Jump to content


NCAA not off the hook yet


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 GG

GG

    Exit 151

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,610 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 08:23 AM

Appeals court says EA didn't have rights to use a college player's image in creating an NCAA football game.  If Hart eventually wins this thing (I see it going to SCOTUS), this will have huge ramifications on the way NCAA conducts business in major sports.

Appeals court reverses Ryan Hart ruling, remanding back to trial.

#2 MOFO

MOFO

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:13 AM

Not sure where I fall on this...think I would just be happy to be in a video game...somthing to show the grandkids...

#3 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,580 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:23 AM

View PostGG, on 22 May 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Appeals court says EA didn't have rights to use a college player's image in creating an NCAA football game.  If Hart eventually wins this thing (I see it going to SCOTUS), this will have huge ramifications on the way NCAA conducts business in major sports.

Appeals court reverses Ryan Hart ruling, remanding back to trial.

This is on EA, not the NCAA.

Also...:

"the company created a virtual Rutgers quarterback that replicated Hart’s actual skills"

Anybody have any idea what this guys actual recognizable skills were?

#4 Cash

Cash

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:30 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

This is on EA, not the NCAA.

Also...:

"the company created a virtual Rutgers quarterback that replicated Hart’s actual skills"

Anybody have any idea what this guys actual recognizable skills were?

But a victory for Hart means that EA can't buy the "rights" to player images from the NCAA.  The Ed O'Bannon lawsuit is a little more on the nose and likely to be wider in scope, but this one is interesting as well.

Kill the NCAA and you kill most of the problems in college sports.

#5 26CornerBlitz

26CornerBlitz

    Read The FN Manuel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,738 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:30 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

This is on EA, not the NCAA.

Also...:

"the company created a virtual Rutgers quarterback that replicated Hart’s actual skills"

Anybody have any idea what this guys actual recognizable skills were?

Isn't it both since the NCAA licenses the rights for EA to use the players' images in the video games?

The latest in the Ed O’Bannon case, and why the NCAA’s headed for change

#6 GG

GG

    Exit 151

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,610 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:34 AM

What they said.

#7 atlbillsfan1975

atlbillsfan1975

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,588 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:44 AM

NCAA is so screwed up. You can see what college football is already trying to do. merge into 'super confrences' which eventually will kick the NCAA out. These confrences will be able to make TV deals and financial decisions and the day to day business operations just fine with out the NCAA.

#8 Cash

Cash

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:55 AM

View Postatlbillsfan1975, on 22 May 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

NCAA is so screwed up. You can see what college football is already trying to do. merge into 'super confrences' which eventually will kick the NCAA out. These confrences will be able to make TV deals and financial decisions and the day to day business operations just fine with out the NCAA.

The only thing I like about the superconference movement is the idea that they'll soon form their own basketball tournament, which will rival/replace the NCAA tournament.  The NCAA's revenue pretty much all comes from the TV rights to that tournament (which is most of the TV money for college basketball -- this is why schools only care about football), and they'd be hard-pressed to find an alternate revenue stream.

#9 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,580 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 11:47 AM

View PostCash, on 22 May 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

But a victory for Hart means that EA can't buy the "rights" to player images from the NCAA.  The Ed O'Bannon lawsuit is a little more on the nose and likely to be wider in scope, but this one is interesting as well.

Kill the NCAA and you kill most of the problems in college sports.

It won't prohibit them but it would possibly make it so they would have to allow for a system of player compensation (immediate for past players, perhaps an escrow account for active players).  Or they could just limit the games to former players and simply pay them a small royalty.

Expect EA to petition SCOTUS.

View Post26CornerBlitz, on 22 May 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

Isn't it both since the NCAA licenses the rights for EA to use the players' images in the video games?

The latest in the Ed O’Bannon case, and why the NCAA’s headed for change

Ryan isn't suing the NCAA.

View PostCash, on 22 May 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

The only thing I like about the superconference movement is the idea that they'll soon form their own basketball tournament, which will rival/replace the NCAA tournament.  The NCAA's revenue pretty much all comes from the TV rights to that tournament (which is most of the TV money for college basketball -- this is why schools only care about football), and they'd be hard-pressed to find an alternate revenue stream.

