N.C.A.A. Athletes Could Be Paid Under New California Law

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow college athletes to hire agents and make money from endorsements. The measure, the first of its kind, threatens the business model of college sports.

Comments: 239

  1. This is a simple moral issue, but a difficult legal one. The young men risking their brains on every snap of a football game deserve the proper compensation for the revenue their sacrifice brings in. That being said, a law in California only establishes the groundwork for launching a lengthy campaign in the courts. The NCAA operates in all 50 states to the best of my knowledge, and this law would change almost every aspect of the NCAA as it currently functions. I hope a reasonable compromise can be reached between all parties.

  2. @Spencer I am not a lawyer, ... but it sounds just possible that you aren't either - or are ill-informed about this particular question. I trust the California legislature - as a guess, 1/2 of its members ARE attorneys - is not "playing games" that will take years and cost millions to litigate. That is, I suspect the NCAA MAY fight a losing battle in court, because the stakes are high enough, ... but lose they will! OF COURSE, there are colleges in all 50 states, but the NCAA is NOT a governmental agency. Yes, Calif. may have to fight for its "right" to require emissions levels in cars lower than the (federal) EPA might prefer. But Doctors "operate" in all 50 states, and the AMA "lobbies" for many of them. Still, each State is free to pass hundreds of laws that govern just what doctors can and cannot do in the few thousand square miles delimited by the state's boundaries. Actually, I wonder just how hard the likes of Stanford and UCLA will "push back," but if Uber looks to have lost - pending Court action - I guess that the universities in Calif. are smart enough to know when a position is indefensible - ethically AND legally - and smells bad, too!

  3. This is a good first step to allow college athletes to get some of the enormous amounts of money generated by their play. The fiction of "amateurism" has been used for way too long to justify paying nothing to the kids who are risking their long-term health for our entertainment while others reap tremendous profits from their exploits.

  4. @Pat I whole heartedly agree. I would like to see the Alabama Crimson Tide spun off as an NFL team. Then the players can be paid what they're worth. It's disgusting that Nick Saban makes 7 million dollars a year and his players can't accept an ice cream cone from a booster without losing their scholarship, getting kicked off the team, and having the team sanctioned. That's exploitation.

  5. This is great. It simply brings the payments already being made out in the open while taking the burden off the schools for paying. Since the schools themselves won't be paying, it won't violate Title IX either. The NCAA will argue that small market schools will be at a disadvantage, which will be debunked when other states take the same position as California. Does anyone think players at schools in "small markets" like Tuscaloosa, South Bend, and Norman won't being making just as much or more than players in LA and the Bay Area?

  6. @skmartists If the NCAA fairly paid all college athletes for their semi-pro activities, this would never have happened. It is the NCAA's greed and insistence on an indentured servitude model that created the crisis.

  7. @JS, "indentured servitude" give me an absolute break. These "student athletes" are absorbing scholarship benefits for free tuition, room & board at institutions where a non-scholarship students would pay tens of thousands of $$. Ironically many of the top recruits for the big money sports (football and basketball) would have NO SHOT to gain admittance on their academic abilities alone. Comparing an athletic scholarship to indentured servitude is a gross twisting of facts and frankly a slap in the face to myriad students from impoverished backgrounds who labor tirelessly just to afford the chance to better themselves intellectually in higher education setting.

  8. @Mike S Simply put, these "student athletes" are given a worthless piece of paper as their diploma in "whatever" is not going to get them a job, assuming they finish college. No normal student would pay tens of thousands of dollars for that diploma. It is an apt comparison to indentured servitude as they toil for a few years for this worthless piece of paper when the colleges and NCAA makes millions out of their efforts. If you compare their scholarship to normal students, then why is a coach paid in millions and not like a normal (even nobel laureate) professor? Of course most of them would have no shot at being admitted to a regular curriculum and they shouldn't be. The right thing would be for them to be in farm teams a la baseball and pursuing basic college education on the side through colleges that offer them a flexible schedule and truly seeks to educate them.

  9. I have such sympathy with this effort and I do believe that some college athletes are exploited. As a parent of nonathletes, however, I resent the fact that some of these athletes are getting free rides in return for their playing; depending on the school, this can amount to more than $200,000 over four years. But this is a tough topic and I'm glad Newsom is forcing the issue.

  10. @Reader I am a father of non-athletes as well. I spent close to $100K on my son's 4 year engineering education in Illinois. But he, in his Senior year, has already received job offers from silicon valley and other places, including full sponsorship for his MS. I doubt the degrees conferred to most of these student athletes get anything close to that. For most of them it is either pro or bust (and for majority of them it is bust). So, yes, I don't envy them one bit.

  11. @Reader The athletes get a free education on paper and spend most of their time playing the sport and not going to class. Only football and basketball players largely have free rides, for the other sports they split the scholarships up and the athletes have to pay real tuition. A lot of athletes are not allowed to major in anything relevant, like a science or other time demanding majors You should be thankful your kids are not athletes.

  12. @Hugh G I was on scholarship in the Big Ten for golf. I then went to law school. It paid for my undergraduate degree. You might want to talk to some college athletes first.

  13. Gavin Newsom is living in the real world and the NCAA is trying to perpetuate a fantasy. the tragic aspect of the NCAA stance is that it has real and negative consequences for athletes in revenue sports ... not least of which is assuming risk of serious and debilitating injury without compensation. That networks, colleges, coaches and athletic directors reap profits from this arrangement is obscene. in short: it's about time.

  14. @j hogan I actually stopped participating in my office NCAA championship pool when it dawned on me that even I could make more money from NCAA athletics than the athletes. The status quo is diseased.

  15. The NCAA needs to be reformed. They claim to support amateur athletics, but yet they fail to enforce egregious pay to play scenarios in basketball. Laws like the one in California will help bring the money in college athletics above board. A number of players are already being paid, just off the books. This will help move things in the right direction and allow athletes in the less popular sports to earn money too. College lacrosse and volleyball players already support youth sports camps at their universities in the off-season, now they can get paid for their efforts.

  16. Everyone knows that many if not most "student athletes" who play a sport for any of the schools that makes millions from that sport are, in fact, just employees of the school. Many if not all of them are admitted with academic credentials far below what the school would normally accept. Many of them never finish their degrees or else the degree itself is a joke. Effectively the schools are running a sports enterprise as a side business to their academic enterprise, and they only have to pay their key employees (the players) room and board. Of course it's critical for them to maintain the illusion that the players are really students because that's their whole justification for being in the business.

  17. @JerseyGirl Yes. It’s an often dangerous unpaid internship that players hope the survive in order to get a chance for a real job in professional sports. While the schools rake in money and focus less on academics. In a word; exploitation.

  18. @JerseyGirl This is also true for the colleges that do not make money on their teams - the academic standards for athletes at the Ivies, Stanford, MIT, etc are lower than the standards for other students. It is time to make college sports about student-athletes, not the other way around.

  19. @JerseyGirl. This is just not true. Over 80% of NCAA athletes earn a degree. 35% earn a post graduate degree! Less than 2% go on to be professional athletes. Drop your biases and get your facts straight.

  20. Excellent first step. The next step is to completely decouple the Division 1 sports from the public universities. These sports are basically just free minor leagues for the pro major leagues, and those major leagues should be paying for the programs, not the universities and as such state taxpayers. While many schools see big-time sports as cash cows, the reality is that most of the athletic departments are already self-funding and how the universities — and more specifically the states which operate them — participate in the revenue sharing is opaque.

  21. Want to make college athletics amateur? Don’t pay coaches and end athletic scholarships. If someone wants to sponsor a team or an athlete, like is done in the little league, then fine.

  22. @AG This doesn't make sense. High school football is an amateur sport but the guy that mows the grass does it as a job. And so to the teacher/coaches. The students should be students first. If they want to play a professional sport, let them go do that as professionals.

  23. @Mmm High school coaches double as facuulty in many cases and are not paid obscene amount like college coaches (who are paid multiples of what other, even nobel laureate, professors get)

  24. about time and ask any real sports fan if they think otherwise. The NCAA is beyond corrupt. How about we be grownups about this?

  25. I hope every cent they make gets deducted from their scholarships. No double dipping here.

  26. The IRS should go after NCAA division power 5 conferences football and basketball programs.

  27. This is fantastic. And for the 380lb defensive linebacker on a 100 meal stipend a day? It's about time to finally get fed.

