On June 1, 2020, a few months after the COVID-19 outbreak, college football players became one of the first groups to return to work.
The shows were concerned about the loss of revenue from television rights and ticket sales, which was destroying their bottom line. At the same time, protests against racial justice swept the country after the assassination of George Floyd.
This unique moment in history sparked a perfect storm that, in retrospect, energized the athletes who became active and active ingredients, deciding what would happen with university sports.
This week, CBS Sports is recognizing the first anniversary of naming, image and image rights to athletes as the starting point for a three-part series that takes a closer look at the condition of college football and the game’s future.
Part I: & lt; strong & gt; The leadership void needs to be filled to tackle the uncertain, unregulated future of sport & lt; / strong & gt;
“I think the last two years have been very important,” said Ramogi Huma, executive director of the National College Players Association. “I think it clearly explains how critical college footballers are to this industry, that this is big business.”
Huma founded the NCPA in the 1990s after seeing injustices show up while playing at UCLA. One of his teammates was suspended for the entire game after receiving money for purchases from an agent. Another had problems paying his health bills after being injured during a voluntary summer internship. (NCAA regulations at the time prevented schools from contributing to such medical bills.)
Progress towards increasing the rights of athletes has started much faster since then, since the US Supreme Court ruled in the landmark NCAA case against Alston in June that restrictions on name, publicity and publicity legislation violate antitrust law. In the year since the NIL came into force, university athletes not only capitalized their money, but also realized a value that had long been hidden from them.
“It happened so fast, and there was so much pressure on it,” said Stanford broadband Elijah Higgins. “The players started to understand their rights. The players began to understand how much money is actually on the table. Gamers began to understand how wrong it is that they cannot use their own name, image and likeness for their own benefit. ”
Cracking the door
The advent of NIL has opened the gates to players looking to resolve several issues, including the still young transfer portal and an even younger one-off transfer waiver which created more flexibility and movement for players. This may interest you : CSA opens preschool for creative arts.
However, NIL – along with the mysterious collectives led by boosters that have suddenly taken a lot of space around the sport – only brings further questions about the long-term relationship between players and their schools.
“We could evolve into a system where they give their athletes more voice and opportunity,” said leading antitrust attorney Jeffrey Kessler. “A law is expected in Congress that would allow athletes to link up with state schools. Otherwise, the problem is that the highest-income schools are mostly state-owned. At the moment, they cannot be denied. It is a real barrier. “
Kessler’s comments came nine months after Jennifer Abruzzo, general counsel for the National Council on Labor Relations, wrote in a memo that income-generating athletes in private schools should be considered employees, which would allow them to associate. The memo is a non-binding decision that only affects 18 private institutions at FBS, but signals a friendlier response from the NLRB should the team try to unionize, as Northwestern players tried in 2015.
“It definitely opens the door for college athletes to enter into collective bargaining,” said player attorney Tim Nevius. “This helps to draw up an action plan for the athletes to be recognized as employees and possibly form a union.”
The NCAA rejected the NLRB findings, arguing that athletes are amateur students who participate in a glorious extracurricular learning experience. In the next five years, however, this question will almost certainly be put to the test. If the answers to these questions are the same as the results of nearly all NCAA lawsuits over the past decade, players have a real chance of winning.
“[Employment] does not change the nature of players in universities,” said Huma. “It finally confirms nature.”
Athletes can benefit enormously from becoming employees as this status comes with numerous legal safeguards. This would clear the way for players to form unions and collective bargaining. This can lead to revenue sharing, along with overtime pay and health and safety regulations.
Top officials across sport are reluctant to accept the concept of athletes defined as employees. Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff called the idea an “existential threat to college athletics” in comments for CBS Sports.
“If you create a job structure, the other kids on the teams will lose their degrees. They will lose their freedom where they want to play, ”said Kliavokoff. “By definition, we will have a draft system: they can be traded or fired.”
While the Kliavkoff position has its advantages, running away with fellows is already common practice for large programs. According to The Athletic, at his own conference, USC coach Lincoln Riley in particular used a little-known rule to cut 10 fellows from his 85-man counter.