I don't see any conference commissioners leaving the NCAA to start their own "league" with its own (or multiple) "national champions" when there is so much money from the networks weighted to the current system.  My guess is that the NCAA would counter with dropping all of any school's sports (football!) if those schools opted out for basketball.

#10 GG

GG

    Exit 151

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,610 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 11:50 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

It won't prohibit them but it would possibly make it so they would have to allow for a system of player compensation (immediate for past players, perhaps an escrow account for active players).  Or they could just limit the games to former players and simply pay them a small royalty.

Expect EA to petition SCOTUS.

Which is basically what the OP said, but you decided to argue at first.

#11 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,580 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 11:59 AM

View PostGG, on 22 May 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

Which is basically what the OP said, but you decided to argue at first.

I was agreeing with you on the SCOTUS part.  This case doesn't name the NCAA.  Also,  I was disagreeing with the other 2 posters. In doing so, I guessed at the ways the NCAA may deal with this, hence the ramifications if you will.  This is distinct form the O'Bannon case.

#12 GG

GG

    Exit 151

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,610 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 01:02 PM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

I was agreeing with you on the SCOTUS part.  This case doesn't name the NCAA.  Also,  I was disagreeing with the other 2 posters. In doing so, I guessed at the ways the NCAA may deal with this, hence the ramifications if you will.  This is distinct form the O'Bannon case.

I never said the case was against the NCAA.  But you can't be serious if you don't think that it won't impact how NCAA conducts its business with "free" labor if EA loses the suit.

#13 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,580 posts

Posted 22 May 2013 - 01:56 PM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

It won't prohibit them but it would possibly make it so they would have to allow for a system of player compensation (immediate for past players, perhaps an escrow account for active players).  Or they could just limit the games to former players and simply pay them a small royalty.

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

I was agreeing with you on the SCOTUS part.  This case doesn't name the NCAA.  Also,  I was disagreeing with the other 2 posters. In doing so, I guessed at the ways the NCAA may deal with this, hence the ramifications if you will.  This is distinct form the O'Bannon case.

View PostGG, on 22 May 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

I never said the case was against the NCAA.  But you can't be serious if you don't think that it won't impact how NCAA conducts its business with "free" labor if EA loses the suit.

Seriously, I've addressed this twice already.

#14 26CornerBlitz

26CornerBlitz

    Read The FN Manuel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,738 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 02:43 PM

Hmmm:
@RollTide
NCAA announces it will not renew licensing contract with EA Sports http://sds.to/12Ls08m

- @SECfootball @SDS

http://sports.yahoo....-193207072.html

Edited by 26CornerBlitz, 17 July 2013 - 02:47 PM.


#15 Kellyto83TD

Kellyto83TD

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,357 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:31 PM

Screw the NCAA.

#16 Cash

Cash

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:17 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 22 May 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

I don't see any conference commissioners leaving the NCAA to start their own "league" with its own (or multiple) "national champions" when there is so much money from the networks weighted to the current system.  My guess is that the NCAA would counter with dropping all of any school's sports (football!) if those schools opted out for basketball.

Don't need to start their own league; they already have those.  Just need to start their own basketball tournament.  The NIT has been a post-season tournament for ages, and used to be roughly on par with the NCAA tournament.  Hypothetically speaking, if the Pac-16, Big 16 "Ten", 16-member SEC, and maybe a 16-member ACC? decided to stage a b-ball tournament to compete with the NCAA, it would be a huge draw, and could very conceivably beat the NCAA Tournament in the ratings.  

You are correct that the current football system gives tremendous profits to the schools/conferences, and they have no incentive to blow it up.  Just minor tweaks like expanding conferences to add major media markets for their terrible cable networks.  However, the current basketball system is comparatively very low-revenue, because the NCAA pockets the TV rights for its tournament, and that alone is most of the TV money for the entire basketball season.  We know that the major conferences are extremely profit-focused these days.  I wouldn't be surprised to see them make a move to take that tournament money for themselves.  Possibly a compromise, wherein the NCAA heavily shares the tournament proceeds with the major conferences in return for a commitment to not start a rival tournament.

