Kansas Crimson

As Missouri joins the ranks of states considering legislation to allow student-athletes to profit from their images and names, it’s clear that an overhaul of college sports is imperative.

[...]

[The] bill and others like it in several states are modeled on groundbreaking legislation signed earlier this year in California. “It’s about equity, it’s about fairness, and it’s about time,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said as he signed a measure allowing students to be paid for their images and names.

[...]

“I would like to see us work with the NCAA and work with student-athletes to try to come up with a federal solution,” said [Connecticut Senator Chris] Murphy, a Democrat.

It’s a good idea. An assortment of compensation rules in different states would not only create a corruptible bidding war for students, it also could lead to the absurdity of an athlete earning money for playing a game in Kansas but not for competing in Missouri.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:12 amThe editorial goes on to call for direct compensation. As a matter of principle, I support this, but I think it is not close to workable from a practical perspective. Accordingly, I don't support shooting for that target now, out of fear it would gum up reform efforts that would at least get a lot of the way toward where we should be.

pdub wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:12 am MIZZOU can fuck themselves forever but it doesn't make sense that UNC gets away with 20 years of that kinda stuff and MIZZOU gets a harsh penalty for a much smaller scale of an academic offense.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:33 pm The only way you could flip me to a Trumper:

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:33 pm The only way you could flip me to a Trumper:

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:00 pm You’re not wrong.

Grandma wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:46 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:00 pm You’re not wrong.

I disagree.
First off, a bill has to be written and submitted. Then voted on by the House and Senate. Then Donald becomes involved.
If it does get passed and signed before November, I really don't think a considerable amount of people from "poor minority communities" will vote for Trump based solely on this.
Hey, I may be wrong - but I'm probably right.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 10:09 am That’s a good point. If Trump did do anything, it’l would be some menial symbolic gesture with little substance. Then, fire up the rhetoric about how he’s the hero of the student ath-o-lete.

and now we’re really on the wrong bored, but perhaps it’s worth noting the dude won all of 8 percent of the African American vote last time around.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 9:10 am

Grandma wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:46 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:00 pm You’re not wrong.

I disagree.
First off, a bill has to be written and submitted. Then voted on by the House and Senate. Then Donald becomes involved.
If it does get passed and signed before November, I really don't think a considerable amount of people from "poor minority communities" will vote for Trump based solely on this.
Hey, I may be wrong - but I'm probably right.

If we’ve learned anything about Trump, it’s that he doesn’t care about the actual thing, just the perception of a thing.

And what’s a “considerable amount” anyway? It didn’t take much to swing a couple key states last time around.

“A lot of the rhetoric and images that we hear about college sports are as antiquated as leather helmets,” Senator Blumenthal, a Democrat, said. “And that makes me angry because I think the present state of college sports is exploitive.”

After months of threats and challenges from the country’s statehouses, the N.C.A.A. faced skeptical senators on Tuesday. But for all the frustration the lawmakers projected — over rules forbidding players from earning money from their fame, over how long it might take to change them — Congress did not seem poised to act immediately in a debate that is central to the economy of college sports.

[...]

The N.C.A.A., which has a membership of about 1,100 colleges and universities, fears what it calls “a patchwork” of rules among the states, contending that any variations from one state to another would undercut and imperil the integrity of competition for about 500,000 student-athletes.

“It is clear to me that the imperative of national consistency, fairness and equity requires a federal solution,” said Douglas A. Girod, the chancellor of the University of Kansas, who added that because Division I universities play nationwide, “only a federal approach that creates a level playing field for competing athletes and universities makes sense.”

[...]

It is not clear what kind of solution Congress could ultimately fashion. But the reception on Capitol Hill was a signal by itself of the bipartisan scrutiny that college sports leaders will probably be dealing with for a while.

“This whole system has to be reformed,” Senator Blumenthal said. “The N.C.A.A. has a role to play, but only if it gets into the game, which, right now, it is failing to do.”

Later, Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, recited a list of other areas where she believed the N.C.A.A. had failed, and said: “A question that must be going through a lot of minds of student-athletes and their parents is how in the world are they going to be able to trust you to get this right?”