What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

mnstate0fhockey said:
The schools control costs for equipment, travel, etc???

Compare the cost for hockey sticks in the 50's and 60's to the cost for sticks today. The inflation on those alone has been staggering.
Click to expand...
Where did I say that? Please highlight it when you find it.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

fangers said:
My issue with this specific lawsuit - I do think there are other more prevalent/pressing issues like multi year scholarships - is that it would only positively impact maybe 5% of all student-athletes, tops. It stands to do more potential damage to the other 95% if scholarships done away with - there are many, manay more youung athletes who may never have had gotten college eduation without them.

This is simply a greed based initiative by a very, very, very small minority.
Click to expand...

It's a very delicate situation. We live in a society that professes to admire success brought about through effort and many rail against the "creeping socialism" being brought about by an "expanding regulatory" government bent on the "redistribution" of wealth yet here we have a case where the top 10-20 percent of both athletes and programs are being asked to "subsidize" the remaining 80 % while a core group of administrators enrich themselves on the labor of others.

I think I support the current structure of the NCAA but you know, it almost seems un-American.
 
jnacc said:
It's a very delicate situation. We live in a society that professes to admire success brought about through effort and many rail against the "creeping socialism" being brought about by an "expanding regulatory" government bent on the "redistribution" of wealth yet here we have a case where the top 10-20 percent of both athletes and programs are being asked to "subsidize" the remaining 80 % while a core group of administrators enrich themselves on the labor of others.

I think I support the current structure of the NCAA but you know, it almost seems un-American.
Click to expand...

Well a lot of this is how to balance it against the needs and stakes of a college or university. What if Professor Patman fails highly paid student X?

That being said, the school doesn't have a right to profit off of imagery as such... Now game broadcasts they can go screw off.

The real question is how much are we willing to pervert the educational system... Free market being what it is, **** off the professorship and they will go elsewhere.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Patman said:
Wow... Nobody is entitled to free education to start with. Second of all what do you care about the number of tennis schollies.

You do realize division 2 gives scholarships, right? Is that from the TV money? Is field hockey that lucrative?
Click to expand...
You just basically agreed with everything in my post.
 
Tipsy McStagger said:
Where did I say that? Please highlight it when you find it.
Click to expand...

The athletic costs, including travel, are part of the total cost for providing scholarships for players to play at a University. Those costs have skyrocketed. It's hard to compare the costs of previous eras to the modern era for that reason.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

mnstate0fhockey said:
The athletic costs, including travel, are part of the total cost for providing scholarships for players to play at a University. Those costs have skyrocketed. It's hard to compare the costs of previous eras to the modern era for that reason.
Click to expand...
And the revenue has skyrocketed as well. If we are just talking about hockey, that is probably why there are only 59 D-I teams. For most schools hockey isn't profitable.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

If the players who play sports that rake in large amounts of money at Universities deserve to get some of that money, should players who play non-revenue sports at those same universities be forced to shoulder some of the cost burden? Forgotten in this whole discussion is that these revenue sports often fund the non-revenue sports that universities offer.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Also not mentioned, these schools offered these players the marketing (via awards promotion, etc) and exposure to pro leagues that benefited in the growth of their careers. The NCAA should just modify the contracts they have players sign upon playing sports to have verbiage that they will forgo rights to any revenues generated by their performance or likeness while at the university. If players don't want to sign that contract, they can play and get exposure elsewhere and pay for their own education. That would be their decision to make.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

mnstate0fhockey said:
If the players who play sports that rake in large amounts of money at Universities deserve to get some of that money, should players who play non-revenue sports at those same universities be forced to shoulder some of the cost burden? Forgotten in this whole discussion is that these revenue sports often fund the non-revenue sports that universities offer.
Click to expand...
Is it forgotten in this whole discussion? Go back and read the thread again, slappy.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Tipsy McStagger said:
In this particular case, proving it will be quite easy. All the plaintiffs have to do is show that the NCAA sold the rights to their image after they were no longer at the school. In O'Bannon's instance, he can show the judge that there was a 6"8" 225 lb man with black skin that played at UCLA in 1995, wore #31 and was left handed on a video game that the NCAA licensed.
Click to expand...
So what are his damages? He isn't the only one on the game. There are probably hundreds. How much is his share of the license fee? That's the problem. That's what the NFL guys are finding out. They go through the product and have to determine how many seconds they're in there, and then what is that actually worth compared with the total value of the product.

Those that don't have a clue just say, "well you made millions, so give us the millions." It doesn't work that way.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

SJHovey said:
So what are his damages? He isn't the only one on the game. There are probably hundreds. How much is his share of the license fee? That's the problem. That's what the NFL guys are finding out. They go through the product and have to determine how many seconds they're in there, and then what is that actually worth compared with the total value of the product.

Those that don't have a clue just say, "well you made millions, so give us the millions." It doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but O'Bannon says he doesn't care about the money.

“It’s not about the money,” he said. “You can’t just throw some dollars in my face and watch me go away. I want systemic change. That’s what we’re here for.”

“Fair would be getting more than zero,” Flournoy said he responded. “I can’t speak for everybody, but I don’t need to get anything for my likeness. I would like them to get my approval before they use it. After all, it is me. Texas Western. Forty-four. That’s me.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/s...-obannon-has-other-critical-participants.html
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

What's O'Bannon's position on NCAA athletes ponying up money to cover operational losses for programs/sports that operate at a loss?

Or is it his belief that student athletes should share in the profits (on top of getting a free education), but not be required to help cover any losses these schools incur?
 
Last edited:
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

The real end game here if O'Bannon wins (and he won't) is that those non-revenue sports that many kids get to play cost free that enrich their college experience will be dropped or moved to club level where they will become pay-to- play and everyone's tuition will likely go up.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

mnstate0fhockey said:
The athletic costs, including travel, are part of the total cost for providing scholarships...
Click to expand...
Really? I was on the fencing team at a school that doesn't even offer athletic scholarships, yet I never had to cough up any gas money for the trips.
 
Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

mnstate0fhockey said:
The real end game here if O'Bannon wins (and he won't) is that those non-revenue sports that many kids get to play cost free that enrich their college experience will be dropped or moved to club level where they will become pay-to- play and everyone's tuition will likely go up.
Click to expand...
I already addressed that point.
Tipsy McStagger said:
I glossed over it because it is irrelevant. If basketball and football and in some schools hockey bring in all the money, why should the people involved in fencing and soccer and swimming be entitled to a free education?

Again, how were schools able to provide scholarships before all of the money started rolling in? You are pretending that the players getting some portion of the revenue would make it impossible for kids to get athletic scholarships for non-revenue sports. Then how did they give out scholarships back in the 50s, 60s and 70s before they started selling rights to televise games?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top