Do you believe Penn State student athletes should be allowed to make outside $$ off their likeness, via autographs, or doing appearances?
Question for the house.
- Thread starter EPC FAN
- Start date
Yes, but it's a slippery slope. Some schools (most) will abuse that and the pay for play will no longer be the look away nothing to see here thing that exists today. I don't know how you can say No when the schools, networks, NCAA, and everyone else are all getting a piece of their pie while they cannot.
Yes. I'm fine with student athletes being able to get paid for their autograph, there is no difference between them and some hot chick getting paid by instagram. That being said, . I believe that universities should also be able to make money off of the student athlete's likeness when associated with the university and I don't believe that they University should be required to pay student athletes.
This would have to be heavily regulated (and even then there would be potential problems).
It cannot be a free market because otherwise you could have boosters offering to pay $200K for an autograph before a recruit even signs.
If you have a highly regulated system (e.g. players get x% of jersey sales), you could still have boosters buying up jerseys (or promising to buy jerseys) to tilt the playing field (pun intended).
While I agree in principle that players should see some benefit from the $$ they bring in (beyond going to school for free which is a HUGE benefit), there isn't a good way to implement this that doesn't invite unscrupulous behavior.
It cannot be a free market because otherwise you could have boosters offering to pay $200K for an autograph before a recruit even signs.
If you have a highly regulated system (e.g. players get x% of jersey sales), you could still have boosters buying up jerseys (or promising to buy jerseys) to tilt the playing field (pun intended).
While I agree in principle that players should see some benefit from the $$ they bring in (beyond going to school for free which is a HUGE benefit), there isn't a good way to implement this that doesn't invite unscrupulous behavior.
Well now. Would they be self-employed or employees of the University permitted to retain the income? I'd have to believe there's the need to declare this income for tax purposes across all jurisdictions and remit withholdings and associated FICA contributions. Seems a lot of work to be done if it's going to all be above board, with only a few having potential to get much out of it.
I think any idea of this kind should be part of a stipend, and/or provisions for the scholarship award.
I think any idea of this kind should be part of a stipend, and/or provisions for the scholarship award.
This. I understand why it's prohibited because it would get out of hand, like, the day it was implemented. If you think $100 handshakes are a problem, wait until $100 autographs are legal. Players at some schools will have writers cramp.
No biggie, Just put them on the payroll like any other university employee.
Doncha just love how people worry that the kids will get too much?
Well would you then allow a booster to pay a football player $100,000 for his autograph?
I don't think it is about "the kids getting too much" as it is (for me anyway) about equity between schools. If you don't regulate it heavily, you will end up with an arms race where schools with crazy/rich boosters will be throwing huge amounts of money at kids. Maybe this works out for PSU OK on the field, but I would honestly rather have a kid come to PSU because he likes PSU than a kid who comes here because he is promised $500K in jersey sale profits over his four year career.
[QUOTE
That was the slippery slope. Do you have problems with the billion dollar TV contracts? Who is getting that money right now? People will abuse the system to win and look the other way. Bama does this with pride and nobody blinks at it.
Because football players bring a shitload of money into the school and research assistants don't. BTW, I think that research assistants should be allowed to unionize in order to rationalize their compensation.
Some research assistants actually do. If your research leads to a patent, the university own that patent and the RA gets nothing.
Not all football players bring in huge $$. Not all RAs bring in huge $$. It's a training period.
If you don't like that model, then advocate for starting a minor league for football (like baseball and hockey).
Colleges can still have teams, but the blue chip guys who don't care about "playing school" can play in the minor league. Both (minor league and college) can still be a pathway to the pros, just like in hockey and baseball.
A minor league plan is far more tenable than paying college players "market value"
Why would the NFL stand up a minor league for football when they have a free one now? Not to mention the TV $$$$'s the schools now get isn't really going to push anyone in that direction. College football is a business and it is a minor league....kids get weeded out there.
It's a nod, nod, wink, wink agreement there. NFL gets free league, schools get a ton of $$$$. Who do you think would want that to go away?
I'm not saying it is viable. I am saying that is Art isn't happy with the status quo, this is a more reasonable proposal than "pay the kids market rate" (which isn't reasonable).
It's not reasonable because it might threaten your Saturday afternoons watching your beloved college football.
Nobody wants to go that way, except me, a bunch of players......and Jeff Kessler.
Honestly, research assistant can do whatever they want. Their plight isn't germane as to whether college football players should be paid.
that would have to come from the NFL, and they have no reason to lower their age limit.
That is such a horsehit argument. No one forces a plumber to become a plumber, but, by law, no group can combine to restrict their wages (absent a collective bargaining agreement).
And if removal of the three year rule (it's not an age limit) threatens the NFL's feed stock, then they'll have to do something about it, won't they?
Well for one 18 year old boys aren't physically ready so that would go back to your farm league question. Pay for play is going to happen and kind of already is for the most part....but the kids may get a bump along the way while they try and figure it out. Too many people sucking on that $$$ teet for anyone including the "student athletes" to want it to dry up.
It's not a horseshit argument. College football players should be college students who play football. For a variety of reasons, that has become a really popular thing to watch, meaning that there is money involved. That doesn't mean that the college students should all of a sudden become millionaires. If you want that, go to war with the NFL and start a minor league.
The NFL has no interest in that, they have a free league. The schools are the only ones with something to lose there. I'm not thinking millions either, but the kids will get a bump to their stipend at some point in time. I'll be pretty shocked if that isn't the case.
Last edited:
Yes. Let them put their earnings in an escrow account for when their amateur careers are over. I believe this is what some non-communist block Olympic athletes did to keep their amateur status before they got rid of the "amateur" rules for Olympic athletes. The so-called amateur standards were eventually eliminated because the communist block athletes were basically pros. They should have every right to benefit from their popularity.
