NCAA votes to allow players to benefit for their likeness & endorsements

[Da Coach]

The NCAA held meetings today to make a decision about whether NCAA athletes should benefit for their likeness and for endorsements.
They just announced that they will allow players to benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness.

This could be a further blow to mid-major schools vs. the allure of playing for the big schools. A marginal Power 5 player will benefit far greater by going to a Power 5 school, even if he rides the bench, since endorsements, and appearance in video games, etc. is far greater for players at major schools. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out. And it will be interesting to watch how Title IX affects this decision. Will female athletes and athletes in lower profile sports demand some of the money made by the more notable athletes playing in major sports like football and basketball? And how is that money distributed when teams are featured in video games? Do the star players get bigger shares than the bench players and walkons?

[Da Coach]

Here is the press release from the NCAA-
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...-opportunities

To me, it looks like they are saying something a little differently than has been reported widely. Many sports outlets are reporting this change will allow payment to athletes for the use of their "name, image and likeness".
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/29/ncaa...es-images.html

But the NCAA release says the athletes can "benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness in a manner consistent with the collegiate model", but does not exactly say how they can benefit, or whether that benefit can be in the form of being paid for their name image and likeness opportunities. I'm not sure what this means. Obviously, more work needs to be done by the NCAA to develop a framework that addresses these issues.

[egib52]

The NCAA held meetings today to make a decision about whether NCAA athletes should benefit for their likeness and for endorsements.
They just announced that they will allow players to benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness.

This could be a further blow to mid-major schools vs. the allure of playing for the big schools. A marginal Power 5 player will benefit far greater by going to a Power 5 school, even if he rides the bench, since endorsements, and appearance in video games, etc. is far greater for players at major schools. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out. And it will be interesting to watch how Title IX affects this decision. Will female athletes and athletes in lower profile sports demand some of the money made by the more notable athletes playing in major sports like football and basketball? And how is that money distributed when teams are featured in video games? Do the star players get bigger shares than the bench players and walkons?

If done right, I think arguably there could be more allure for the marginal Power 5 player to benefit at a mid-major. Would people be more likely to pay money for autographs or merchandise for a 7th or 8th player on a P5 school or a top player on a MM?

[Da Coach]

That makes sense if the biggest source of money comes from merchandising, so let's hope the recruits see it that way and don't all flock to the big schools.
But IMO, there would only be a rare mid-major kid, like a Ja Morant last year from Murray State, who would draw enough national interest to benefit significantly from sales of merchandise nationally. But we'll have to see where the money is coming from, and how much it is. Kids might see that they would be better off at the Big Schools if main source of money comes sources like video games.
Before they ceased making them in 2014 because of lawsuits like the Ed O'Bannon suit, big money was paid to the NCAA and member colleges from the video game manufacturers, who made millions off the likeness of college football and basketball players.
Here is an article from back in 2013 that reported that one video game manufacturer (EA Sports) was paying some colleges $75,000 each year to include them in their video football games-

https://kotaku.com/sportswriters-polls-determine-payments-in-ea-sports-c-1180534255

Those numbers would probably be much higher today. EA Sports was getting rich off their video games, but the players weren't getting any of it. If the NCAA can reach an agreement, the money could start flowing again. And commercial endorsements and shoe deals might follow. But again, would the mid-major kids cash in significantly? Will we eventually see Connor Linke doing commercials for Avanti's?