[Source] - The NCAA's lobbyists have continued to press the case for those guardrails, and now they have more help. A document circulated by the Power Five lobbyists, obtained by AP, lists the conferences' "core principles" for athlete compensation, and most of those principles include limitations.
They include: a requirement for "one term of academic progress" before athletes can sign endorsement deals; a ban on athlete deals with "advertising categories inconsistent with higher education"; and limits on who can advise athletes on third-party contracts to prevent "unscrupulous actors."
Remember when the news broke a month or so ago about the NCAA moving forward letting athletes make money on name, image and likeness. They kept using the term guardrails and I (along with everyone else) said this is one of those one step forward but not really moments? Well, it's even worse than that.
Look at the 'guardrails' being put in place. You have to have one term of academic progress. Why? What does that do? Why can't someone as the top rated recruit sign an endorsement deal the first day on campus? Also what are we going to determine as a term of academic progress? A ton of guys will come in during the summer class and take classes then. Will that count? Again, just a useless guideline. Actually, I can guarantee what they'll say. Mark Emmert will blabber on about how this will prevent illegal recruiting (it won't). He'll say that they are student-athletes. Those who think college athletes being capped is a good thing will applaud. It will continue to make no sense.
The second one - a ban on deals with advertising categories inconsistent with higher education. What the hell does that mean? Assuming they will talk about gambling (happens all the time), alcohol, etc. But what about if Barstool wants to do an ad deal, are we inconsistent with higher education? How can you have gambling be legal for college games but rule it inconsistent with higher education. Again this is just an unnecessary guardrail. Why are we even doing this to begin with? I've said it before but these guys and. gals should be able to make money whoever wants to pay them. Why does it matter who pays them? Are we really pretending like college athletics is above alcohol (sold at games), gambling (happens on games) or porn (okay, maybe that one).
The last part of having a list of who these athletes can work with in terms of advising them makes the most sense, but even then, why is the NCAA getting involved with that? It's the same bullshit they did with agents. They forced agents to fall within these guidelines that were deemed acceptable by the NCAA and only the NCAA. It was met with backlash and they adjusted a bit, but it's still whatever the NCAA can do to be hands on. They refuse to give up control of anything.
Here's the truth. The more guidelines they put in, the more 'illegal' or 'cheating' is going to happen. Why? Because shit won't change. Why would it? It's been this way for years upon years. You think someone is going to all of a sudden listen to not take the $50,000 from someone not within NCAA compliance? Hasn't stopped people up to this exact date.
Also laugh out loud funny conferences spent $350,000 to lobby against this. It's almost like there's a ton of money in major college athletics. I've said it so many times - schools don't even have to give more. What they give in scholarships is plenty fine. But trying to cap what the free market dictates players are worth is just stupid as shit. Why do we care? It's not our money. We literally don't care what anyone else makes, so let's stop pretending like we give a shit if a bar wants to pay a player.