As to your guess:  The NCAA only has power or authority when things happen 1 school at a time.  The only reason playing NCAA-sanctioned athletics means anything at all is because nearly every school has signed on to the NCAA.  But if all the major conferences walked together, who cares if the NCAA dropped all of their football programs?  They'd just continue playing each other in non-NCAA games.  The BCS was formed by the (then) six major conferences working together -- not by the NCAA.  They've shown that they're willing and able to handle their own business when it comes to monetizing college football's postseason.  

Now, how likely is my scenario?  Right now, extremely unlikely.  But if, in a couple years, we move to 4 superconferences with very few mid-majors left, I think it's pretty feasible.  Especially if the NCAA loses a lawsuit in the interim.  I really think that if the major conferences detect weakness in the NCAA, they will strike.

#17 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,580 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 11:07 AM

View PostCash, on 18 July 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

Don't need to start their own league; they already have those.  Just need to start their own basketball tournament.  The NIT has been a post-season tournament for ages, and used to be roughly on par with the NCAA tournament.  Hypothetically speaking, if the Pac-16, Big 16 "Ten", 16-member SEC, and maybe a 16-member ACC? decided to stage a b-ball tournament to compete with the NCAA, it would be a huge draw, and could very conceivably beat the NCAA Tournament in the ratings.  

You are correct that the current football system gives tremendous profits to the schools/conferences, and they have no incentive to blow it up.  Just minor tweaks like expanding conferences to add major media markets for their terrible cable networks. However, the current basketball system is comparatively very low-revenue, because the NCAA pockets the TV rights for its tournament, and that alone is most of the TV money for the entire basketball season.  We know that the major conferences are extremely profit-focused these days.  I wouldn't be surprised to see them make a move to take that tournament money for themselves.  Possibly a compromise, wherein the NCAA heavily shares the tournament proceeds with the major conferences in return for a commitment to not start a rival tournament.

As to your guess:  The NCAA only has power or authority when things happen 1 school at a time.  The only reason playing NCAA-sanctioned athletics means anything at all is because nearly every school has signed on to the NCAA.  But if all the major conferences walked together, who cares if the NCAA dropped all of their football programs?  They'd just continue playing each other in non-NCAA games.  The BCS was formed by the (then) six major conferences working together -- not by the NCAA.  They've shown that they're willing and able to handle their own business when it comes to monetizing college football's postseason.  

Now, how likely is my scenario?  Right now, extremely unlikely.  But if, in a couple years, we move to 4 superconferences with very few mid-majors left, I think it's pretty feasible.  Especially if the NCAA loses a lawsuit in the interim.  I really think that if the major conferences detect weakness in the NCAA, they will strike.

Mr. Rip Van Winkle with the bump!

The bolded part is incorrect.  96% of the tourney money goes back to NCAA conferences/schools ($740 million a year).  They are in the midst of a 14 year, $10.8 billion contract with CBS alone.  For CBS, they generate over $1 billion in ad revenue--just for the tournament.

That tourney money fuels a lot of college football programs--they are dependent on it.

So that one tournament drives both football and basketball programs at major schools.   The value of the tournament is that it covers all conferences.  CBS (or nay other network) would have little interest in paying for multiple smaller tournaments or one cobbled together by a few major conferences.  And why would any conference therefore forego the current system for one which will bring them less money?  A team or conference leaving the NCAA would be unimaginable.  It would affect all of their sports and obviously limit their recruiting to those who couldn't get recruited to NCAA schools.

In order for your scenarion to happen,  all major conferences would have to have to agree to coming together as a single entity and have a similarly massive TV contract in their pocket to that which they have now.

Without all of that, it makes no sense to leave the NCAA (anf the CBS contract runs to 2024).

#18 jeremy2020

jeremy2020

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 11:21 AM

Players should be paid and allowed to take endorsement deals (imagine how the pros would scream!). The NCAA needs changes, but I'm not sure it being outright eliminated would be the best option.

#19 Cash

Cash

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 12:02 PM

View PostMr. WEO, on 18 July 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

Mr. Rip Van Winkle with the bump!

The bolded part is incorrect.  96% of the tourney money goes back to NCAA conferences/schools ($740 million a year).  They are in the midst of a 14 year, $10.8 billion contract with CBS alone.  For CBS, they generate over $1 billion in ad revenue--just for the tournament.

That tourney money fuels a lot of college football programs--they are dependent on it.

