 5 star recruits every year. It would destroy the competitive landscape, and create a massive bidding war for athletes. It also would likely bring Cowen's vision for Tulane into reality.

Cali is falling apart. Cause there isn’t constant growth? The state is the fifth largest economy in the worth tmk.

mba, you know better than that. Revenue (GDP) and profitability are two different things. California's GDP grows due to tech companies and Hollywood. But they have massive debt and expenses, and the more they keep giving everything away free, the more in the red they'll be.

RobertM320 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 6:18 am

mbawavefan12 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:22 pm

HoustonWave wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:45 pm California is falling apart, and their politicians screw around with this. To allow endorsement income would create a ripe environment for alumni abuse. Any high heeled alum could pay huge amounts of money to his alma mater's team. If Univ. of Oregon adopted this, I guess Nike would ensure that they get all the 5 star recruits every year. It would destroy the competitive landscape, and create a massive bidding war for athletes. It also would likely bring Cowen's vision for Tulane into reality.

Cali is falling apart. Cause there isn’t constant growth? The state is the fifth largest economy in the worth tmk.

mba, you know better than that. Revenue (GDP) and profitability are two different things. California's GDP grows due to tech companies and Hollywood. But they have massive debt and expenses, and the more they keep giving everything away free, the more in the red they'll be.

The people who live north of Sacremanto do not even want to be a part of California...they want to form their own State...... what a dump site that place has become..California has become the home to S&S ... Shit and Syringes

doesn't mean much, imo.

California says its ok to pay the players. Doesn't mean the NCAA does. These teams are still beholden to NCAA rules. Doesn't affect Tulane or anyone else until something is passed federally because right now it's just posturing.

squilz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:52 am doesn't mean much, imo.

California says its ok to pay the players. Doesn't mean the NCAA does. These teams are still beholden to NCAA rules. Doesn't affect Tulane or anyone else until something is passed federally because right now it's just posturing.

The teams are, but, if the law is enacted, the players could receive compensation from their likeness and there is nothing the NCAA can do other than not allow them to play. However, as everyone knows, the NCAA is unlikely to disrupt the P5 and the associated media deals, so, if this law passes, the NCAA will likely being the party having to roll over and not the PAC12 or anyone else. They may drag their feet a little, but they would not have a lot of options.

It doesn't affect Tulane though unless Louisiana passes a law, the federal government passes law, or the NCAA changes its rules (i.e. to allow for profiting off of likeness, to ban California programs, etc.).

simple solution the "Law"...do not use Players' Lilkeness' in advertising...use computer simulated images....All 'Licensed " sales of uniform Shirts / Jersey's will be nameless...thus no Player Royalties need to be paid.....'knock off' sales will result in Law suits..... I am not an Attorney, nor have i played one on TV's LA Law or Bluff City...but this is a simple solution

Aberzombie1892 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:59 am

squilz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:52 am doesn't mean much, imo.

California says its ok to pay the players. Doesn't mean the NCAA does. These teams are still beholden to NCAA rules. Doesn't affect Tulane or anyone else until something is passed federally because right now it's just posturing.

The teams are, but, if the law is enacted, the players could receive compensation from their likeness and there is nothing the NCAA can do other than not allow them to play. However, as everyone knows, the NCAA is unlikely to disrupt the P5 and the associated media deals, so, if this law passes, the NCAA will likely being the party having to roll over and not the PAC12 or anyone else. They may drag their feet a little, but they would not have a lot of options.

It doesn't affect Tulane though unless Louisiana passes a law, the federal government passes law, or the NCAA changes its rules (i.e. to allow for profiting off of likeness, to ban California programs, etc.).

Actually, I think this is the spot where the NCAA would disrupt the P5 and not allow those players to play. Those that do would result in the school forfeiting games, or even not allowing the school to be eligible for championships in any sport. Try having a school tell their women's volleyball or swim team they're not eligible for championships because the school preferred to pay their football players, and see how far that goes.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... o-be-paid/

"Current NCAA bylaws state that any programs that roster student-athletes who accept money or benefits from outside interests are in violation of NCAA amateurism rules."

And what exactly has the NCAA done historically to enforce this rule evenly across all programs? I will watch the train wreck from afar.

