California passes law to allow student-athletes to make money off endorsements

[abark]

That is absolutely not in danger of happening. What, 1 top 10 recruit in the last decade have elected to go overseas (Emmanuel Mudiay)? And look at how that worked out for him... guess he's still in the league but he's not exactly lighting it up nor does he have teams lining up to give him a big contract.

RJ Hampton and Lamelo Ball are playing the NBL this year on pro deals and they're both top prospects. Lets face it, if you're telling a player out of high school whether he could develop nicely in a pro league or go unpaid in the NCAA, i think the choice is pretty clear.

The system is completely antiquated.

Okay, so 3 players out of 1,000. Not sure the NCAA really cares.

Maybe if those players start to go on having successful NBA careers then they'll care, but until that happen, I don't think they will. You say the choice is clear but basically no one has made that choice.

Brandon Jennings too. And don't just look at the past. If it works out for Hampton and Ball, it will only get more and more common.

Hampton already has a large guarenteed contract and a multi million dollar shoe deal. You think younger prospects don't see how the other one and done guys are getting screwed in comparison.

Also, who cares how Muddiay's career turned out. Him and Jennings played overseas and were both still top lottery picks. That's the only thing relevant to this conversation.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

The NCAA is still in control and legal precedence is in their favor.

This is no different than states passing laws to legalize marijuana. Legal precedence has been established that corporations still maintain their right to ban the use of marijuana, implement drug screening, and fire any employee who engages in the act of marijuana regardless of the state legislature.

This doesn't change anything unless the NCAA is willing to make their own internal rule changes - the NCAA is still free to ban players who take endorsements. The only difference this law makes is that players who get banned would still get to keep their scholarships.

The difference is that the NCAA doesn't employ these kids -- they regulate the schools they play for. And as the only org that regulates revenue-generating college sports, they're subject to antitrust scrutiny.

I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how this'll play out, but I'm pretty sure IBM testing its employees for weed isn't strong precedent here.

[RCM88x]

RJ Hampton and Lamelo Ball are playing the NBL this year on pro deals and they're both top prospects. Lets face it, if you're telling a player out of high school whether he could develop nicely in a pro league or go unpaid in the NCAA, i think the choice is pretty clear.

The system is completely antiquated.

Okay, so 3 players out of 1,000. Not sure the NCAA really cares.

Maybe if those players start to go on having successful NBA careers then they'll care, but until that happen, I don't think they will. You say the choice is clear but basically no one has made that choice.

Brandon Jennings too. And don't just look at the past. If it works out for Hampton and Ball, it will only get more and more common.

Hampton already has a large guarenteed contract and a multi million dollar shoe deal. You think younger prospects don't see how the other one and done guys are getting screwed in comparison.

Also, who cares how Muddiay's career turned out. Him and Jennings played overseas and were both still top lottery picks. That's the only thing relevant to this conversation.

I think the fact that most people consider them busts or bums now matters, 17-18 year old kids look at them and definitely don't want to end up like them. They want to end up like Lebron, KD, Curry, Kawhi, etc... Until an american kid goes overseas, beats the system, and turns out to be a big time NBA player, I just don't think its gonna change. Kids value the experience, the prestige. Its just not all about money, they're 17-18 years old, they don't really have a grasp of that concept. Most of them have been babied by their parents, relatives, and coaches for their teenage years anyways, they probably don't consider money a big issue because its something they've always had. Maybe if it was 25-30 years ago when basketball culture was much different and the player-base was far more often disadvantaged kids in struggling families, but that just isn't the majority anymore. Basketball has totally become a prep/suburban sport. If anything football and baseball have taken the spot that basketball once had.

However, my guess is the NBA allows 18 YOs in the league before 2023 anyways, so its basically a non-issue for basketball.

[DoItALL9]

California schools willing to leave the NCAA? California could easily have its own or multiple conferences.

Sent from my LM-G710 using RealGM mobile app

[Edrees]

The NCAA and their crazy threats.

Like they're really going to have march madness without any California teams. Especially when most of the top recruits will pick California schools.

What states are going to sit around and see all of the best recruits go to California school without passing similar laws.

It shouldn't have taken a new law to make this happen, the NCAA should have made the change years ago.