  28. The NCAA is an absurdly commercialized enterprise for the benefit of megacorps at the "students"' expense anyway. Their model is the rigged "gig" model of the Uber-Lyft cartel, and as with that cartel it's time to stop hoping these athletes won't be exploited as underpaid employees under a veneer of "college education"—and start giving them protections, benefits, and WAGES as the workers they already ARE.

  29. "The powerful universities... said the law would put their athletes in danger of being barred from routine competitions and showcase events like the College Football Playoff and the men’s and women’s N.C.A.A. basketball tournaments....that help some universities log more than $100 million each in annual athletic revenue. In a Sept. 11 letter to Newsom, the N.C.A.A.’s Board of Governors said that the measure would “erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics” and that the N.C.A.A. had “consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first, and they should not be employees of the university.” ---- The universities have devolved into greedy corporate-like mobsters who want their entitled money and don't anyone disturbing their shady racket. A university is supposed to a place of learning, education and productive mind expansion, not the official minor leagues of the National Football League extorting indentured servant athletes for hundreds and hundreds of millions in exchange for an NFL lottery ticket with really low odds. The NCAA pretends it's a non-profit entity, but it's as profit-minded as Exxon-Mobil and any other large multinational corporation. Good for the student-athletes who have been systematically exploited by the money-hungry NCAA and their university overlords for fifty years.

  30. Make professional football and basketball create farm leagues like baseball, and get colleges back to what they are supposed to be doing . . . TEACHING!

  31. @Mtnman1963 And lose all those $'s from collegiate sports? Dream on. The athletes are not slaves. Let them earn some money while they can because only 10% make it to the big leagues.

  32. @Mtnman1963 How do u make private industry do anything they don't want to do?

  33. College football will cease to be the Alabama invitational.

  34. I am all for people getting paid. However, we should factor in the scholarships they receive as payment as well. So long as the universities do that, I don't care how much they pay them.

  35. @Dave When I attended college [as a non-athlete] at a Pac-10 Division 1 NCAA school there was no way that I could have served the two masters of my department and a coach at the same time. There are not enough hours in the day - 15 credit hours * 4 hours of effort/week/credit hour = about 60 hours of academic work/week. Even if you can get through your essays and problem sets and labs on 3 hours/credit hour that's 45 hours a week. With practice, gym, travel and games there is no way that these 'student-athletes' can truly utilize the 'scholarship' that lands them on campus.

  36. @Andy 60 hours a week focusing on academics? Seems a bit much. College was much easier than real life as I recall.

  37. @Dave scholarship and stipend are good benefits to being student athletes. but why would they be prohibited for getting shoe endorsements? or creating their own YT channel to make money? those are separate endeavors that is not related to playing with your school?

  38. Good on the Gov. Newsom. The NCAA, colleges and universities have been exploiting young athletes for too long.

  39. "business model" is all you need to hear to know this system is as far from "college education" as these sports have gotten.

  40. If I was a lowly college football blocker and I knew that the block I was about to throw that may kill me would be what assured that the hot-shot running behind me would realize his big payday from Nike, would I? No way, let that sucker earn it himself!

  41. It’s time to disconnect college and university athletics from the huge machine of professional sports. Why should there be a connection with educational institutions anyway? And yes we can use Europe as an example. They have plenty of professional sport teams but they’re not wound in the universities and colleges.

  42. @srwdm Because money. Compare the attendance at a minor league game to college games.

  43. @srwdm We probably can't tell private colleges what to do but, public universities, in particular, should get out of the commercialized athletics (scholarships, and all) and concentrate on academic programs.

  44. Gov. Newsom is setting an historic and damaging direction to college sports. There are two fundamental solutions to this problem: 1. Most Division 1 college football teams should become NFL minor leagues teams, not associated with any university. The system would be similar to minor league baseball. 2. Eliminate all athletic scholarships in universities and colleges, similar to all Division 3 schools. The amateur athletetic programs that result from this system are much more interesting and enjoyable. You play a sport at the end of a day of real academic courses to get some exercise and unwind. Most important, all athletes in this system are actually preparing for careers and productive lives.

  45. @Paul Robillard You don't think that this is a first step in this direction? Exposing the strange bedfellows of highly competitive athletics and intellectual inquiry should begin to force open the barn door, and perhaps lead to one of the outcomes you endorse.

  46. @Paul Robillard 1. Will never happen. 2. Will never happen. Reasons. - Money.

  47. I look forward to the title IX lawsuits when men players are paid more than women players. The commercialization of college sports was always a bad idea.

  48. @Prudence Spencer The hyper focus on sports at an educational institution was always a bad idea.

  49. @Prudence Spencer This only allows the students to get payed from outside sources. The school themselves wouldn't be paying the athletes.

  50. The only group the "amateur player" model benefits is the NCAA itself. Of course those people, who have made billions of dollars exploiting student athletes for decades, have a problem with the legislation. And Newsom is right - the NCAA cannot be trusted to do the right thing by the students. This is definitely a situation where the exploiters will never recognize or acknowledge that they are exploiting - it will have to be stopped from the outside. The rise of social media means that - as Newsom says in the article - any college student can start an Instagram account and become an "influencer" and get paid for their opinions and endorsements. Any student except a student athlete, who could benefit hugely from being able to have an agent and promote products while they're playing. Problem is, in this new model, none of that money would flow to the NCAA. That's the problem the NCAA has with the "paid student athlete" idea. They don't directly benefit. This is all about money, it has nothing - ZERO - to do with what's good for students. What's good for students is to be able to leverage their talents to their best advantage. It's a new world; the NCAA needs to start living in it.

  51. I’m hesitant to endorse this change unless my agent says they’re going to pay me enough to go watch the games and/or my bookie says the odds are good enough that I can’t lose.

  52. NCAA basketball and football funds do more than just line the pockets of advertisers and media companies. In a vacuum, allowing collegiate athletes to be paid sounds reasonable; but what happens when every blue chip athlete goes to school in a big media market (i.e. Stanford, USC, Miami)? Half the schools in all the Power 5 Conferences and most of the mid-America conference schools (and their students) lose athletes, lose funding, and a won't recover. Compensation for collegiate athletics also won't greatly benefit softball and water polo athletes; it'll pay out athletes that already stand to make money professionally. Worst case scenario these athletes leave school with at least a good portion of their education paid for. Many of us have been out of school for years and are still paying off the loans; they'll all more than welcome to join the ranks.

  53. I think the Governor is doing the right thing. I could never understand why they would be barred from earning money on top of their scholarships. With that said, would be great to see the Governor solve the homeless and budget crisis that his State is experiencing.

  54. @Steve What budget crisis? Faux news.

  55. Fine. But take it a couple of steps further. First, admit that this is all about big-money, big-time, TV football and not about riflery, volleyball, or water polo. Think anybody in those sports is going to rake in the bucks by endorsing a local restaurant or a line of jock straps? Then, having gotten real about it, drop the pretense that those recruited to play big-time college football are, or even should be, students first or students at all. Let colleges create professional football teams housed on campus and that play in the name of the school--and who cares whether they are students there or anywhere else? Pay them a professional's salary commensurate with their talent and whatever fame they garner, and let them make money on the side any way they like as long as it's legal. In other words, when it comes to big-time football, drop the myth of the (cough, cough) "student athlete," the "student" part of which has never been much more than a myth, and let college football be its own self-contained, big-money, professional enterprise, which it already is for everybody connected with it except the players. Any other way will just create gross inequity for students who play the not-so-glamorous sports, have no chance of making any money from them, and really are, in some cases at least, students first.

  56. The NCAA has been a ruinous force for higher education, turning once-respected institutions like the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill into a sordid business. And the NCAA's protestations that California's move would diminish the separation between amateur and professional play is laughable. The appropriate course of action is to have professionally promising athletes play in a minor league, like baseball. That way the players could make as much money as they can while the major leagues look them over. Or they could be recruited to the majors right out of high school. Most of the football and basketball players in universities have no interest or cultivated aptitude to study - that's not why they're there. They want to play, and they should have another pathway. That way both sports and universities become less corrupt. They never should have become so linked to begin with.

  57. The colleges should pay the athletes. And pay them a lot. The coaches get paid millions. The colleges get lots of advertising from the teams, which is worth plenty. So the athletes should get some of the money. The market rate, at that. Today there is really no reason that big time sports--in particular football and basketball--should be connected to colleges. In the 1920s maybe it made sense. For smaller colleges it makes sense today. For Ohio State and USC it makes no sense. The teams are big time businesses. The colleges should sell them, license the names of the colleges and teams, and let the teams be run like the big time and big dollar sports that they are. There is zero reason for having them connected to the colleges.

