08-13-2020, 06:34 PM
By "breathtaking" I mean the speed of change we see.
Did you read the article I linked? Cory Booker was an athlete at Stanford. I'm pretty sure he understands what would and wouldn't be acceptable at Stanford in terms of athlete rights. The highlights:
1. NIL compensation will be allowed
2. Athletes will be able to enter into marketing rights agreements with conferences that allow for things like EA College Football deals to be struck
3. Athletes would benefit from an advisory council looking out for their interests; a step shy of a union
4. The portion of LOI that binds players to schools will be gone, allowing immediate transfers
These all seem imminently reasonable concepts to me. None of them include direct compensation to athletes above and beyond scholarship, room, board, etc. The only provision schools will rail hard against is unimpeded transfer rights. Coaches are afraid of freedom of movement, but the reality is, that creates an incentive for them to make their athletes happy, and what is wrong with that?
If athletes want to get paid to play, they can play in the G League or others should they develop. I do think athletes will accept the proposed changes without direct compensation from the schools, with maybe some medical insurance guarantees thrown in. It's better for all involved if the federal government passes a law that sets the standards for everyone, so there is no need for athletes to negotiate with conferences or schools for more rights.
Did you read the article I linked? Cory Booker was an athlete at Stanford. I'm pretty sure he understands what would and wouldn't be acceptable at Stanford in terms of athlete rights. The highlights:
1. NIL compensation will be allowed
2. Athletes will be able to enter into marketing rights agreements with conferences that allow for things like EA College Football deals to be struck
3. Athletes would benefit from an advisory council looking out for their interests; a step shy of a union
4. The portion of LOI that binds players to schools will be gone, allowing immediate transfers
These all seem imminently reasonable concepts to me. None of them include direct compensation to athletes above and beyond scholarship, room, board, etc. The only provision schools will rail hard against is unimpeded transfer rights. Coaches are afraid of freedom of movement, but the reality is, that creates an incentive for them to make their athletes happy, and what is wrong with that?
If athletes want to get paid to play, they can play in the G League or others should they develop. I do think athletes will accept the proposed changes without direct compensation from the schools, with maybe some medical insurance guarantees thrown in. It's better for all involved if the federal government passes a law that sets the standards for everyone, so there is no need for athletes to negotiate with conferences or schools for more rights.