Gary Sheffield, Jr
Videos by OutKick
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed a new bill that regulates college athletes’ name, image, and likeness early Thursday. Kemp held his signing in front of a Georgia Bulldog backdrop, which was supposed to signify “pro-player profits” — until you read the fine print.
Details reveal that schools can still take a significant cut of that money if they feel like it. A deal that looks player-friendly but that is actually pro-owner/school in the end? Seems to happen every time, doesn’t it? Figures.
Governor Brian Kemp @GovKemp signing bill to allow college athletes to get paid for usage of name, image or likeness pic.twitter.com/Gt6Vhr6xNF
— Steve Gehlbach (@SteveGWSB) May 6, 2021
The bill allows schools to take up to 75% of an athlete’s endorsement income, according to attorney and athlete advocate Maddie Salamone. And as WESH anchor Kendra Douglas added, the deal is going to kill recruiting.
This could for sure hurt recruiting and I can’t see coaches going for it. https://t.co/0nbeCfKI4o
— Kendra Douglas WESH (@Kendra_Melinda) May 6, 2021
Here’s the deal
There’s obviously a huge problem with a 75-25 cut, but how will it impact recruiting, exactly? Well, if Alabama lets players keep a larger cut than, let’s say, Auburn, then Nick Saban has the upper hand.
And in theory that makes it sound like the programs taking less of a cut will have an edge on contested recruits. That’s technically true, yet we have to acknowledge that some schools have the financial freedom to make more pro-player decisions. It would be better if Governor Brian Kemp capped out the cut schools can take so we could avoid these unnecessary advantages.
Athletes don’t need to be wealthy and ruin the integrity of college sports, however signing $50,000 deals to potentially pocket just $12,500? Absolutely ridiculous. This is a battle that’ll eventually push even further towards the players — it’s just a matter of when. Hopefully we find a happy middle ground because this ain’t it.
So whoever pays the players the most gets the recruits… not any different than it has been for a few decades.
Exactly this whole “WE HAVE TO PAY THE PLAYERS NOW CUZ CAPTIALISM!” will do nothing to improve the balance of power in NCAA sports and will only make it look more like pro sports turning off millions of mid level program fans in the process. I mean what is the point of investing your fandom in any player that joins a program who doesn’t find their way into the CFP year in and year out? Your recruits will transfer after one season, you won’t be able to get any 5 stars if your program doesn’t have the revenue to promote their name, image, and likeness. The only way IMO to “pay” these guys fairly and intelligently is to allow them to have an investment fund of some sort set up in their name that they manage with the assistance of a team financial advisor which they gain access to upon the completion of their Junior year at the university and must at least obtain an Associate’s degree to qualify for full vestment of the funds. Idk how nobody has proposed this yet because it would actually teach financial responsibility something desperately lacking from many pro athletes.
Because the University of Georgia doesn’t earn enough money from their football and basketball programs. This is laughable, almost reminiscent of the mining “company towns” that paid you $100 a week then charged you $90 for food, rent, and tools
“Allows” doesn’t mean they are forced to take the money. Any athletic department stupid enough to do it deserves the hit recruiting will take.
I think this is the right takeaway. It’s a choice like many others an athletic department has to make that will affect recruiting. If they choose the taketh away route, top recruits won’t come and they lose out. Smart ADs just won’t do it.
Taxes
Politicians still get contributions, AND TICKETS, from schools and fans.
I can’t wait until point shaving is discovered
Watch the NBA show it’s face on how rigged these playoffs are going to be with the Lakers and Lebron floundering. People are going to wake up to hmmmmm maybe it was kinda sketchy that a League Commissioner was so adamant about promoting and getting into bed with Sports gambling.
I am torn here. I respect the right of the best players to make money from NIL. On the other hand, those players still represent the universities and will no doubt be wearing university attire in any NIL commercials, ads, etc. so both parties should profit from this, although 75% is rather steep. Paying players in this way will eventually lead to the end of the NCAA and college athletics as we know it. What rights do the players have as they are technically not employees and thus no union rights? This isn’t the NFLPA.
These guys already get gifts from boosters. I understand the desire to get paid. I think NCAA president Mark Emmert is a scumbag. But I just don’t see how this ends well.
If you think we’ve got a too top heavy scenario now, you haven’t seen nothing yet. Honestly I’m not sure what the right answer is.
Exactly what I’m seeing people in this era can only see two inches in front of their faces. Then when all of the negative repercussions start rolling in everyone who promoted the bad idea without fully thinking it through go “hurrrrdurrrrr how did this not improve this already corrupted situation!?!?!?”
Charging a licensing fee for use of the logo or association with the school is reasonable. 75%, OTOH, is absurd.