  58. Excellent! The school, coach, and corporations should not be the only ones to profit from the efforts, and terrible health risks, of these kids. PAY THEM!

  59. I say colleges and universities shouldn’t have athletic programs at all. Why should they? Is somebody going to get a Masters Degree in Football? A Bachelors if Science in Basketball? Give me a break. All of these schools are addicted to the money raised by these sports, period. Maybe they should focus on actually providing an education to students, not spending time and money on sports.

  60. @BrainThink College athletics are hugely popular and widely supported by many people who never even went to the colleges they support. Have you ever been to a college football game and experienced the feeling of community and esprit de corps of tens of thousands of people exuding pride and excitement in an institution, their state, and their youth? When I go to a game or watch my team on TV it gives me a sense of hope that people can celebrate and share a common purpose. And that is something that is so greatly lacking in nearly every other aspect of our society these days.

  61. Either make every Division I college sport an intramural, or pay the athletes. I sat in the Carrier Dome at Syracuse University watching a men's basketball game. Syracuse sells alcohol at their home basketball and football games. Syracuse makes money from alcohol revenue while paying their athletes nothing. It's sick that adults are drinking at college games where the athletes themselves are too young to drink. Colleges are making millions from unpaid labor. It has to end or be changed somehow.

  62. @Michael. Their athletes are paid with scholarships. I guess those should be taxed.

  63. @Jackson - Some, far from all, are 'paid' with scholarships.

  64. You’re right about taxing the scholarship. But do you support giving the bosses the sole control over the athletes’ compensation? For example should the NFL be able to keep athletes from appearing in commercials? If not why limit college athletes from selling their celebrity?

  65. The NCAA ruined the careers of many athletes when it used to stop a player good at baseball and football from playing one professionally while still being able to keep eligibility in the other. It took forever for that to change. The only problem I see with this California law is that it sets up some possible jealousy in teams where a player gets paid endorsements, like a quarterback, and a lineman who does the heavy work gets nothing. We shall see. However, too bad, NCAA.

  66. How’s that different from the pay scale in the NFL—or for that matter the differential pay scales in most work venues?

  67. @John Harrington Give California credit- they are apparently not as socialistic as everyone says they are- otherwise they would have decreed that the lineman gets the same amount of money as the quarterback.

  68. @Murray Suid Very different because colleges are not professional sports leagues in how they operate. The NFL is a pro sports league. The jealously in the NFL is part of the program. I am in favor of college athletes being able to make money the same as any non-athlete is. I played college football. We weren't allowed to have any sort of job during the school year or we would have lost our eligibility. I did not come from a moneyed background. In my first two seasons, during the winter, I played minor league hockey under an alias and was paid $200 a game in cash. I transferred in my junior year. I was a red shirt for a season and, then, I gave up my last two seasons of eligibility because of the NCAA and I got a job at a ski resort so I could afford to live and ski. I am sure the NCAA has forced many student athletes to have to make the choice between playing or having to work their way through school without having to accrue a massive loan debt. I had a tuition, room and board and books ride for my first two seasons, but I had to walk on when I transferred, meaning I had no financial help. Yet, to stay on the team, I could not work. Poverty. My junior year, during football season at least, was sheer poverty just so I could be on the scout team in practice. So, I quit the game. I will go on record here as saying I think the NCAA is as hypocritical an organization as could possibly exist given what they receive for selling their sports to television.

  69. California is leading the rest of the country to the future right now. Amazing the difference a solid Democrat majority makes! Positive change seems to start there.

  70. @alan haigh Not to mention a capitalist, free-market, free-enterprise change It's amazing how Republicans pretend to applaud the free market right up until people who look a certain way want to participate in it

  71. @alan haigh In South Carolina and at the National level, it is mostly the Republicans who are pushing for a California like law.

  72. @Jackson: "Wow, leading in overpaid athletes." Please explain what that means? College athletes can be dismissed for taking a hamburger lest they throw the game yet college coaches "earn" multi-million dollar contracts. So please tell the rest of us which overpaid college athletes you are referring to. That is [college athletes]- after all what the article is about. Oh; what about Virginia's homeless problem (since that topic is quite relevant to this article)?

  73. A better solution would be to create minor league systems for football and basketball as already exists in hockey and baseball. It is a for profit enterprise as it stands, why hide it behind the university system?

  74. @Slim Sadey But California doesn't have the power to force the NBA and the NFL to do that. Indeed, baseball and hockey are examples of sports where a minor league exists side by side with collegiate level sports, including Division 1 teams. I think this occurred because so many professional players are not American -- Canadian, European, for hockey, and from Latin America for baseball. Nonetheless, you don't see collegiate hockey and baseball teams at the center of the fraud in Division 1 athletics. If a minor league were created, the brightest and best players with checkered academic records would not be playing in college. Everyone knows that.

  75. first of all these players get full ride scholarships to top schools, secondly the governor of California does not have the power to do what he is trying to do, it will go to the Supreme Court and California will lose to the NCAA. watch and learn.

  76. @Zion A full ride to a top school where their only job is to make sure that the head coach doesn't get fired. Most don't have time to do anything but their sport and and are not encouraged to major in a degree that would actually benefit them. Why doesn't the governor of California have the power to do what he is doing? What is constitutional about denying athletes the same rights as other students? If you are on a full ride academic scholarship you can make as much money from your image as you want.

  77. @Zion Everyone gets paid the same ? Isn't that socialism ?

  78. When the NCAA's Board of Goveners states that “...consistently stood by its belief that student-athletes are students first", did everyone laugh? The concept of the student-athlete was a good one, long before it started making big money. Now, it detracts from the purpose of academia. I love college sports, but it is harming our academic system.

  79. This is how change is made. Cheers to the California Governor and Legislature for addressing this long term abuse of labor.

  80. @DMS26 not sure its abuse if they are getting scholarships. Work for free tuition and housing. The problem is that training and tournaments prevent these students from working any additional "real jobs" and so don't have any spending money or money to live on. So its hard. But its not like any students jobs pay any real money anyway.

  81. @marx True, but most students aren't generating millions of dollars in income for the university, either.

  82. The playoff scheme was the first big step to commercialize the NCAA. California has now taken the next big step. I’m saddened.

  83. The exploitation of athletes by those who have big purses and power in our society has got to stop. This is one step in the right direction.

  84. Bravo Mr. Newsom. The argument is that this is amateur sport, all for the love of the game, right? Surely if that's true, it's unnecessary and unwise to pay a coach $4,000,000 or more per year to manage things, right? And give him a staff of some 40 coaches/assistants/trainers? The model is ridiculous. Sure it used to be about pride and athleticism, but that was ages ago. Now it's about plain old money. The model to the students whose bodies provide the basis for the revenues is crass and outdated.

  85. @Joe you need forty people to watch the miscreants called athletes.

  86. @Joe College coaches should not be paid more than the governor.

  87. @Joe: As someone who competed at the world level (albeit in an obscure sport), and thus had to follow the Olympic rules pertaining to amateur status, I can only say that eliminating any charade of amateur sports at these levels is welcome. It worked well for Olympic sports. And for many student-athletes, the 'student' part is also a charade. Not sure this is the right way to deal with that issue, but college is a joke at many of the top collegiate programs in football and basketball.

  88. Many people forget the difference between the two types of student - athletes. There are students who get into the school on both athletic and academic merit, and have athletics as just one part of their life and education. These are the students who should be around. The other type are a good majority of football and basketball players - only there to bump up their draft stocks. In the words of Cardale Jones, "we ain't come to play SCHOOL!" No more preferential treatment for these people

  89. @Khoi Nguyen I really do not understand how "these" people are getting preferential treatment. I still assume someone admitted these students.

  90. California is simply the best state. I miss not living there anymore but equally happy to help turn a red state sane.

  91. This is great news. Let the people who do the work get paid.

  92. Watch the California schools attract the best talent in the country. Stanford, USC and UCLA should be thanking the governor.

  93. Good. College basketball and football, especially the latter, is equivalent to modern day slavery. When the entire world has more ethical models for training and producing athletes you know there is a problem. That for generations we have given kids brain damage with no financial reparations is sickening. That people still watch college football and even the NFL, which also shares an incredibly backwards financial model, is fascinating to me. People are watching people shortening their lives by decades right in front of them and they aren't even getting the money they deserve! What good is a college degree if it comes with severe brain damage?

  94. Love it. Big time college sports is all about exploitation of the players. It's a cynical calculation by the sinister NCAA and its members.