So that one tournament drives both football and basketball programs at major schools.   The value of the tournament is that it covers all conferences.  CBS (or nay other network) would have little interest in paying for multiple smaller tournaments or one cobbled together by a few major conferences.  And why would any conference therefore forego the current system for one which will bring them less money?  A team or conference leaving the NCAA would be unimaginable.  It would affect all of their sports and obviously limit their recruiting to those who couldn't get recruited to NCAA schools.

In order for your scenarion to happen,  all major conferences would have to have to agree to coming together as a single entity and have a similarly massive TV contract in their pocket to that which they have now.

Without all of that, it makes no sense to leave the NCAA (anf the CBS contract runs to 2024).

You know it!  NCAA was on my mind again after the EA announcement.

Regarding the bolded, what's your source on that?  I'd heard some time ago that the NCAA tournament TV deal was the primary source of income for the NCAA, and that they kept most of the money, but I confess that I don't remember where.  It always made sense to me, though, because the recent conference re-alignments have been all about football (except the Catholic 7 splitting from Conference USA The Big East).

Anyway, I did a quick bit of googling, and I can't find a direct corroboration of your 96% figure.  Closest I've got is this, which says that "96 percent of [all] NCAA revenue benefits the membership through distributions or services".  But only 60% is distributed directly to the schools -- about 23% or so is mostly tied up in mysteries programs and services, most of which are probably as helpful to schools and athletes as the "convenience fee" that TicketMaster charges.  13% is for the cost of putting on championships, which should probably count for these purposes, because that's overhead the schools/conferences don't currently have to pay.  Of course, the schools also aren't receiving the revenue from those championships, which is significant.  Or more accurately, school are only receiving 60% of the revenue from those championships, since money is fungible.

Anyway, I was overstating it a bit, but my point largely stands:  The NCAA is deeply dependent on its basketball tournament for operating income:

"In most years, rights fees have accounted for about 85 percent of all NCAA revenue. In 2009-10, the media agreements constituted 86 percent of NCAA revenue. Most of the remaining 14 percent in 2009-10 came from championships (mostly ticket sales)."

Last year was comparatively lowat just 81% of revenue stemming from TV rights.  (They don't give numbers for non-basketball TV rights, but based on the math, I think everything else combined is less than $1 million.  Just dividing the CBS/Turner payout from last year into the NCAA's total revenue gives you 80.9%, so no other TV rights have a significant impact.)  This year projects relatively high at 88% (per the same page).  They don't give any breakdown of the "championship" (ticket sales) revenue, but my guess is that it's nearly all tickets to the NCAA tournament.

Okay, so what's the point?  The point is that in the big picture, the NCAA makes nearly all their money off of their basketball tournament, and can't survive without it.  In the current system, schools are only getting something like 75% of that revenue back.  It is my belief that the current environment of big-time collegiate athletics is one of extreme desperation for money, and I don't think big conferences will be happy long-term with the NCAA's huge cut off the top.  

One thing I definitely need to concede, though, is that in the short term, there'll be no changes.  I didn't realize how much of the money did go back to the schools/conferences.  And in the short term, the NCAA does provide a very valuable service: it keeps costs way down by ensuring free labor.  I no longer think the superconference movement alone is enough to kill the NCAA.  It'll take legal victories or the NCAA totally passing the buck to schools/conferences on the legal front.  Once schools get to the point where they have to compensate players, the NCAA starts to lose its value.  Maybe the NCAA will be smart enough to adapt and survive, or maybe the major conferences will be afraid enough of change that they'll continue to cut the NCAA in, but I hope not.

#20 Ramius

Ramius

    Don't Tread on Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,408 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 12:30 PM

View Post26CornerBlitz, on 17 July 2013 - 02:43 PM, said:

Hmmm:
@RollTide
NCAA announces it will not renew licensing contract with EA Sports http://sds.to/12Ls08m

- @SECfootball @SDS

http://sports.yahoo....-193207072.html

This probably won't affect anything about the game. The only differences you'll see next year is that all NCAA logos/references will be removed from the game, and it'll be called College football '15 instead of NCAA '15.

Individual schools handle their own licensing deals, and i can't imagine a single D I-A school not wanting to miss out on royalities from the game.