Conversely, players hired as employees can create benefits in terms of player mobility and compensation. Schools may offer guaranteed contracts with buyout or option offers. They may also require athletes to remain in college for a limited period of time. These are all common features of professional sports contracts.
Of course, there will be unintended consequences as huge public educational institutions have to start asking complicated questions about pay.
“There are definitely things that have called for flexibility for a while,” said Bob Bowlsby, outgoing Commissioner Big 12, “but we shouldn’t think about creating another layer of professional sports because I don’t think it’s anything higher than education. I think there would be a lot of college education that would reject this idea. “
How do players get there?
Whether it comes from trade unions, employment status, or national college athlete laws – such as the College Athlete Rights Charter proposed by Sens. To see also : The 10 longest running video game franchises, ranked. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) in December 2020 – changes are coming fast.
“There has never been a more important point,” said Huma. “It’s a time when lawmakers listen, media listen, federal agencies listen, lawyers are active. Ten years ago it wasn’t quite like that. Ten years ago, many people would side with the NCAA.
“Now the NCAA is quite secluded.”
NIL and player compensation remain a distant secondary concern for Huma, standing behind the continued protection of health and safety. He sees the coming years as a critical time for athletes as competition grows. Ultimately, having a common voice or action of Congress to lean on would make it much easier for players to have their say.
University programs may try to stay ahead of player requirements by being proactive. Increased player engagement is almost certain.
UCLA Sports Director Martin Jarmond predicts players will organize themselves to obtain group licenses within 2-3 years.
“I think it’s on the table,” said Jarmond of the prospects for sharing revenue with players. “I think it’s possible.”
Jarmond looked at the possibility of involving athletes in marketing campaigns. For example, he suggested promoting the possibility of autographs with a star like Jaime Jaquez Jr. in a game that would not otherwise be well attended.
“I think it has to be more of a partnership,” said Jarmond.
This timeline could be sped up if EA Sports relaunches its “NCAA Football” video game franchise in 2023, as previously reported. Players will almost certainly contribute to the proceeds of this game for using their names, images, and likenesses.
NCAA Football was discontinued in 2014 because NCAA rules did not allow revenue sharing. Making common-sense reforms and opening the door to group licensing – and possibly even collective bargaining – can reassure athletes.
“The fairer and more equitable the treatment of athletes, the less pressure to pursue more,” said Gabe Feldman, professor of sports law at Tulane. “The need for a union diminishes as athletes get [more rights].”
What’s next?
One complication for college football players – compared to other professional athletes – is the transitory nature of their workforce. On the same subject : Bill Schubart: Will artificial intelligence improve life or just make business more profitable?. Players can only qualify up to five years, and many quit after just three years.
It’s remarkable that players have more than 1-2 years of maximum value as leaders on and off the pitch, while the Phoenix Suns NBA star quarterback Chris Paul spent eight years as president of the National Basketball Players Association.
The NCPA and other like-minded organizations have set long-term goals in the hope of promoting the long-term rights of players. People from the NIL area also have a problem with the characteristic that players are only motivated by short-term financial gains.
“People are getting a bad impression,” said Miami-based mega-booster John Ruiz, who has signed contracts with over 100 athletes on the NIL in South Florida. “These kids and their families are looking not only for payday loans. They are looking for education, stability, knowledge, networking. They are looking for a place where they can play for 2-3 years and have the best. a chance for the future. “
As college football consolidates and television revenues skyrocket, the arguments that football programs, which generate $ 100 million a year are amateur activities, become increasingly flimsy.
The NCAA works overtime trying to weigh the ramifications of this new world while continuing to rebuild its constitution through the NCAA Division I Transformation Committee.
If the NCAA does not respond quickly enough, the enterprise can be changed externally.
“The people who benefit from [the system] will find no reason to change,” said Higgins, the All-Pac pass catcher. “Obviously, it will have to be pressured by the people concerned, people who care about the problem or people who understand the problem – and want to fix it.”
