Chris Speilman sues Ohio State & IMG

[saevel25]

8 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

Imo imo the real question is where does the money come from?

Not really. The money comes from anyone who decides to go to the NFL games, watch the NFL games, or buy NFL gear.

I have no issue with what NFL players make. They are the ones putting their bodies on the line to entertain millions of people. If they don't get paid, then the money would just trickle down to the owners. Either way the money has to go somewhere in the NFL.

43 minutes ago, jamo said:

I support college athletes being allowed to collectively bargain for payment from schools. If the school's (and athletic department's) finances dictate that what the athletes are asking for will put the program in the red, then I support the school cutting the program. But if the athletes are making millions upon millions for the school in profit (which aren't being funneled into academics anyway) then I support the athletes being able to bargain for that money.

I think that they should be able to get a cut of anything that is related to or associated with their image. They should also be allowed to market themselves. Like if a local business wants them to do a commercial, they should be allowed to do so and get paid for it. They should be allowed to sell signed merchandise.

 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, jamo said:

I support college athletes being allowed to collectively bargain for payment from schools. If the school's (and athletic department's) finances dictate that what the athletes are asking for will put the program in the red, then I support the school cutting the program.

So goodbye to every sport but men's football and basketball?

I mean, there's a point at which this gets silly on the other dude, too.

And not many colleges are profitable even in football or basketball. Thirty? Fifty?

8 hours ago, Jack Watson said:

Exactly.  That's what I mean.  I like Steph Curry fine.  Seems a good guy and all but is throwing a ball into a round metal ring really worth that kinda cash?

The market says yes.

[jamo]

18 minutes ago, iacas said:

So goodbye to every sport but men's football and basketball?

I mean, there's a point at which this gets silly on the other dude, too.

And not many colleges are profitable even in football or basketball. Thirty? Fifty?

They'd exist as they do now. If you're a player on the University of Wherever baseball team, and your program clearly isn't a moneymaker for your team, then you're probably not going to hold out for a paycheck because you know the program isn't rolling in money. It would be stupid to strike at that point because you know you're not going to win. The school has no reason to pay you because they're already either losing money or near even. There's an equilibrium point which the vast majority of schools and athletics programs already live in, as you mentioned.

But if you're a football player at Florida, and you can see that your coach is making $6 million a year and the SEC just cut a big deal with a TV network, all of a sudden the players have the financial power. If they strike and hold out for money, the school will realize that they'll lose money if they don't give in to the players' demands (at least enough to get them to end the strike).

I think that's the only way opening up schools to pay players would work from a practical and PR standpoint.

[iacas]

Is the lawsuit more about after they leave college though? Not being paid in college?

[mcanadiens]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Is the lawsuit more about after they leave college though? Not being paid in college?

That's the way I read it. The argument about paying current college athletes is rather tangential.

 ...

When you look at the rest of the world, the phenomenon of college sports in the U.S. is a pretty weird thing. Most other places schools may have intramural-type competitions, but the aspiring professional athletes play for clubs. For example, FC Barcelona has the famous La Masia which produced many top players both for its own side and others. Most of the big soccer clubs have them and its often the same in the other sports as well.

The confluence of state-funded universities and the large budgets for varsity sports does create a bunch of issues. Certainly an arrangement that the NFL, NBA and to a lesser degree the NHL like very much. I'll say that it really does a disservice to those athletes that are inherently ill-equipped for academics. I would have loved for Maurice Clarett to have had a chance at professional football.

[saevel25]

25 minutes ago, iacas said:

Is the lawsuit more about after they leave college though? Not being paid in college?

This particular lawsuit is about the schools making money off the players likeness after they leave school.

Quote

“My concern is about the exploitation of all former players across this nation who do not have the platform to stand up for themselves while universities and corporations benefit financially by selling their name and likenesses without their individual consent. "

I think it falls inline with the argument that has been going on for years now. On college players receiving value for their services to the school and athletic department.

 

 

[NCGolfer]

3 hours ago, saevel25 said:

This particular lawsuit is about the schools making money off the players likeness after they leave school.

I think it falls inline with the argument that has been going on for years now. On college players receiving value for their services to the school and athletic department.

Sounds like Spielman is suing the university for a sound reason (using his likeness without his consent or compensation) while using a populist argument.  I'm glad he says "former players"...and doesn't lump in the current "college athletes should be paid". 

[Jack Watson]

Wouldn't you say an athlete on full ride is being given very nice compensation?

Given that the school is making it possible for these guys to do what they do I hardly think the word exploit is correct in this case.  

To me,  if you think you are THAT special go pro.  Why risk career ending injury with no compensation (so to speak)?

But I am leaning towards images and likenesses of players during their collegiate career being more or less college property.  

I kinda don't see the point of the lawsuit.  Where are all the homeless ex college stars unable to get income from their images/likenesses that colleges are cashing in on?

To me the issue of pay is a non issue.  Amateurs shall receive no pay.  