Probably 10-15 other states with similar labor philosophies will follow suit with a similar law, now that they have the idea in their head. I can tell you with certainty that Washington, NY and Massachusetts will do something like this sooner or later.

NCAA will have to have 50% of the country tournament excluded if they want to do that.

[clyde21]

Okay, so 3 players out of 1,000. Not sure the NCAA really cares.

Maybe if those players start to go on having successful NBA careers then they'll care, but until that happen, I don't think they will. You say the choice is clear but basically no one has made that choice.

Brandon Jennings too. And don't just look at the past. If it works out for Hampton and Ball, it will only get more and more common.

Hampton already has a large guarenteed contract and a multi million dollar shoe deal. You think younger prospects don't see how the other one and done guys are getting screwed in comparison.

Also, who cares how Muddiay's career turned out. Him and Jennings played overseas and were both still top lottery picks. That's the only thing relevant to this conversation.

I think the fact that most people consider them busts or bums now matters, 17-18 year old kids look at them and definitely don't want to end up like them. They want to end up like Lebron, KD, Curry, Kawhi, etc... Until an american kid goes overseas, beats the system, and turns out to be a big time NBA player, I just don't think its gonna change. Kids value the experience, the prestige. Its just not all about money, they're 17-18 years old, they don't really have a grasp of that concept. Most of them have been babied by their parents, relatives, and coaches for their teenage years anyways, they probably don't consider money a big issue because its something they've always had. Maybe if it was 25-30 years ago when basketball culture was much different and the player-base was far more often disadvantaged kids in struggling families, but that just isn't the majority anymore. Basketball has totally become a prep/suburban sport. If anything football and baseball have taken the spot that basketball once had.

However, my guess is the NBA allows 18 YOs in the league before 2023 anyways, so its basically a non-issue for basketball.

why does that even matter and how is it relevant? the only way that is relevant is if you're also claiming they wouldn't have busted had they played in the NCAA for a year (because there are no busts that play in the NCAA first, right?)....

otherwise this is a non-point, doesn't even make sense.

[clyde21]

The NCAA and their crazy threats.

Like they're really going to have march madness without any California teams. Especially when most of the top recruits will pick California schools.

What states are going to sit around and see all of the best recruits go to California school without passing similar laws.

It shouldn't have taken a new law to make this happen, the NCAA should have made the change years ago.

Probably 10-15 other states with similar labor philosophies will follow suit with a similar law, now that they have the idea in their head. I can tell you with certainty that Washington, NY and Massachusetts will do something like this sooner or later.

NCAA will have to have 50% of the country tournament excluded if they want to do that.

Oregon and Colorado too

the NCAA can either get in front of this or get left behind, but the train is already moving.

[RCM88x]

Brandon Jennings too. And don't just look at the past. If it works out for Hampton and Ball, it will only get more and more common.

Hampton already has a large guarenteed contract and a multi million dollar shoe deal. You think younger prospects don't see how the other one and done guys are getting screwed in comparison.

Also, who cares how Muddiay's career turned out. Him and Jennings played overseas and were both still top lottery picks. That's the only thing relevant to this conversation.

I think the fact that most people consider them busts or bums now matters, 17-18 year old kids look at them and definitely don't want to end up like them. They want to end up like Lebron, KD, Curry, Kawhi, etc... Until an american kid goes overseas, beats the system, and turns out to be a big time NBA player, I just don't think its gonna change. Kids value the experience, the prestige. Its just not all about money, they're 17-18 years old, they don't really have a grasp of that concept. Most of them have been babied by their parents, relatives, and coaches for their teenage years anyways, they probably don't consider money a big issue because its something they've always had. Maybe if it was 25-30 years ago when basketball culture was much different and the player-base was far more often disadvantaged kids in struggling families, but that just isn't the majority anymore. Basketball has totally become a prep/suburban sport. If anything football and baseball have taken the spot that basketball once had.

However, my guess is the NBA allows 18 YOs in the league before 2023 anyways, so its basically a non-issue for basketball.

why does that even matter and how is it relevant? the only way that is relevant is if you're also claiming they wouldn't have busted had they played in the NCAA for a year (because there are no busts that play in the NCAA first, right?)....

otherwise this is a non-point, doesn't even make sense.

Because kids look at those guys and think, wow they suck now and they went overseas to play, maybe I shouldn't do that.