  95. Yup, might as well completely abandon the charade of "student" athletes. Would love to see the N.C.A.A. call Newsom's bluff.

  96. About time. Time to break up the NCAA, which is essentially a criminal enterprise that profits off the free labor of collegiate athletes.

  97. This is nonsense. Free tuition and getting paid on top of that. Scrap college football and just call the "college" programs what they are: NFL minor leagues or development leagues. Let the NFL finance it. Then use that money to give real students more aid.

  98. It means nothing unless they manage to get the NCAA to change their rules.

  99. We live in a brutally capitalist country. Student-Athletes take on the risk of long-term injury while earning millions for their colleges. Most of these guys will never play professionally. They deserve to be paid for the risks that they are taking.

  100. @Mickey The entire modern day enterprise of the NCAA has been built mainly on the backs of African American student-athletes and run primarily by white organizations. See any resemblance to slavery?

  101. All this law seems to do is allow students to make money from their own image, rather than only allowing fat cat coaches to make money from their player's images. To me, this NCAA rule is the most egregious breach of individual rights. It basically states "we own you."

  102. This is ALL about monetizing their social media and I bet there are digital marketing firms looking to make deals with schools as we speak.

  103. The top conference football and basketball programs are semi-pro feeder leagues for the NFL and NBA. It is dishonest to call them college athletic programs. The connection is artificial. It is all about the money. It is long past time that the athletes got a piece of the pie.

  104. May I be the first to congratulate California for stepping up to the plate and playing hardball with the NCAA.

  105. It is my personal opinion that anything that weakens the business model of college sports is a win for higher education.

  106. Scholarship athletes receive a free education and free room and board. Most non-athletes who attended Division I colleges will be paying off student loans for decades. Spare us the righteous indignation because the students who are receiving a six-figure college education and experience for free aren't getting paychecks on top of it. If athletes must be compensated, allow them to profit from their name and likeness and hold the earnings in trust until graduation.

  107. @David No, allow the athletes the choice of playing professionally instead of being forced to attend college when they don't want to. And maybe, just maybe, divert the scholarship money that is paid to athletes to students who really do want to be there.

  108. @David, most college athletes are not on scholarship, approximately 2%. Even those who are, many of the scholarships are partial and dont even cover a full year of school. I am not in favor of a select few athletes getting huge deals, but there should be some greater revenue sharing from the NCAA to the actual student.

  109. @David These student " amateur"athletes are working a full-time job that essentially requires their regimented participation, training, and travel solely on the terms of the colleges and universities. Perhaps your argument might have merit if the athletes were all talented enough to "go pro" and leave college to do so. That would be an equitable ROI in the that the institutions could posit we gave you an opportunity to showcase your talents, train at an elite level, and you graduated. However, we are talking multi-level merchandise deals, video games, and shoe and apparel deals in the millions. Not to mention the revenue generated by fundraising from generous alumni as result of sports on campus. These lucrative revenue streams surpass what any thinking person in a capitalistic society would deem to cut themselves out of. In what other business model is this even imaginable ? We urge students to go to college so they may get a job that pays them for their performance. Yet, these students athletes are not being paid for their verified performance where very aspects of their performance is statistically scrutinized weekly. I agree that the income at least a portion of it should be held in trust. Why not give the money mangers an opportunity to participate it what will soon become another lucrative avenue by which to live off the labor the students.

  110. The ongoing fraudulent claim of "amateurism" that the N.C.A.A. exploits as the foundation of its business model, has all the moral legitimacy of a street corner 3 card Monte scheme. Infuriatingly, it is a scheme that all college athletes are required to play, despite being aware that their time & labor (and in many cases, their health) is making vast sums of money for individuals who have much less at stake. An aggressive restructuring of the financial rewards associated with college sports is long over-due. Beyond the obvious point that athletes must be compensated at a level commensurate with the entertainment value of their athletism & performance. College coaches in major sport programs should be compensated as tenured professors at their universities, as was generally the case before television money corrupted college football & basketball. The revenue generated should be distributed more broadly, eliminating the abuse of authority, rampant nepotism and celebrity life-styles based on what amounts to slave labor. The revenue generated by college sports should benefit colleges, educators, staff & students more broadly. My apologies for offering a simplistic solution to a deeply complex & corrupt system. These are some of the ideals the California legislation begins to address. There is still a long way to go. But it's an admirable & courageous first step.

  111. @mike4vfr Thank you and well said.

  112. @mike4vfr Exaggerate much? There is no such comparison between slave labor and college athletics. Get a grip.

  113. The states of Ohio, Alabama and Michigan will soon follow. This gives California schools a competitive advantage- above the table money.

  114. The "business plan" of colleges and universities should be education, not running a multi-billion sports franchise. I am perfectly OK with these changes. The unpaid exploitation of college students has gone on for way too long and enriched only a small circle of insiders.

  115. If college athletics is totally different from the pro games, pay college coaches the same amount other faculty members get.

  116. @Murray Suid faculty members are way overpaid. They hardly work.

  117. I wonder what this will do to the student dynamic. Right now the athletes are considered classmates, contemporaries and cohorts, will the same hold true when the players are treated like professionals who share the campus but not the "college experience"'? Either way the change is welcome, long overdue and, unless everyone else wants to forego profit, fair.

  118. @Rick Gage "Right now the athletes are considered classmates, contemporaries and cohorts . . . ." How long ago did you graduate? Certainly, some of the athletes in my classes were just students, but most were not. Those athletes who are at the center of recruiting fraud are not regular students, and a lot of other athletes are expected to maintain such a punishing schedule they literally cannot be regular students. Half the time they can't even decide which classes to take and are provided with all kinds of tutoring and extracurricular assistance, and end up socializing with other athletes.

  119. @Rick Gage College should be about diversity, financial and educational. College is the place where you come together from diverse backgrounds, The great equalizer is the college experience itself. All students should live on campus, eat together in the college cafeterias, work together, share thoughts in the classes they share and in college activities. It is a growing time. Money wise, all students should be required to take financial planning classes. It is a big field for sure and the young should be a captive willing audience. When I started my first job 35 years ago, for the Federal Government. they gave us our first paycheck and took us downstairs to the Jamaica Savings Bank in the building and helped us open accounts. We had regular classes on the new Thrift Savings Plan Program as the Government was transitioning from the Civil Service Retirement System to the TSP. We learned about contributions and matching which the Federal Government does. These lessons were not wasted on most of us. Thanks to this, I saved and invested well. I also was made aware of Series EE Savings bond. A low cost but steady way to save a lot. I got bonds for 20 years and now cash them regularly as they mature at 30 years. Student athletes and college students in general are ripe for the teaching.

  120. "At the same time, it also explicitly declares that it is the Legislature’s intent “to avoid exploitation of student-athletes, colleges, and universities.”" We'll see. Almost 80% of NFL players are broke just two years after retirement. Where's the money go? "Friends", agents, investment scams, you name it. These 18 year-olds are going to be making a lot of money - for somebody else.

  121. @mijosc They're ALREADY doing that. You realize that every year, EA Sports puts out a new game using the images and likenesses of every college football player in the country, and none of them get paid a dime for that. That, by itself, not even considering the other ways they're exploited by the NCAA, is enough to merit this law.

  122. People seem to be focusing solely on big name players. What about the players that are on scholarship, but no one knows who they are? If students are getting big contracts then that's less money going to schools. The logical next step will be to provide fewer benefits to student athletes. Why should the university pay for your room and board and food if you're getting six or seven-figure endorsements? That's all well and good for Manti Te'o, but what about the second string DB whose name no one knows? I agree that it is unfair for money to be made off the students, but it's not as cut and dried as supporters of this bill are making it.

  123. @AnonymousPlease But most athletes do not receive anything like a full scholarship, and why should I, a parent of non-athletes spend a lot of time worrying about "student athletes" at all?

  124. @Barbara Because athletics bring money and publicity to Universities. They do benefit non-athletes.

  125. @AnonymousPlease Sorry, that trope has been disproved time and again. When you add the all in costs of stadiums and facilities and innumerable others, very few athletic programs actually earn money. The only possible argument is that they keep alumni more engaged with the school and more likely to give money. At some point, that can't be good enough.

  126. Isn't it amazing how long and hard a road to get folks to face the truth in these United States? College football and basketball players have long been hired to work for universities, bringing profits to those institutions on the promise of possible professional earnings on the other side. Their labor has been exploited just as interns were once exploited by hospitals in the name of "education." Oh, they got an education, all right, on how the rich and powerful stay that way while the workers are broken by dreams of glory and reward which accrue to only the very few.

