College Players Allowed To Sign Endorsement Deals?
- Thread starter Lumpy 2
- Start date
The NCAA makes millions off these kids, why should they not be aloud to cash in a little bit
College campuses endorsing capitalism? I'll believe it when I see it.
UNC promoting a bookstore no doubt.Duke doing tripadvisor.com
WildcatfaninOhio
All-American
I've always thought this was the best route to go for those that insist that college athletes be paid. Money wont have to come from athletic department budget. No title 9 issues to wade through. No cries of equal pay for football players and men's tennis. If a player has a marketable image, why not let them cash in?
I'm sure there will be some sort of earning limit. And lets don't think UK won't be able to get a few endorsements for their players as well. The top players for UK will be pulling in bucks from shoe companies as well as local companies like Ky coal and such.
On a side note Godfathers and Deja Vu will have the UL players locked up in contracts.
On a side note Godfathers and Deja Vu will have the UL players locked up in contracts.
coal is dying (as it should. terrible stuff that kills everybody that goes to dig it out of the ground).
shoe deals are gonna go through Oregon, Maryland, UNC, and whoever the hell Reebok is attached to first.
then there's the massive amounts of tech money in Seattle.
everything going on in SoCal.
NYC is the capitol of the world and every school there would benefit.
it's gonna become an endorsement bidding war every single year. not sure Kentucky can be attractive enough to the best.
this is great news for the kids, if it happens. i just expect Kentucky to perpetually be middle of the pack, like we were under Tubby. i just don't know how one of the poorest states in the Union has enough money to throw around like that. and it could all but put an end to our football program.
Bad, bad, bad idea. Compensating some college athletes in some way...absolutely. Doing it through endorsement deals, would be a disaster. Schools like Maryland (Under Armour) and Oregon (Nike) would be able to throw out big time cash to players for endorsement deals. Recruiting would turn into who is the highest bidder. A guy with the talent of AD could sit back and wait for the highest bidder. It's a terrible idea.
Somewhat of a way around schools and NCAA directly paying athletes...
It could be pandora's box though....with all the shoe company allegiances...
If a kid plays for an adidas AAU squad, will adidas even let a nike or under armour school come sniff around?
Will Nike start to buy up high schools and middle schools, and give them incentives for pushing kids to nike aau squads and colleges?
If a kid gets recruited over or injured and sees less playing time at a Nike school, are they going to allow him to transfer to an under armour school that has more PT available?
Will Nike go to coach Cal and say "hey coach, you're too deep with talent, some of these kids aren't really going to shine sharing PT or sitting on the bench, we're going to need for a couple to go elsewhere so they can be stars...don't worry about it, it's in the contract...we run things now..."
...or..."hey Cal...these guys start tonight...if not then maybe we'll see about this up and coming high school stud going else where..."
and it won't stop at shoe companies...once they get involved others will get involved in then we have chaos...H&R Block may snatch a kid in high school and say "here's a check you're going to this city/campus"...
then some CEO will say "hey how about my alma mater...here's a check..."
T. Boone Pickens will start signing kids up to promote his company...
Maybe Tommy Turtle Neck gets Yum to snatch some kids up...
Folks, I'm all for a fair way to compensate athletes, but I hope everyone realizes how things get mucked up when big money gets involved...
It could be pandora's box though....with all the shoe company allegiances...
If a kid plays for an adidas AAU squad, will adidas even let a nike or under armour school come sniff around?
Will Nike start to buy up high schools and middle schools, and give them incentives for pushing kids to nike aau squads and colleges?
If a kid gets recruited over or injured and sees less playing time at a Nike school, are they going to allow him to transfer to an under armour school that has more PT available?
Will Nike go to coach Cal and say "hey coach, you're too deep with talent, some of these kids aren't really going to shine sharing PT or sitting on the bench, we're going to need for a couple to go elsewhere so they can be stars...don't worry about it, it's in the contract...we run things now..."
...or..."hey Cal...these guys start tonight...if not then maybe we'll see about this up and coming high school stud going else where..."
and it won't stop at shoe companies...once they get involved others will get involved in then we have chaos...H&R Block may snatch a kid in high school and say "here's a check you're going to this city/campus"...
then some CEO will say "hey how about my alma mater...here's a check..."
T. Boone Pickens will start signing kids up to promote his company...
Maybe Tommy Turtle Neck gets Yum to snatch some kids up...
Folks, I'm all for a fair way to compensate athletes, but I hope everyone realizes how things get mucked up when big money gets involved...
Last edited:
Controlled money to the kids is a good thing. Allowing endorsement deals would turn college athletics into an arms race. Deepest pockets wins. It's an absurd idea. You guys who are for this know exactly what will happen. Players will be bought, much like they are with the Yankees. How about we treat players better but try to retain some level of amateurism along the way.
I think this will allow UNC players to promote mouthpieces...I can hear Emmert thanking them for stretching the rules and forcing the NCAA to think outside the normal rules.
First, the 4 corners, now endorsements for their cheatin' administration.
Another game changing action by the Tar Heels, who simply defy normal rules and regulations.