Why is that hard to understand? Doesn't matter it if it actually made a difference, what matters is how kids perceive these guys and if they want to follow them.

[Duke4life831]

The NCAA and their crazy threats.

Like they're really going to have march madness without any California teams. Especially when most of the top recruits will pick California schools.

What states are going to sit around and see all of the best recruits go to California school without passing similar laws.

It shouldn't have taken a new law to make this happen, the NCAA should have made the change years ago.

Probably 10-15 other states with similar labor philosophies will follow suit with a similar law, now that they have the idea in their head. I can tell you with certainty that Washington, NY and Massachusetts will do something like this sooner or later.

NCAA will have to have 50% of the country tournament excluded if they want to do that.

Oregon and Colorado too

the NCAA can either get in front of this or get left behind, but the train is already moving.

Yup. If the NCAA wants to try and make any good graces with this subject, they drop this rule as soon as they can. Fighting it or even holding onto this rule until they're forced legally to drop it is an even worse look for them.

Im actually someone that doesn't have an issue with the NCAA not paying the players, (especially with the new G League contract available). They offer what they offer and the players have a choice if they want to take that or not, I think its a bigger issue that the NBA forces the OAD rule.

But with all of that said, the cant make money off your name or likeness is so far beyond overreach by them its ridiculous. Its the dumbest rule with anything to do with sports that I know of. If a player wants to go make a local TV commercial, good on them, why the hell does the NCAA have to stop that from happening.

Someone within the NCAA has to be smart and realize, this is going to happen no matter what. We can either look like idiots and hold onto this rule until we are forced to change it, or we can get out in front of it and end the rule now. Be smart about this NCAA.

[Ainosterhaspie]

Like the poster above me I don't think it's a problem that the NCAA doesn't pay the athletes. They do pay the athletes with a free degree of they want it.

But I detest the restriction on athletes finding a way to make money on the side. If it's not interfering with practice and games, or bringing disrepute to the school, it's not the school's business.

[clyde21]

I think the fact that most people consider them busts or bums now matters, 17-18 year old kids look at them and definitely don't want to end up like them. They want to end up like Lebron, KD, Curry, Kawhi, etc... Until an american kid goes overseas, beats the system, and turns out to be a big time NBA player, I just don't think its gonna change. Kids value the experience, the prestige. Its just not all about money, they're 17-18 years old, they don't really have a grasp of that concept. Most of them have been babied by their parents, relatives, and coaches for their teenage years anyways, they probably don't consider money a big issue because its something they've always had. Maybe if it was 25-30 years ago when basketball culture was much different and the player-base was far more often disadvantaged kids in struggling families, but that just isn't the majority anymore. Basketball has totally become a prep/suburban sport. If anything football and baseball have taken the spot that basketball once had.

However, my guess is the NBA allows 18 YOs in the league before 2023 anyways, so its basically a non-issue for basketball.

why does that even matter and how is it relevant? the only way that is relevant is if you're also claiming they wouldn't have busted had they played in the NCAA for a year (because there are no busts that play in the NCAA first, right?)....

otherwise this is a non-point, doesn't even make sense.

Because kids look at those guys and think, wow they suck now and they went overseas to play, maybe I shouldn't do that.

Why is that hard to understand? Doesn't matter it if it actually made a difference, what matters is how kids perceive these guys and if they want to follow them.

because there are plenty of players who've completely busted and playing the NCAA?

'where are Anthony Bennett and Jahlil Okafor now?'

[clyde21]

Like the poster above me I don't think it's a problem that the NCAA doesn't pay the athletes. They do pay the athletes with a free degree of they want it.

But I detest the restriction on athletes finding a way to make money on the side. If it's not interfering with practice and games, or bringing disrepute to the school, it's not the school's business.

that's not payment. you and I can go get a scholarship...doesn't mean we're helping the schools make millions

[Ainosterhaspie]

Like the poster above me I don't think it's a problem that the NCAA doesn't pay the athletes. They do pay the athletes with a free degree of they want it.

But I detest the restriction on athletes finding a way to make money on the side. If it's not interfering with practice and games, or bringing disrepute to the school, it's not the school's business.

that's not payment. you and I can go get a scholarship...doesn't mean we're helping the schools make millions

The athlete is getting something of value in return for something of value. It may not be a cash exchange, but is the same idea. The best athletes probably are worth way more than they get paid by the university, but they're still getting paid.