  127. @Claudia Well argued and thoughtful. And while we are at it, why not unionize the athletes so there are protections if they are injured and so they are paid a fair wage for the hard work they do on and off the field. Most large corporations are loathe to embrace change but many do and so will the rich and powerful colleges. Most are already very well endowed and should share their largess when they can. This country needs to be more egalitarian and this is how it starts. For example, Levain Bakery in NYC has profit sharing with the employees. Someone once made an argument that the people that take the chance and start a business and invest their time and money deserve the profits. Yes, if you also realize that they have workers too on whose backs the money is made. Yes, you had the idea, the know how and the start so you should have more but there comes a point when enough is enough. Though Levain engages in profit sharing, it has not stopped them from growing and opening new locations in what is a highly competitive lucrative market. The Big Business of Bakeries. It is time for companies and colleges to share the wealth. There is plenty for everyone and this is how we grow.

  128. This is long overdue as college sports have not been amateur events for decades. I cannot look at what I have termed "plantation" sports particularly at the collegiate level when revenues are at the billion dollar level. The athletes receive little and that includes scholarship support if they are injured and if they graduate. How can a coach and his staff become millionaires based on the work of "student athletes". How do universities which should be the keepers of the flame for thought mount a critical argument in support of this excess.

  129. I would rather not have any of the sports that serve as a pipeline to professional sports represented in any way in college, because in this country they have an absurd, oversize importance relative to academics - you know, the reason people go to school. But if that can’t be changed, because of alumni and the way some communities consider their college sports, then we might as well run this openly. But the money that pays for these salaries, the scholarships (would they still be handed out), the expensive sports facilities should all come from a profit-making athletics department, corporate and alumni sponsors, etc, separate from the rest of the school. Otherwise I fear this will serve to siphon yet more money from academics.

  130. One more step is necessary: to abolish requirements that athletes be required to give up valuable practice, sleep, and partying time in order to pose as "student-athletes" [sic] by attending classes and meeting course requirements. Let them enrol in real academic courses (if they want to) without charge, but *after* their athletic eligibility has expired. Only by separating "athletic" and "academic" in this way can universities preserve their primary educational mission, while at the same time furnishing high-quality circuses so as to generate support from alums, the public, and legislatures.

  131. Too bad the law does not also prevent college coaches from green-lighting admission for athletes and force student athletes to choose between the scholarship they receive now, valued at $30,000-$70,000 s year (on top of the value of the coaching they receive, the training, and exposure for the few college athletes with a legitimate shot at a pro career) and what they can earn profiting from their imagine, etc. College athletes - scholarship athletes - are already paid. And whenever they choose to leave school - they do it debt-free. The idea that they should further profit when most kids have to gain admission without the help of a coach and often graduate with debt is incredible.

  132. @Douglas Weil - I would agree with you if the NCAA and Colleges did not make billions of dollars a year on the backs of the student athletes.

  133. @Douglas Weil If an Alabama football player told Nick Saban he needed to skip practice or miss "voluntary" weight training to study his scholarship would vanish in a heartbeat. These schools care nothing about a player's education. If schools put education ahead of sports for these athletes you might have an argument.

  134. @Andrew Reid Every college athlete can opt to apply to college the same way everyone else applies - choose the schools, fill out the application, ask for teacher references and complete the optional essay. Scholarship athletes have sn easier path to admission, they are paid in the form of a scholarship worth tens of thousands of dollars, and graduate without debt. For the few who legitimately can make a go at a professional career, they receive coaching they could never afford in the best facilities and are given i credible exposure worth tens and tens of thousands of dollars. I don’t disagree that there are problems that must be addressed beginning with the balance between athletics and academics. But the answer is not adding to the financial windfall college athletes already receive. It is in reforming a system that has the balance wrong between sport and class.

  135. Slippery slope. Rutgers cancelled several Olympic sports to help fund their football program. Where's the money coming from to pay these athletes? Who's really paying for this boondoggle. Yes, the university makes money off the endorsements, but the players already have scholarships and training facilities that an athlete in an Olympic sport, or a chemistry major lacking proper lab equipment, can only dream about. Beware the unintended consequences.

  136. What if colleges and universities were for education and research? Let the business model be business.

  137. @Lawrence Norbert Too late that ship has sailed. College and Universities have a new purpose which is to have curricula linked directly to getting a good job so you can earn. If you somehow are also well educated that is just a secondary by product.

  138. This will basically benefit a handful of star athletes who will get their faces on ads for campus bars, car dealerships, and other local booster companies. I think a better way to go would be making sports a "work-study" job in which athletes, regardless of star power, make a few bucks for playing ball, much like other students who mop floors or work in the cafeteria.

  139. @SoCal That might fly but generally (out on a limb here) you do not risk a brain concussion mopping floors or working in the cafeteria.

  140. @SoCal Boo boo, capitalism. As opposed to before, where coaches and staff were the only ones making money. They could also endorse a whole team and spread the joy of money. Unlike before, where all the athletes shared were injuries.

  141. College football is a racket and this is a step in the right direction. But I worry about the unintended consequences.

  142. @Brad The unintended consequences will be that most schools will probably drop D1 football, which they should anyway. Only the power 5 conference schools will survive.

  143. College football. It was a nice run. Even more stunning and disappointing than this decision is how short sighted many people are. Well, this will allow me more time to do and follow real stuff.

  144. @Seldom Seen Smith it was a REALLY good run for the folks getting rich off other people's labor.

  145. An athletic scholarship at Stanford pays, per year, $53,000 tuition, $19,000 room and board, books, lab fees, etc., private tutors, $4,000 stipend, to participate in a made up pretend game. Oops, I forgot, everybody is a victim these days.

  146. It's wild listening to 'free market conservatives' defend a cartel's right to artificially cap compensation at a wildly below market, non-cash rate because "amateurism". In almost every athletic league that turns a profit the athletes receive somewhere between 45-50% of total revenue as income. If you applied that % to the top 50 or so college football programs the 85 players would *average* ~ $250,000 a year in salary. Instead they get an education most aren't really expected to complete in any meaningful way (you try getting the most out of a scholarship after a 50 hour work week and cross country travel), room and board while their coaches, administrators and almost everyone else not in uniform gets rich.

  147. @pt. How have you identified free market conservatives? Is there a dog whistle we’re all missing?

  148. This is long overdue (Universities exploit students to make millions off of them while compensating them a fraction of their market value). I say this as a college professor. However, I fear this will only exacerbate the already-too-low graduation rates of athletes. How's this for a wrinkle. Colleges will sometimes charge a "tax" to professors for their outside consulting, since they are using, in part, the prestige of the university to charge the lucrative rate they do. How about a 30% university tax on all endorsement deals student athletes secure as part of a university program (a reasonable reimbursement to the university for using their name in the endorsement). The wrinkle...if the student graduates within 5 years of matriculation, the money is returned to the student, with interest.

  149. Why? Why does it matter if student athletes graduate? Everyone knows they are not there for the degrees. That’s not why the university let them in and that’s not why they enrolled.

  150. @Vanyali If education has nothing whatsoever to do with it, then why does the NFL get to subcontract their training league out to colleges? If you truly believe what you said, then EVERY college team in the country should be closed, and the NFL should just create a minor Leauge like baseball has, so each franchise has its own farm system whereby it trains its payers before bringing them up to the show.

  151. @DispatchesVA I think the tax is a great idea. It would result in different amounts of pay for students at different schools, however, and potentially between sports (do "non-revenue" sports' athletes still get a cut? do UVA tennis players get the same percentage as UVA football?), and gender (UVA men's basketball generates more revenue vs women's). Or, everyone gets the same amount?

  152. We are seeing the creation of a second rate professional league that will produce a product no one is interested in. National recruiting has already decimated the traditional concept of conference play (the best in my state competes against your best; Florida vs Georgia/ Ohio vs Michigan). Will college free-agency be the next step toward professionalizing the college game? We are already moving in that direction with the transfer portal. If I want to watch the best in the world do something I watch the pros, not some second tier knock off, which is the best a college team can hope to be. It is important that colleges remain within the amateur ranks. Once colleges become a lesser quality professional product, I am not sure many people will maintain interest. Further, what happens to all of the sports that are financial losers and don't produce big media stars? Does the government step in to "level the playing field" and demand everyone gets a share of the pie? Here we have the government as the big fixer of all social issues. College fans will live to regret this move away from the historical foundation of collegiate sports. If I want to watch professionals at work, I will watch the best in the world.