First, the 4 corners, now endorsements for their cheatin' administration.
Another game changing action by the Tar Heels, who simply defy normal rules and regulations.
This would be good for schools like UK who are super high profile, and for schools like Maryland and Oregon with big corporate backers who could endorse all their favored school's players. Would Malik Newman and Stephen Zimmerman want to go be the big fish in a little pond when it would hurt their endorsement earnings potential? Because go to UK or Duke and you're talked about on ESPN and every sports channels and site constantly.
Heck...Mark Cuban owns a hundred different companies, he may just endorse some kids and get them to go to IU...
how does that sound to some folks?
Jerry Jones has some companies he could use to endorse kids to Arkansas...
how does that sound to some folks?
Jerry Jones has some companies he could use to endorse kids to Arkansas...
Terrible for college athletics as a whole. Again, compensate the athletes that deserve it, but this is not the way to do it. Boosters would be way too involved in the recruiting of athletes because the company they own can now endorse a player, etc. It would get so ugly.
yeah...stay one more year and get this 10k endorsement deal instead of a 1.8 million dollar first round NBA contract where you can get all the endorsement deals.
good pull
For all the reasons already listed, there would have to be a cap on the amount the players can make to level the playing field. I don't see how this can work out in a way that doesn't create a recruiting advantage for some schools.
IMO, coaches should be left up to recruiting the players and not boosters. How do you feel about it?
recruiting advantages...you mean like nicer dorm rooms, huge arena, elite workout facilities?
really why does it matter? coaches are just as dirty as the boosters. they are the ones with all the access to agents. coaches are just under contract by the university so its "ok". but really...whats the difference at the end of the day.
I am assuming that means you feel that boosters should be able to throw cash at players any way they want and parents/guardians should steer their son to the highest bidder? And if school A loses out to a recruit at school B because a booster was able to offer a much more attractive financial package to their parents, that would be good with you?
We will disagree on this one.
If it involves cracked lawyers, it's bad. In fact if it involves lawyers at all they will make it bad for everyone involved.
Well college basketball has worked for years and has been very enjoyable for years. Why should an average bench player who doesnt play get compensated? Why should only player get more than the other? Thats what the Pros are for...
You guys act like it's going to be a free market where Nike can give all the money to Oregon they want. There would be a cap on what they can give to each player or maybe even team. It was only last year the NCAA allowed schools to give athletes a little food-and-laundry money — capped at $6,000. This would be an extension of that.
The best thing you could do is have a pool of money that is split between all players on the team. If you have individual endorsement deals I do think it hurts a lesser school in a conference like a Vandy. While UK may have 10 players with endorsement deals, Vandy may have 2. UK/Lexington businesses could afford to give Charles Mathews $10,000 to endorse an auto dealership. I'm not sure Vandy could give the 7th player on their team that kind of money.
The sport that makes all this impossible to do unless you have a team pool is football. Alabama can give 80 of their 85 scholarship players $10,000 a season in extra money and still survive. Not a lot of schools can.
The best thing you could do is have a pool of money that is split between all players on the team. If you have individual endorsement deals I do think it hurts a lesser school in a conference like a Vandy. While UK may have 10 players with endorsement deals, Vandy may have 2. UK/Lexington businesses could afford to give Charles Mathews $10,000 to endorse an auto dealership. I'm not sure Vandy could give the 7th player on their team that kind of money.
The sport that makes all this impossible to do unless you have a team pool is football. Alabama can give 80 of their 85 scholarship players $10,000 a season in extra money and still survive. Not a lot of schools can.
school A gives me a 50% scholarship. school B gives me a 100% scholarship. i go with school B. what is the real difference between cash or a scholarship?
we just arbitrarily decided one was acceptable and one is bad.
Sure lets go back to the days of $100 handshakes,jobs watering grass that pay $50 per hour and all the other stuff that got programs in trouble in the 80's.We can do it on a bigger scale now by using bit coins and other internet stuff.sounds like a great idea......not so much,but of course BostonCat would think it is a great idea
In Division I basketball, every school has 13 scholarships to offer. It's an even playing field. To me, that is different than going to the highest bidder based on what the boosters can afford.
why does that matter to you? is this jealousy? someone you dont deam worthy of the money getting it. everything about college basketball and football are pro sports. just without the paychecks.
i cant imagine me enjoying john wall, davis, or KAT less because when they go give an interview they are wearing a t-shirt endorsing the local coffee shop.
but what if school B is union college and school A is MIT. there is nothing even about any of this. i dont know why people think there are already tons of recruiting advantages already baked into the system. look at the recruiting advantages uk has over basically everyone with its facilities. there is nothing even about it.
its an asset...no more or less. a booster can build uk a state of the art weight room. but cant give the cash equivalent to 100 recruits over the years?
Pretty sure it would involve a lot more than wearing a T shirt or promoting common grounds coffee shop. But hey, you live in a utopia where everyone does the right thing, bureaucracies don't run amok and everyone is treated equal. I just doubt it would ever be as simple as you try to make it out to be.
