I could also see schools offering to pay players, but then say they don't get scholaships. Since they have to be a student at the school, they have to pay tuition, room and board themselves. So what they get in pay they end up losing in added costs in going to school. I think those proposing paying players need to look at the unintended consequences.
Burn down the disco. Hang the blessed DJ. Because the music that he constantly plays, it says nothing to me about my life.
An interesting developments for the NCAA and another potential (ironic) wrinkle.
1) The NCAA will no longer license to EA. This will most likely end the NCAA Football and Final Four basketball series video games. The NCAA claims that it has nothing to do with the Ed O'Bannon case, but that seems extremely unlikely.
2) The saga of Johnny Manziel is REALLY interesting. Bomani Jones wrote an interesting article about him here.http://www.theshadowleague.com/artic...orst-nightmare
So, Johnny is the one player who could blow the system up, and yet the great irony is that Manziel is the kind of person for whom the entire system was originally designed. Amateurism prevented the poor, who needed to work and couldn't devote the same amount of time to a frivolous activity like football, from participating en masse. Manziel doesn't need college football and their form of payment (the scholarship), just like those who originally participated in amateur athletics didn't need the assistance. He is exactly the archetype of the original NCAA, and he could be one of the biggest threats to the NCAA. I am very interested to see his career plays out.
Variatio delectat - Cicero
Six current players have joined the lawsuit.
Variatio delectat - Cicero
Is Ed O'Bannon relevant if his college jersey had UCSD on it instead of UCLA?
I certainly don't think the current system is "fair and equitable" (whatever that means), but the only way to fix it without killing it (having the NCAA pay an equal amount to all athletes in the same sports at all athletes in the same division) has zero chance of actually happening.
O'Bannon may "get his", and he also may end up killing the next guy's chance to "get his" (meaning a free education, television exposure and access to unlimited hot coeds).
For a select few guys, playing minor league baseball is great. But it's nothing like college football is for about 5,000 guys at the top 60 schools. And college baseball is okay, but if college football and college basketball are going to be more like college baseball, I'm not real excited by the prospect of it all.
Lets use you example of a minor league NFL system. Each team is going to have to pay 65 or so players. They will need to fund a stadium for these players to play in. For ever great college team, 3/4 of the player will never play a professional down. So now an NFL team had to decide which players they want to invest in as 18 year olds in the most physically demanding sport. Not only that, they will have to guess right as well as surround the player with a bunch of guys who will never see the field. All that while trying to find a city and fund a stadium for those players to play in.
The thing with O'Bannon is he was able to use that UCLA jersey he drapped over his shoulders as a showcase to get drafted 9th in the NBA. Without UCLA you think he signs a $3.9M contract? Based upon his Wikipedia page he worked as the marketing director for a Las Vegas auto dealership. You think he gets that job if he doesn't have the notoriety from his days wearing a UCLA jersey?
Do you think that Ed O'Bannon is where he is right now without UCLA? Not only the education but also the exposure? Do you think that people would recognize Ed O'Bannon and tell what a great tournament he had in 95 when UCLA won it all? How about if he was playing for the Sioux Falls Skyforce or Fort Wayne Mad Ants?
Without UCLA, Ed O'Bannon may have never blown out his knee and been the guy he could have been on the court. We don't know.
The schools need the players a lot more than the players need the schools. The NFL and NBA will find the players with or without colleges.
See I view it much differently than you do. If the NFL and NBA thought it was in their best financial sense to create a minor league system they would. I also think the student athletes need the schools much more. Where else could Braxton Miller go and play in front of 100,000 people every fall Saturday. OSU will still sell out the stadium with or without him.
What is Johnny Manziel without Texas A&M? He was a Texas school boy legend but until a performance against Alabama on national TV he was pretty much to people outside of Texas or the SEC. If he is playing for a minor league NFL team based in El Paso does anyone care? Does anyone notice if the El Paso Earthquakes beat the Spokane Thunders?
I agree with Boston Red, be careful not to slaughter that golden goose. There are 125 FBS schools with approximately 85 scholarships each bringing to the total of FBS players to 10,625. 254 players were drafted this past season in the NFL draft. So roughly 2.3% of collegiate football players are drafted which leaves 97.7% doing something other than playing football. 97.7% of college football players who get a full ride though college and the exposure playing on TV in front of the nation. You think the NFL wants to create a minor league system where only 2% make it to the NFL? You think the NFL wants to take that financial risk?
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.