  153. @Robert I am confused by your comments. Where now, do the bulk of the players for both the NFL and NBA(best in the world) originate from and the fact still remains that regardless of what these players might ultimately receive in return for their services only a small fraction of them will ever make it to the pros anyway and ultimately receive the "big paycheck" that will totally overwhelm anything they might have received at the college level.

  154. @Robert Historical is correct. Big schools have always had an advantage recruiting the top talent and no one to date seems to mind. The sports that are financial losers... how about they recoup some of the million dollar salaries paid to the " amateur" college coaches and spread those shoe endorsement, and televised game dollars across the board internally or it that off the table?

  155. When one considers the amount of revenue being generated by a conference like the SEC, it becomes difficult to argue that some of this money shouldn’t be shared with the student athletes. Granted, not all conferences are created equal. Additionally, what many people fail to remember (or conveniently forget) is that the money generated by the big money producing sports (i.e. Mens Basketball and Football) is used to fund lesser attended sports programs on both the Mens and Womens side, not to mention faculty salaries, and otherwise raising the profile of the University for prospective students. That being said, I think the Power Five conferences have an opportunity to get out in front here and be on the right side of history. Granted, these numbers are being pulled out of thin air, but how about holding $25K in trust for each player for each year he is on the team. This would mean that if a player stays in school for four years, he would receive $100K upon graduation (not a penny before then, and that number would be reduced if you leave school early.) Not an overly significant sum, but also something that could set a kid up for the rest of his life if he is smart about it. I don’t think that college athletes should be making millions of dollars, but as a lifelong College Football fan, it’s becoming more and more difficult to ignore the elephant in the room.

  156. Athletes play college sports for two reasons: 1) love of the game and 2) to get a scholarship to off set the costs of getting an education. If they want to get paid, then they should bypass college and go directly to a professional level league. In the alternative, if universities decide to pay athletes, then get rid of sports scholarships altogether, pay the athletes from TV revenues, and give the institutional scholarship money to students who need it to study and get a degree.

  157. Clearly, not only is the NCAA making BILLIONS from these players but they have, from time to time, proven themselves to be corrupt. People forget, that despite whatever the college athletes receive in return for their services, only a small fraction of them ever make it to the pros. One can also not ignore the fact that for years now only a handful of schools attract the top players and why is that happening and who do we think we are kidding here? One can recall the documentary of student football athletes attending a major university in Florida in which athletes took meaningless course while driving to and from school(mostly practice) in BMWs.

  158. The NCAA can make this problem vanish by paying all student athletes a reasonable stipend. Elite athletes aren't there for the education anyhow. "Starting at defensive tackle, majoring in general studies.."

  159. The NCAA should end the collusion that caps athlete compensation at a scholarship.

  160. @Midwest Josh--the athletes are already getting paid. They get free tuition, free room, free unlimited dining and a stipend. Add it up. $100k per year at a private university, $70k at a state U.

  161. Turning college sports another into professional league is about the worst thing that could happen to college sports. Let the kids who want to play in a minor league somewhere, but don't attach it to college sports. And if we have to, kick the California teams out of the NCAA.

  162. @Mmm Worst thing for a fan and those making $$. Not the worst thing for these student athletes. There are no true minor league options for athletes other than Baseball. Very few athletes make it professional. For the majority of basketball and football players, they have monetized fro the benefit others. Assistant football coaches make $750k a year and often much more. AD's, head coaches and various other Administrators make millions and are often the ghiest paid employees of their states. It is not morally or ethically right. Player gets injured, it is all over -- no contact, nothing but an education worth $150k at a state school, if not less.

  163. @Harrison College sports are not professional minor leagues. Nor should they be. Sports sanctioned by the NCAA include the following: basketball, baseball (men), beach volleyball (women), softball (women), football (men), cross country, field hockey (women), bowling (women), golf, fencing (coeducational), lacrosse, soccer, gymnastics, rowing (women only), volleyball, ice hockey, water polo, rifle (coeducational), tennis, skiing (coeducational), track and field, swimming and diving, and wrestling (men).

  164. @Mmm Agreed. Where do sports fit into the mission of colleges in 2019? It has gotten out of control and your list proves it. These are educational institutions. It is just as dumb in Div II and III schools but for other reason. The number of student-athletes on those campuses is crazy, all these kids play in obscurity and are subsidized by the School. Schools feel like they have no choice as the sports are marketing tools and the schools they compete with for students have all these sports. Round and round we go. Every time I see a Div II "signing" of a player for lacrosse, water polo, skiing, fencing....crazy. This should be the realm of club sports, just like countless other clubs on campus (e.g., hiking, spelunking, video games and a bunch of other sports that didn't make the list.)

  165. California's law will benefit only a few elite athletes and does nothing for the vast majority of college athletes. Most schools with intercollegiate sports don't generate enough revenue from sporting events to pay for the programs and the programs are subsidized with general fund income. The accusations of greed and exploitation apply to whom, maybe .01% of college athletes. 99.99% of student-athletes are very happy to be able to play the sport they love and complete school with no or less debt.

  166. @Michigander Scholarship money spent on college athletes is a total waste of funds. 99.99% of student athletes are less academically qualified than the rest of students on campus. If they want to play games they can go do that on their own time. They should only be at college if their primary focus is academics.

  167. @Jeremy "Academically qualified," an interesting choice of words. To play sports in college, you have to be disciplined. Conditioning is a requirement throughout the academic year, often very early morning while your classmates are snoozing. It's like a part time job, often requiring 20 hours a week, every week while in school. The graduation rate for athletes is 86% compared to only 64% for all students. Ask yourself. Who would you rather hire, a graduate, or a student-athlete graduate who in addition to the academic work, worked the equivalent of a 20 hour a week job while taking classes and plays well with others?

  168. Now that we've correctly labeled them as professional athletes instead of students, can we spin off college athletics altogether so universities can get back to, you know, academics? The only college athletics should be intramural and club sports.

  169. @Will Colleges have become/have always been the free development league for the NFL. Maybe it's time for the NFL to start funding development leagues much as the NHL does with the AHL and ECHL leagues.

  170. Smaller colleges in small population states will lose recruits to the big city colleges. Students will be looking for the biggest media markets for the most endorsement money. And California has the biggest media market. The governor signed a bill that could attract the best players to come to California. Doesn’t seem right.

  171. I would rather universities give this zero thought. Other countries look at our combination of university and sports like we are crazy.

  172. @Jim isnt that true for NFL/NBA?

  173. Hard to agree with this initiative.So-called student-athletes in glamor sports, football, basketball would be set apart from other students who don't play sports or do less glamorous sports, track, etc. The "big men on campus" would now be wealthier, than their peers who are merely students. And what about the females? They don't compete in football. The notion of student-athletes has long been flawed. Few of these athletes go to college to be students. They go to be athletes. The amount of tutoring they receive is not available to those who go to be students. There must be a more sensible solution.

  174. @blgreenie Tennis and golf already are allowed endorsement deals, albeit limited to cover costs. But it hasn't broken anything. This is a step in the right direction.

  175. @blgreenie Wow. We currently have no students on any of these elite campuses who are already wealthier than their peers? I was unaware of this (must be) recent development. It only matters if they are potentially wealthy student athletes?

  176. I do not think we would have any arguments if you substituted the word "welfare" for revenue in the sentence "in annual athletic revenue" N.C.A.A. basketball tournaments, made-for-TV moments that help some universities log more than $100 million each in annual athletic revenue.

  177. So what if there are 2 hotshot players on a team, that are getting $50mil each for selling shoes made in Indonesia? What about the rest of the team? Suppose none of them get an endorsement? Is that right? How about a stipulation that all money to a player has to be matched to the University's diversity scholarship funding? Would that be a good idea?

  178. @BorisRoberts Now you are worried about the rest of the team? What team? And where do you think the current shoes are made? Your concern, two people becoming multi-millionaires at $50 million each. So, you do understand there is money available for enrichment but just not too much enrichment. If the rest of the team is successful they will benefit from revenue from television/cable/on-line and e-games. Please know that the schools are still firmly in the drivers seat and they will fight to make sure that the billion dollars in revenue from trade marked merchandise etc. stays in their coffers. It is unfortunate that the free market is only important when we can declare who gets to benefit from it. If no one else on the fictional team gets an endorsement well that is how the market works in the real world. Oh, and first there would have to be a diversity fund. If all monies generated by an individual athlete would have to be matched that would have to be across the board to every other entrepreneurial student. After all that would only be fair.