Fine Ohio State,  if you are a money making machine filling a 109,000 seat stadium with football fans join the NFL-then compensate players with salary.  What does this have to do with education?

 The point of a college is not the same as an NFL franchise though.  I vehemently disagree with the strange comment that OHIO St football players should strike.  There's plenty more players at that level to fill their shoes and Ohio States stadium with fans dude.   That's pretty much a k in my book.   The University has the power at this level and that's just the way it is.

I just get rubbed the wrong way by this suit.  

 

Edited August 5, 2017 by Jack Watson

[Jack Watson]

If I'm a stud freshman wide receiver without ever having proved myself at that level you think I am gonna join a STRIKE?  I want some of what you're smoking J.

[Buckeyebowman]

First of all, we're not talking about multi-million dollar contracts for college football players. Pay them minimum wage for the hours they practice and play. This puts a little jingle in their pocket so they can go out an have some pizza, or a burger, or some wings with their buds and just socialize. 

I don't know about you, but college was as much a social as academic experience for me.

It's interesting to note that the first college football players who really raised this as a serious issue were from Northwestern! I heard the interview on a very late night sports talk radio program on a Saturday or Sunday, which guaranteed it wasn't going to budge the needle very much! Of the 11 points the players wished to discuss with the administration, none of them involved being paid to play!

I was about working conditions, time management, insurance, etc.

For instance, they had a teammate who suffered a bad injury while in a game. You'd think his medical and rehab expenses would be covered. Well, maybe not! His parents were presented with a bill for $10,000 for what the university's insurance didn't cover!

Also, I remember when Robert Smith, running back for Ohio State, who was pre-med, asked with all the practice time, when he was supposed to study?! Football fans responded like he'd stuck a knife in OSU football's back!

[iacas]

43 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

Wouldn't you say an athlete on full ride is being given very nice compensation?

I think that's off topic since the lawsuit is about what the colleges can do with the likenesses of players after they leave the college.

43 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

I kinda don't see the point of the lawsuit.  Where are all the homeless ex college stars unable to get income from their images/likenesses that colleges are cashing in on?

To me the issue of pay is a non issue.  Amateurs shall receive no pay.

They may not be amateurs after they leave the school.

[Jack Watson]

57 minutes ago, iacas said:

1 hour ago, Jack Watson said:

They may not be amateurs after they leave the school.

True.

My current thinking is let's say a player turns pro in golf before a big event.  He/she finishes top ten in the PGA/LPGA event.  They get the prize money.

What they can't do is turn pro before the final round and get payed for a top ten as if they declared status before the event began.

They can't turn pro and then get retroactive prize money from events they already played in.

 

 

 

[iacas]

45 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

They can't turn pro and then get retroactive prize money from events they already played in.

That's not what's happening here.

[Pretzel]

On 8/2/2017 at 1:17 PM, saevel25 said:

Student A: Full ride scholarship for academics. They get a part time job or full time job. They are able to study, and get some side money.
Student B: Full ride football athletic scholarship. They are required to spend upwards of 40 hours a week practicing and preparing for their games. They get no money for it.

Why should Student A be able to work a side job and make money when Student B is working a side job for the school and not getting paid?

In this case I agree Student B should be paid, but the argument they're making is that Student A is working a side job on top of his job for the school. His job for the school is to maintain good grades and the reputation of the school by being a stellar student. If their grades drop, they lose the money, same as how if the performance of the player drops he loses the money.

Like I said, I think it's unfair to the athletes that they aren't paid, but that's the argument the schools would make in this scenario

[Jack Watson]

So there were banners put up at the stadium with photos of Spielman and others and below that Honda.

So the University put up one of its historical photos of a player.  Whoopety doo.  Their property.

 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

So the University put up one of its historical photos of a player.  Whoopety doo.  Their property.

Maybe.

That's what the lawsuit will help to determine.

I don't think that the likeness of former players should forever be used commercially.

[saevel25]

13 minutes ago, Jack Watson said:

So there were banners put up at the stadium with photos of Spielman and others and below that Honda.

So the University put up one of its historical photos of a player.  Whoopety doo.  Their property.

Honda has no right to use their likeness to gain monetary value with out their permission. 

The school has no right to use their likeness for monetary value with out compensation or permission. 

Likeness is equivalent to branding, There are countless examples of were one company sues another for brand infringement. I can't go out an have the logo of my company be close to looking like Apple's logo. I can't put Apple's logo up in promotion of my product with out their permission. Just because I may own the property doesn't mean I get to use someone else property freely. A person's image or brand is their property. 

[Jack Watson]

Honda sponsored the banners.  The banners are decorations.  There is nothing on the banner implying those players drive or ride Hondas or endorse the Honda brand.  Honda is not being sued.  

At any rate let's say Spielman succeeds,  all that happens is the University puts in a line or two in a student athlete agreement saying that the University has the rights to image likeness use.  Nothing changes.   No sign no scholarship.  

To me it's kinda like some CEO going back to their high school and asking for money because their image was used in a yearbook that the school made money on without sharing the profit.  It's greed driven.