Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#992566 - 10/28/09 02:14 PM College Athletes' Marketability
kuME10 Offline
Prairie Warrior

Registered: 09/08/09
Loc: Lawrence, KS
Jay Bilas blogged about a few cbb tidbits, one of which being the cuffs that college athletes wear that don't allow them to sign individual endorsement deals. He stated the following:

" Jordan Shoe Controversy: Back in the 1980s and 90s, shoe companies had deals directly with coaches. As a player, I was always told that I could wear any shoe that I wanted, but it was probably best that I wear the shoe that my coach provided, especially considering that he was the decision-maker as to who played and how much.

At the time, Georgetown coach John Thompson told his Hoya players that they were wearing Nike shoes whether they liked it or not because he was getting paid by Nike, and he showed them his shoe contract. He wanted them to know exactly what the deal was, and wanted them to be aware of why it was happening that way. Thompson thought the players should be asking what the arrangement was, and should be concerned about who was profiting and why.

Now, shoe companies lock up entire programs and schools and negotiate deals directly with the institutions. Central Florida's Marcus Jordan, son of the great Michael Jordan, has expressed a desire to wear the Nike shoe that bears his father's name rather than the adidas shoe that UCF is contractually obligated to have its players wear.

The "controversy" is pretty darn interesting. Is the player contractually obligated to wear the adidas brand? Is the school in violation of its contract if it allows Jordan to wear the competitive shoe? I have not seen the contract, and the deal is spelled out in the contract. However, I do think it raises some of the contradictions and double standards alive today in college sports. I have no problem with UCF cutting smart business deals. I do, however, have a problem with the players being prohibited from cutting their own smart business deals.

In many cases, the shoe companies do not want to lock up entire institutions, they want their shoes on certain players. It would be better targeted and more efficient. But, because of the myth of amateurism, players cannot agree to a shoe deal or any other sort of endorsement deal.

I am not in favor of schools paying college athletes. I am in favor of taking the cuffs off of players and allowing them to take advantage of their clear market value outside of the university.

Right now, Tyler Hansbrough has an endorsement deal with a telecommunications company where he helps find a lost dog. Why couldn't Hansbrough have done that commercial last season? It wouldn't have cost North Carolina anything, and it would have hardly made Hansbrough a "pro." If the players are marketable enough for schools to sell to corporate interests, which they do every single day, they ought to be allowed to do it for themselves.

All Marcus Jordan wants to do is wear his own shoes. And there's a "controversy" over it? Please."


IMO, college athletes should be able to take advantage of their marketability. After all, that's what athletics programs are doing by signing deals with Nike, Adidas, Under Armor, etc. It would be interesting to allow, but I can also see it getting out of hand pretty quickly.

Top
#992567 - 10/28/09 02:24 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: kuME10]
DrPepper Offline
US Marshal, Kansas Territory

Registered: 09/18/03
Loc: Buffalo, NY
So ESPN CBB still can't stop talking about Hansbrough. Aghhhh.

Top
#992568 - 10/28/09 06:24 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: DrPepper]
5DecadeHawk Offline
Otto Schnellbacher

Registered: 11/22/07
Bilas and ESPN would love nothing more than to allow college athletes to cut their own commerical deals. This would guarantee that the big media market teams would easily be able to attract the best players.

"Come to school here. Our big market assures you that you'll earn the most money on endorsements."

ESPN already favors the big markets, but if those markets actually started consistently attracting the nation's best talent... they'd be happy as ever.
_________________________
tmcats put KU76erfan on ignore. It's Timmy asking us to quote KU76erfan's posts frequently.