  179. I don't know if this is the right step, could have easily been resolved by creating regulations that obligates the institutions to pay the student athletes, it seems fair especially if the coaches are paid. The endorsement regulation doesn't address what will likely be a majority of the student athletes will never see an endorsement.

  180. I think a lot of commenters are missing a major point here. The universities will not be paying the athletes. This law simply permits the athletes to sign advertising deals and market themselves. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this, given how much money those same universities make off the back of these athletes.

  181. @confounded This is a zero-sum proposition: the "advertising dollars" you reference are in fact being paid today to the NCAA, selected conferences (primarily the Power Five), and individual schools (Notre Dame, notably) in the form of broadcast rights. Those monies are then distributed to member schools, who use the funds primarily to fund non-revenue sports required under Title IX. If the "advertising dollars" you reference flow instead to elite athletes in major sports, the monies currently funding Title IX beneficiaries will simply dry-up. Do you really want Jalen Hurts benefiting at the expense of Oklahoma's Volleyball team?

  182. @John If you fired the entire athletic department at most Division 1 schools and instead gave 500 athletes a full ride and didn't make them play a sport, most everyone, including the university, the other students and the athletes would be much better off financially.

  183. @Hugh G--how can you have a 500 athlete sports program and no athletic department?

  184. "Student" athletes are already being paid. Free tuition, room, unlimited dining and a stipend. At a private U that's about $100k/yr, $70k @ state U. The system is broken. The fix? Make college sport a "minor" league. No scholarships, no education. They aren't there for that anyway. Let the school recruit, sign and pay players based on a market value. Let the athletes sign marketing deals. In effect, they are now "professional" athletes. The universities sponsor these "minor" league teams and make their money off it. NFL teams can choose to sign players any time from these teams. Just like minor league baseball. Because that's what college sports really are, a minor league stepping stone to the big league. Everyone gets what they want, everyone gets paid and the sham of the "student athlete" fades into the sunset.

  185. @bored critic Or, free enterprise. Schools can do whatever business they want and so can student-athletes. Let schools compete for the best athletes. Let athletes sell their image. Less is more.

  186. @bored critic Lets solve by making college sports a "minor"

  187. 1) Kids on academic scholarships are allowed to earn money off their intellectual and technical abilities, while retaining their scholarship eligibility. But NCAA athletes can't. Let athletes earn money off their abilities, just like any other kid. 2) With a fair amount of frequency, "non-revenue" sports are dropped by schools, in favor of balancing the Title IX men-to-women ratio. So, once that happens (men's crew, for example), the teams are considered "club" teams, which are unregulated by the NCAA, making those athletes eligible to play and make money off their likenesses/athletic prowess. Pretty ironic that "non-revenue" club athletes can get paid, but "revenue" athletes can't. 3) I realize that club athletes are not on athletic scholarship (thus, the argument being we should let them earn money). However, not all NCAA-sport athletes are on scholarship either, or the amount is not close to a full ride, so how is it ok for them to not be allowed to make money? It's easy to focus on high revenue men's basketball / football, in the major Div I leagues, but what DII? DIII, where sports scholarships aren't even permitted?

  188. This is a brilliant move by Governor Newsom - beset by homelessness that is out of control, a "train to nowhere" that is hopelessly underfunded, and environmental challenges too numerous to catalog - he chooses to solve the problem of under-representation among elite athletes. Great job, Governor! Keep up the good work!

  189. @John Injustice is injustice. Considering that this could funnel money into the neediest neighborhoods and towns, it isn't completely unrelated to homelessness... Inequality has more than one cause and this is one of them.

  190. @John maybe worry about Georgia's problems. California can walk and chew gum at the same time. (2018 GA rankings from U.S. News: Crime and Corrections: 35, Economy: 14, Education: 31, Fiscal stability: 13, Health care: 42, Infrastructure: 17, Opportunity: 33, Quality of life: 32)

  191. @John Looks like it doesn't effect you in any way as you live in Georgia.

  192. There really is no good solution here that I can think of when it comes to the bed fellows of college sports and money. It is undeniable that college sports (football, basketball) give many people great joy, community and a sense of pride to follow a state's football team or an alma mater. However, it is also undeniable that a very select few (mostly white men) make an incredible amount of money off the backs of young men (and some women) risking injury and bodily harm. And then all teams and all athletes are not created equal - football and basketball are totally outsized where as other collegiate sports still maintain what most remember college sports to be - friendly competition, student athletes prouding representing school and also actually studying and getting degrees with no hope or intention of playing professionally. I think it is right to push the NCAA and all those involved to find a new model.

  193. The fact that institutions were able to contractually prohibit student-athletes from engaging in free-enterprise of a $1B/year industry is absurd to begin with.

  194. @Remarque It's the nature of monopoly. It's not so much that the NCAA had the authority to do this, as they had the power. If their control over your industry is such that you can't play/work without their say-so, then they can put whatever restriction on you that they want with impunity.

  195. Public colleges and universities aren’t being supported by state governments anymore: the taxpayer funding for operating costs are down from about half to low double digits. Increasing income from sports and tuition are the way colleges survive. A fairer deal for the student athlete means less money for the university that will have to be made up in other ways. For example, entire teams wear the Nike swoosh and the university is paid for that. Individual player deals mean no endorsement money for the teams. Now what?

  196. @Yeah Higher % of revenue for the individual player(s). Nike wants a winning team or memorable teams wearing their shoes as well as the best players. They are allegedly already paying key players under the table now it would all be above board.

  197. @Yeah Most of the mid tier Division 1 athletics need subsidies from the general fund of the University. In the Mid America Conference the best performing athletic department only generates about 40% of their budget from athletic income. Athletics drive up the price of most schools. Very few athletic programs run at a profit- except Division III which doesn't give scholarships and most of the athletes pay tuition..

  198. @ Hugh G by taking the athletic department as a whole you miss the mark. The department as a whole includes intramural sports and general rec facilities. Without the football and basketball programs raking in big bucks, those programs...the truly social and amateur activity...will have to go or other funding will have to be found.

  199. The amateur rules of the NCAA don't relate to real life any more. These rules were established when college teams were dominated by wealthy, privileged, nearly all white kids, who were hardly ever the best athletes out there. College was too expensive for most Americans. College teams were more like club teams, where the amateur rules were meant to keep teams from slipping in too many 'ringers' into their teams. Now that colleges compete for the best athletes because the best athletes bring the most money and prestige to the schools, the amateur rules are absurd and unfair. Look at the recent Kansas investigation brought by the NCAA. Kansas is probably going to pretend that its coaches didn't know the shoe company was paying its athletes, alleging plausible deniability, but (wink, wink) we all know what's really going on. And, of course, it's not just Kansas. It's time the rules for college athletics reflect reality. It's time that colleges start paying for the talent they display on the field, on the court, on the track, in the pool and elsewhere. It's only common sense and it's only fair.

  200. There does seem to be something inherently biased and unfair to milk these star athletes and reap tens of millions for colleges and coaches when the athlete's only remuneration is a free or discounted cost of education (scholarship = discount) at a football factory.

  201. I'm not sure, because I don't go back that far in time. But I don't think the original team's profitability years ago was ever expected to morph into today's reality. It's certainly a new day, and expecting to review old paradigms is not unreasonable. (;

  202. @Our Road to Hatred The University of Chicago was a charter member of the Big Ten and had the first Heisman Trophy winner. They dropped out of the Big Ten in the 30's because they saw that money was taking over. 50,000+ seat college football stadiums have been around for a long time. There is nothing new here except coaches are now making more and more money.

  203. Finally someone did the right thing. The courts have done more and more to acknowledge the outright unfairness of the current system but stopping short of doing anything about it. Kudos to California!

  204. A couple of points in response to fellow commenters; while I have not conducted or even read any recent studies I do know there are more than a few student athletes here at the U of O who have earned high marks and degrees. On top of a full commitment to their sport. Often daily training, and even twice a day. I also know that the coaches and their staff are generously compensated. U of O football coach Mike Bellotti's compensation plan both while active as the Ducks football coach and his life long Public Employees pension have made him a millionaire. — Check it out online, the money is mind boggling. — He receives an outrageous monthly check while Oregons public employees educators and the state education financial picture are bleak because of huge debt. So while the top PERS recipients bask in huge payouts the rest of the recipients contracts have seen sharply escalating cutbacks to their pension plan. And this in a state who's teacher pay is dramatically less than our neighbors Washington and California, Another glaring wrong is the injured players who are cut with no compensation, no degree, and no future as an athlete. This is double wrong, the schools should insure these hard working students against injury and provide a full ride for four years or more.