"The 1,100 schools that make up the NCAA have always, in everything we do, supported a level playing field for all student-athletes. This core belief extends to each member college and university in every state across the nation." (First sentence of the letter to California Governor)

"supported a level playing filed", What a joke. That's why, Members of the NCAA Board of Governors tolerate a two tiered system with P5 and the rest.

We'll never outbid the P5. All we need to do is outbid the other 4 G5 conferences and we'll be slightly better off than we are now.

I hope it passes.

The NCAA can lose the PAC 12, and it isn’t really losing a “P” conference. If the PAC 12 is removed from championship play, the other PAC 4, and some of the better G5 schools can readily fill any void that the PAC 12 might leave. Let the crazies in California play with each other.

I think it's more likely that other states follow and there's going to be a huge disruption in FBS athletics. States will want to protect their flagship universities.

Should that take place then the NCAA should retaliate by eliminating all athletic scholarships in California.

Show Me wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:15 am Should that take place then the NCAA should retaliate by eliminating all athletic scholarships in California.

Good luck with that!

Has anyone studied the content of the California bill? Do individual schools have the right to pay their athletes or will they be required to pay? Would there be a fixed amount each athlete would receive or would it depend upon the individual's popularity and how many jerseys are being sold with their name?

My cynical nature leads me to believe this could be the beginning of the end of college sports as we know it.

This article answers a couple of questions from my earlier post:

https://www.apnews.com/82f3ae443485479b8011da02524adcff

A couple of the more salient points:

• The Californnia Senate "voted 39-0 Wednesday to pass the bill, which has the endorsement of NBA superstar LeBron James"
• The govenor "has 30 days to either sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature"
• The NCAA urged the governor NOT to sign the bill "warning that if he does California colleges and universities would eventually be banned from NCAA competitions because of their “unfair recruiting advantage.
• "The Pac-12, which includes USC, UCLA, Stanford and Cal, issued a statement reiterating its previous stance — asking the California Legislature to delay the debate until the NCAA announces formal proposals."

GreenLantern wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:48 am This article answers a couple of questions from my earlier post:

https://www.apnews.com/82f3ae443485479b8011da02524adcff

A couple of the more salient points:

• The Californnia Senate "voted 39-0 Wednesday to pass the bill, which has the endorsement of NBA superstar LeBron James"
• The govenor "has 30 days to either sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature"
• The NCAA urged the governor NOT to sign the bill "warning that if he does California colleges and universities would eventually be banned from NCAA competitions because of their “unfair recruiting advantage.
• "The Pac-12, which includes USC, UCLA, Stanford and Cal, issued a statement reiterating its previous stance — asking the California Legislature to delay the debate until the NCAA announces formal proposals."

Gotta admit...Lebron knows all there is to know about the college experience

Why does LeBron James' opinion matter? Seriously, he never went to college, and is not an elected official. Does Tom Hanks, Clayton Kershaw or Wayne Gretzky have a say in the matter as well?

The schools are not the ones paying the players. Also any existing sponsorship deal the school has takes precedent over what a student could bring in (they gave the sample of the school has an Adidas deal the kid cant bring Nike).

No one is quite sure what the ramifications of this bill will be.


Also the rural parts of California that want to leave. . . Are the parts that depend and make the greatest use of the social programs and tax dollars provided by SF/LA/SD. We would be perfectly happy to have them go form another state or country. It’s kind of like the South. The elected officials score cheap points (Bobby Jindal voting against expanded Medicare) to embarrass a democrat when it’s his constituents who desperately need these programs. It’s also the south that takes more federal $$$ than they provide from their tax base. But liberals are bad, reading is bad and college is bad (except for college football).

DfromCT wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:16 am Why does LeBron James' opinion matter? Seriously, he never went to college, and is not an elected official. Does Tom Hanks, Clayton Kershaw or Wayne Gretzky have a say in the matter as well?

I mean, he's not ignorant of the subject, and he's a smart guy in general. He got recruited hard before being one of the last high school to pro players, and has played with/mentored countless rookies coming out of college since then. Obviously they're talking about this kind of stuff in the locker room. Ask any nba draft pick in the last 10 years who their favorite player is: 9/10 will say Lebron. He's the biggest name in the field that this directly impacts.