Top
#992569 - 10/28/09 06:33 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: 5DecadeHawk]
Geezer Offline
To serve & protect

Registered: 01/08/06
Loc: JayhawkLaw office Lobby
Absolutely horrible idea from Bilas. Who do you think arranges endorsement deals? Agents. How is that going to work? It's not and it won't ever happen.
_________________________
"Nice hands, Jess." Bill Self, Oct. 17, 2012


Top
#992570 - 10/28/09 06:54 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: Geezer]
kuME10 Offline
Prairie Warrior

Registered: 09/08/09
Loc: Lawrence, KS
Do you think college athletes should receive compensation from EA Sports and other video game companies for mimicking everything about a player except slapping names on their backs?

Top
#992571 - 10/28/09 06:59 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: kuME10]
Geezer Offline
To serve & protect

Registered: 01/08/06
Loc: JayhawkLaw office Lobby
You can't have your athletes invovled in endorsement deals. See the Colorado football player/ winter sports guy.
_________________________
"Nice hands, Jess." Bill Self, Oct. 17, 2012


Top
#992572 - 10/28/09 07:31 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: Geezer]
livedeadhead Offline
Baby Jay

Registered: 01/15/09
Loc: Bloomfield, NJ
I gotta disagree. I mean, if the university is making money off of the players and if that amount of money is in far excess of the compensation that the players receive (which it of course is) then they are getting exploited.

Actually, paying the players seems to make more sense to me than letting them engage in endorsement deals b/c of how that would give an unfair advantage to larger markets as someone said above.

Take all that $$ from the massive TV deals for the tourney and from the video games, put it in a pot, divide it by the number of D-1 players and give it to them. That would be fair. There would be no problems with that except that the universities wouldn't make as much money, prob couldn't pay the coaches as much $ either. That would be the RIGHT thing to do. Currently, as Bilas said, the NCAA is a simply not applying the same standards to itself that it applies to its players (bunch of hypocrites)

Top
#992573 - 10/28/09 07:41 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: livedeadhead]
Geezer Offline
To serve & protect

Registered: 01/08/06
Loc: JayhawkLaw office Lobby
"Sorry Coach, I have a photo shoot in LA next week. I'll do my training on the road."
If the Universities don't get that money is there a new practice facility and Do the Towers get rehabbed?
_________________________
"Nice hands, Jess." Bill Self, Oct. 17, 2012


Top
#992574 - 10/28/09 07:48 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: Geezer]
livedeadhead Offline
Baby Jay

Registered: 01/15/09
Loc: Bloomfield, NJ
? No photo shoots, just pay them.

Maybe they don't get a new facility or new housing, but neither would any other programs unless the university itself just pumped in the $$ from wherever it might get it, so it wouldn't really matter. I'm sure the players just love their new stuff, but I'd bet that they'd take getting payed for the money they are making instead.

Arguing that the players who earn the money for the schools and the NCAA should not receive a larger portion of it than they do is like arguing in favor of some old communist russia-like state where everybody works but only receives just what they need and all the spoils go the top because they are the ones in power. No way u can support the exploitation of these players and say you have their best interests at heart.

Top
#992575 - 10/28/09 07:53 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: livedeadhead]
Geezer Offline
To serve & protect

Registered: 01/08/06
Loc: JayhawkLaw office Lobby
I'm good with a stipend at a reasonable amount but to portray the men's hoops team as exploited is nutz.
_________________________
"Nice hands, Jess." Bill Self, Oct. 17, 2012


Top
#992576 - 10/28/09 08:22 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: Geezer]
phineasgage Offline
Baby Jay

Registered: 04/29/08
Loc: 10th and Illinois
yeah jay let's just go ahead and just make parity in college basketball worse than it actually is

Top
#992577 - 10/28/09 08:34 PM Re: College Athletes' Marketability [Re: phineasgage]
5DecadeHawk Offline
Otto Schnellbacher

Registered: 11/22/07
NCAA Basketball Athletes receive a free college education and other benefits worth well over $100,000 on average. That's not exactly chump change.

There are over 4000 Division 1 Men's Basketball players on scholarship.
_________________________
tmcats put KU76erfan on ignore. It's Timmy asking us to quote KU76erfan's posts frequently.

Top

Preview