  205. Just as it did with low emission vehicles, California sets the standards. As the biggest auto marketplace in the country, car makers had no choice but to make all their cars to the California standard. This same theory is true in this case, once California establishes the rule, every other state and college will have to do likewise, because obviously if players have the opportunity to make money by going to California schools then you can bet every star player in every sport will head west for the gold in them hills. Bravo California. While others talk, you accomplish.

  206. Does anyone else find it highly ironic that the NCAA is considering challenging the California law on constitutional grounds because it violates the Interstate Commerce Clause? So collegiate sports is "commerce"? Glad to hear the NCAA is contemplating finally abandoning the hoary fictions of "amateur collegiate sports" and "student athletes" once and for all!

  207. @Julio Wow that didn't even occur to me reading the article, but you're absolutely right.

  208. Well, if it can finally get Cal to the Rose Bowl, I'm for it.

  209. @Tony Long Doesn't cal go to the Rose bowl when they play UCLA at home?

  210. @Tony Long. Cal will never go to the Rose Bowl as a Rose Bowl participant. Why? Well, Cal is a good, actually great, school. They just don't break the rules enough to entice great players. Stanford does. Stanford is a private rich school that knows how draw the better athletes who are reasonable students. Cal just isn't capable of doing that. This little law isn't going to help them any because you have to have some notoriety to be able to draw endorsements and you have to have ultra wealthy alums to make the whole thing work. How many Cal graduates founded a company like Google?

  211. Seems fair, but it works both ways...If the athlete is using the university's name, logo, or trademarks in any way to give himself recognition, the university should be compensated.

  212. It's time to end the charade and returning all college athletics back to the true Student/Athlete. Let the pro leagues develop farm systems to develop players who have no interest, aptitude, or desire for college. Big time college athletic programs have no shame.

  213. @Michael Hansen The top 64 colleges could become the farm teams with paid athletes who happen to work at these schools (and attend classes if they desire). The lower echelon schools should simply give up the athletic scholarship model and have volunteer teams that compete for old-fashioned glory.

  214. @Roy Lowenstein That sounds pretty great.

  215. @Roy Lowenstein It would also help to require all students to attain a minimal proficiency in some type of athletics. Anything that gets them in shape.

  216. Beginning in the early 1990s, public education at every level, from pre-school to university, has been defunded. The consequence for our public universities is that they are experiencing a steady process of privatization. At the same time, our public universities--and some privates, as well--are in thrall to the entertainment industry. In that context, the California law is nothing but a side show.

  217. I applaud this strictly because it will help tear down college athletics. Why should a university make tens of millions off a player's name and all that player gets is a scholarship worth, at best, a few hundred thousand dollars that won't translate into a meaningful career afterwards? "Student-athletes" get a 'free ride' not only by way of tuition, but also in taking watered-down classes, preferential grading and relaxed requirements. In the end, the paper they have their diploma on is mostly worthless. Meanwhile, in sports like football, their bodies are put through so much abuse that long-term damage is frequently done. Football, et al, should try and thrive the way baseball thrives, by having a minor league system which protects the players' health, not by subcontracting it out to universities who turn a student's best chance at an education into an injury plagued frat party. When football has to pay the full bill for the harm it causes to it's players, it'll fold quicker than a terrible hand at a poker table.

  218. @John, Basketball at universities is HUGE business. Have you never heard of March Madness? An annual contest where the top 64 teams in the nation compete for millions of dollars, ALL of which ges to the universities. That is wrong. It is exploitation bordering on slavery. The universities hold all the aces in those unequal relationships. What classes kids take, whether they attend classes or practices, how much the kids get for a food allowance. There must be an equitable way to share the vast profits generated by NCAA sports. Coaches are paid millions when professors are paid hundreds of thousands, and players make nothing? California got it right.

  219. @Tom McLachlin Not a single college student is forced to accept an athletic scholarship.

  220. @John Really? All that money off of a player's name? You can name - let's be generous - a dozen players on the top 4 teams this year? Fans come for the schools and the coach and the tailgate party.

  221. "The Rich (schools) get richer," brought to you by the state of California

  222. No more sports in college please. College is for academics. Professional athletes should go pro and stop this farce. Will clean up admissions as well. Messi did not pretend to go to college so BD could play soccer...

  223. Throwing a ball around has absolutely no value to society. Its fun to watch but there is no meaningful value. It’s a shame so much money is made off sports.

  224. @Hothouse Flower Define "value" please. You don't think enjoyment experienced by citizens is valuable to a society?

  225. @Samuel No. it’s just amusement with no inherent value. Throwing a ball around does little to improve anyone’s life other than for the people throwing it or for those owners of teams that throw them or those making mega bucks from licensing rights.

  226. Start new leagues and get sports out of colleges. The National Pre-Pro football league, where brains are obsolete.

  227. Why are we spending public money on this farce?

  228. About time. The NCAA already does this for 'white sports' like tennis and golf. The states should take this in their hands, they're the ones being impoverished in many cases. Colleges win but needy communities lose.

  229. Here's my solution--get sports entirely out of institutes of higher learning. They don't belong there. It's an intellectual sham. If Washington State pulls this stunt, as an alum of their largest university, I will cease to support them financially.

  230. “Every single student in the university can market their name, image and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that,” Newsom said in an interview with The New York Times. “The only group that can’t are athletes. Why is that?” Because the other students are not receiving a free education and free room and board which, in the case of many private universities, comes close to $100,000 per year. At a state university that number can approximate up to $70,000 per year. That's why.

  231. @bored critic A lot of schools have full ride merit academic scholarships, and those students only have to go to class- plus they can work or do whatever they want. Their job is to get a good education and hopefully give a pile of money back to the university some day Outside of football and basketball, most athletes don't get full rides. Baseball and Lacrosse have ~10 full rides to spread around to teams of 25-50 athletes.

  232. Actress Lori Loughlin's daughter, Olivia Jade Giannulli, did not want to go to college, but got into USC through a scam perpetrated by her parents. While at USC, Jade conducted business and used her image and endorsement deals on Instagram and youtube to profit from and to set herself up post college for a career as a Influencer, product endorser and model. If Olivia Jade can profit during her time in college, sell her college experience through social media, make money off endorsement deals, and not even want to be in college, then tell me why an athlete can't do the same while helping to bring in billions of dollars to the university and local economy?

  233. One more college sports fan rooting for California.

  234. Memo from: Nike Subject: Paying college athletes JUST DO IT!

  235. Big college sports in this country is not about education really at all and only about making money. What's wrong with the athletes actually sharing in this cash bonanza that comes from this exploitative business model?

  236. Good! It is about time. Every player should be paid for revenue generation for a college or university. Division I has long been known as a scam. Look at the graduation rates of Div I football players and show me how it isn't a pro league without having to pay. These scholarship men and women should be given extended health care for injuries and two years of school beyond their eligibility to graduate with an effective education. Now NCAA athletics is a slaughterhouse.

  237. A lot of people here mocking the "student" part of student-athlete. Bluntly, they don't know what they're talking about. I'm a recent college graduate, and while in my undergrad, I knew quite a few student athletes. I even tutored some. Yes, there are those who embody the worst stereotypes. Most don't. For many, that athletic scholarship was the one and only ticket to a college education. For many, they were the first member of their family to step onto a college campus. For every "dumb jock," I met at least one who came alive in an environment that prized education and intelligence, and saw a lot of athletes who barely made it through high school lock in and complete their bachelor's degree early. I knew one football player whose family came from Africa with almost nothing. He played on the offensive line, one of the most mentally demanding positions (if you're laughing at that, you're just showing your ignorance of the game). It's also one of the most anonymous - they're not star players and you never hear their names unless they make a mistake. No one is going to come offer him an endorsement deal - his payment for playing is the opportunity to attend a top 50 university for free. He graduated in three years with a double major in physics and chemistry and a double minor in German and Chinese. Without the current model of student athletics, it wouldn't have been possible. California's plan is a bad idea with little forethought for what it will mean for the future.

  238. @Aiya Here is an idea- lets take all of the money spent on coaches, stadiums, trainers, travel, and use it instead to give some athletes a free education and not require them to play a sport. The university would save money, the athletes would be better served and the general student population would see a tuition savings.

  239. All this controversy calls to mind the old, old wisecrack about alumni complaining that their college team was "playing like a bunch of amateurs.