That other types of scholarships are out there has nothing to do with it.

I'd be fine with schools giving the players actual money, not just a bunch of free stuff (degree, room, board etc), but that part of the system doesn't bother me the same as a stupid rule you can't profit from your own name and likeness.

[RCM88x]

why does that even matter and how is it relevant? the only way that is relevant is if you're also claiming they wouldn't have busted had they played in the NCAA for a year (because there are no busts that play in the NCAA first, right?)....

otherwise this is a non-point, doesn't even make sense.

Because kids look at those guys and think, wow they suck now and they went overseas to play, maybe I shouldn't do that.

Why is that hard to understand? Doesn't matter it if it actually made a difference, what matters is how kids perceive these guys and if they want to follow them.

because there are plenty of players who've completely busted and playing the NCAA?

'where are Anthony Bennett and Jahlil Okafor now?'

But there are also a lot who haven't, significantly more than have had success playing 1 year overseas.

[sikma42]

Like the poster above me I don't think it's a problem that the NCAA doesn't pay the athletes. They do pay the athletes with a free degree of they want it.

But I detest the restriction on athletes finding a way to make money on the side. If it's not interfering with practice and games, or bringing disrepute to the school, it's not the school's business.

that's not payment. you and I can go get a scholarship...doesn't mean we're helping the schools make millions

The athlete is getting something of value in return for something of value. It may not be a cash exchange, but is the same idea. The best athletes probably are worth way more than they get paid by the university, but they're still getting paid.

That other types of scholarships are out there has nothing to do with it.

I'd be fine with schools giving the players actual money, not just a bunch of free stuff (degree, room, board etc), but that part of the system doesn't bother me the same as a stupid rule you can't profit from your own name and likeness.

So as long as it has value then you okay with them being paid with it?

Also 90% of colleges degrees arent even worth the paper they are printed on...its all a scam.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

[mademan]

Like the poster above me I don't think it's a problem that the NCAA doesn't pay the athletes. They do pay the athletes with a free degree of they want it.

But I detest the restriction on athletes finding a way to make money on the side. If it's not interfering with practice and games, or bringing disrepute to the school, it's not the school's business.

that's not payment. you and I can go get a scholarship...doesn't mean we're helping the schools make millions

The athlete is getting something of value in return for something of value. It may not be a cash exchange, but is the same idea. The best athletes probably are worth way more than they get paid by the university, but they're still getting paid.

That other types of scholarships are out there has nothing to do with it.

I'd be fine with schools giving the players actual money, not just a bunch of free stuff (degree, room, board etc), but that part of the system doesn't bother me the same as a stupid rule you can't profit from your own name and likeness.

Ive no problem with a school negotiating with a player and both coming to an agreement of scholarship for play. I take issue with the idea that the players arent allowed to negotiate at all for anything. Room and board and even education is not payment

[Lalouie]

it's an attempt to boost the pac12 football and basketball because we've been sucking in a major way of late.

otoh all the other conferences have to do is follow suit. LOL

[clyde21]

Because kids look at those guys and think, wow they suck now and they went overseas to play, maybe I shouldn't do that.

Why is that hard to understand? Doesn't matter it if it actually made a difference, what matters is how kids perceive these guys and if they want to follow them.

because there are plenty of players who've completely busted and playing the NCAA?

'where are Anthony Bennett and Jahlil Okafor now?'

But there are also a lot who haven't, significantly more than have had success playing 1 year overseas.

we don't have a sample size to say it...your only sample i...Mudiay? we've seen wayyyy more people bust out of the NCAA than Mudiay lol

[Clyde Frazier]

Holy **** the majority of comments on that article are insufferable...

[RCM88x]

because there are plenty of players who've completely busted and playing the NCAA?

'where are Anthony Bennett and Jahlil Okafor now?'

But there are also a lot who haven't, significantly more than have had success playing 1 year overseas.

we don't have a sample size to say it...your only sample i...Mudiay? we've seen wayyyy more people bust out of the NCAA than Mudiay lol

Has there ever been a player to go overseas and play that was actually a superstar player in the NBA? I can't think of any.