[81alum]

I find the idea repulsive and the logic behind it specious. Athletes already get gigantic financial advantages over non athletes at most schools. Figuring out how to pay them further will make that situation much worse. If they are going to be paid, they should be in a minor league, not in an institution of higher education. Of course, that is probably also true even without the change as far as the revenue sports are concerned. As I've said here before, I endorse the baseball model, since it gives players the choice of turning pro or going to college--but not doing both at the same time.

The comparisons with musicians and actors etc. who make money professionally while attending college, are not appropriate--unless we are giving them full ride scholarships to come to university to practice their crafts at Stanford.

At many institutions, this will turn into another source of corruption and become a way to funnel money from boosters to players via retail purchases. It will create inequality between the players. And it nukes whatever remnants are left of the amateur ideal.

If Stanford players start cashing in on big endorsements while they are students, I will rapidly lose interest in their sports. I hope that doesn't happen. Perhaps Newsom will veto this. If he doesn't, perhaps the NCAA will stick to its guns and ostracize California. That will be terrible in many ways, but preferable to destroying amateur athletics. More likely it gets signed and the NCAA finds some mealy compromise that chips a little further at the remnants of amateurism.

[81alum]

I find the idea repulsive and the logic behind it specious. Athletes already get gigantic financial advantages over non athletes at most schools. Figuring out how to pay them further will make that situation much worse. If they are going to be paid, they should be in a minor league, not in an institution of higher education. Of course, that is probably also true even without the change as far as the revenue sports are concerned. As I've said here before, I endorse the baseball model, since it gives players the choice of turning pro or going to college--but not doing both at the same time.

The comparisons with musicians and actors etc. who make money professionally while attending college, are not appropriate--unless we are giving them full ride scholarships to come to university to practice their crafts at Stanford.

At many institutions, this will turn into another source of corruption and become a way to funnel money from boosters to players via retail purchases. It will create inequality between the players. And it nukes whatever remnants are left of the amateur ideal.

If Stanford players start cashing in on big endorsements while they are students, I will rapidly lose interest in their sports. I hope that doesn't happen. Perhaps Newsom will veto this. If he doesn't, perhaps the NCAA will stick to its guns and ostracize California. That will be terrible in many ways, but preferable to destroying amateur athletics. More likely it gets signed and the NCAA finds some mealy compromise that chips a little further at the remnants of amateurism.