Home
NCAA Football 14 News Post



In case you've been living under a rock (or you just don't care), the NCAA and Ed O'Bannon have been in a legal war for a few years now. This has effectively ended the NCAA Football and NCAA Basketball franchises for the time being as the case works its way up the courts. Today, we're one step closer to the case going to the Supreme Court, as the 9th Court Circuit of Appeals ruled on the case.

Quote:
"We conclude that the plaintiffs have shown that they are injured in fact as a result of the NCAA’s rules having foreclosed the market for their NILs in video games. We therefore do not reach the thornier questions of whether participants in live TV broadcasts of college sporting events have enforceable rights of publicity or whether the plaintiffs are injured by the NCAA’s current licensing arrangement for archival footage"

Indeed, the 'number one factor holding back NCAA video game growth' as described by EA was the inability to use college athlete's actual likenesses in their games.

In the ruling, the court upheld the original ruling by Judge Claudia Wilken in saying:

Quote:
"The district court found that it is entirely possible that the NCAA will resume its support for college sports video games at some point in the future, given that the NCAA found such games to be profitable in the past, and that finding of fact was not clearly erroneous. Given the NCAA’s previous, lengthy relationship with EA and the other evidence presented, it was reasonable for the district court to conclude that the NCAA may well begin working with EA or another video game company in the future."

It would seem the crux of the matter at this point for the return of NCAA video games is the NCAA allowing a few things. First, allowing video games to be made again -- as the NCAA currently has a policy in place which doesn't allow for that. Second, the rules on athletes NILs being used would have to be changed. Third, compensation rules would have to be finalized.

What is more likely is that the NCAA will take this matter all the way to the Supreme Court as they have alluded to. A Supreme Court ruling could jeopardize the entire system of amateurism the NCAA has built, although there is no real beat on how the Supreme Court might rule since the case hasn't been argued.

As far as a return of NCAA Football goes, this case continues to hold up any possibility of that because it is preventing any of the three questions above from being definitively answered. Not only does this case need a final resolution, but systems will need to be put in place for the games to have a chance at returning. At this point, you are easily 24-36 months away from that becoming a reality on any fast-tracked solution sans a miracle, which puts the arrival date of any future game years into the future.

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 52 - View All
NCAA Football 14 Videos
Member Comments
# 1 scraw28 @ 09/30/15 11:49 AM
or they will have to wait until the outcome of the 2016 elections
 
# 2 HenryClay1844 @ 09/30/15 12:00 PM
So, does this mean that the NCAA and the various colleges cannot restrict athletes or anyone from selling their imaging rights?
 
# 3 AyeBruhChill @ 09/30/15 01:00 PM
The whole notion of "amaueturism" that the NCAA tries to project is nonsense. Are these kids student-athletes? Yes. But this idea that a full ride is adquate compensation and other rules resctrictions under the guise that it is unfair to the student population as a whole is garbage. The NCAA makes a near billion dollar profit of the labor of "amateurs". ESPN doesn't have a 8 billion dollar tv deal for the student body, they have it for "amateurs". These universities make millions of dollar on "amateurs". Urban Meyer, Nick Saban, Kevin Ollie make 5+ mill to coach "amateurs". The money they make their schools well covers their free rides.

These kids should have a right to their individual brand on things outside of university revenue. They should be able to sell rings and sign autographs. Those things are valuable because of the work THEY did. They should get a cut of their jersey sales and they should be compentsated for things like video games.

They need to resolve this, because no one is winning, both in video games and real life.

I mean college hoops 2k17?! Nuts
 
# 4 GLO @ 09/30/15 01:26 PM
Aye,

I respectfully disagree. Being someone who has tens of thousands of dollars in college loan debt, it would appear that education does have a very real monetary value, especially if you go to a large school where tuition can range anywhere from $20k-70k a year.

You can't have it both ways. Either education isn't worth anything and nobody should EVER have to pay for it. OR Education is worth the tens of thousands of dollars that they charge for it and be receiving a "full ride"the athletes are getting more than fair compensation for the GAMES they play as student athletes.

So which is it for you?
Education = no value?
 
# 5 mike24forever @ 09/30/15 02:42 PM
GLO,

No one paid to watch you study or write an exam, or made a video game of you doing it. I'm an educator and I believe student athletes deserve at least a guaranteed 4 years of education and an ability to make money off of their image, above and beyond their scholarship. Of course education has value, but so does their image.
 
# 6 canes21 @ 09/30/15 02:53 PM
The education does hold value, but the athletes should be able to do what they want with their image at the same time. If an athlete wants to sing autographs or even sign a minor contract with Nike for a commercial or advertising, they should be allowed. Those are not mutually exclusive events. As for the players getting paid for being in a video game, I can't go into detail about how I feel on that subject because I honestly do not know how I feel.
 
# 7 goillini03 @ 09/30/15 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by canes21
The education does hold value, but the athletes should be able to do what they want with their image at the same time. If an athlete wants to sing autographs or even sign a minor contract with Nike for a commercial or advertising, they should be allowed. Those are not mutually exclusive events. As for the players getting paid for being in a video game, I can't go into detail about how I feel on that subject because I honestly do not know how I feel.
I agree mostly with this. I think that brands could not align with a college athlete if the university has ties to a brand. Part of the brand money that the schools get go towards funding of the program. There is a fine line that would need to be discussed.
 
# 8 Deezo @ 09/30/15 03:11 PM
Fact is the NCAA is never going to give up the idea that student athletes shouldn't be paid. Universities like Alabama, LSU, Texas, USC, Ohio State, etc make over $100M a year off the football program. Most of which is funneled into the football team or to help fund other non-headline sports. Should the kids get some sort of stipend from the university, most would say yes. Should they be able to make money off their likeness? Maybe, depends on what brands they are endorsing. A Nike school wouldn't like their star RB to sign a shoe deal with UA or ADIDAS. I'd be okay with a kid like Cardale Jones endorsing Nike and getting some addition money for the use of his likeness. BUT...with him being on OS...and OS being sponsored by Nike...they don't have to paid him at the moment.

And additionally, schools that make more would potentially be able to "offer" players more of a stipend to play with them. It's like the biggest FA pool every year. Unless schools were capped with how much they can pay Student athletes. /rant
 
# 9 CM Hooe @ 09/30/15 03:16 PM
An athletic scholarship is basically a full-time job for FBS athletes - based on not only the experiences described by former Northwestern QB Kain Colter, but my personal experience (in my first year of college I lived on the same hall as two football players who made it to the NFL). It is a full-time job which precludes players not only from enrolling in certain classes but also from taking advantage of other opportunities to earn income away from the athletic department. As such, it's my opinion that the players should be compensated as if they were employees while associated with the athletic program.

Given also that the TV deals for the television broadcast of college football and basketball games value in the Billions of dollars, it's also my opinion that the NCAA can afford to pay these players what they deserve. Without the players (regardless who they are; ESPN pays to broadcast all the games, not just the ones the stars suit up for) there is no product produced to create that television contract.

The current arrangement doesn't have any moral ground to stand and the legal grounds get more uncertain by the day. A better organization than the NCAA would try to stay ahead of the curve here, but my guess is that the NCAA will kill the entire thing before relenting to basic human decency.
 
# 10 GlennN @ 09/30/15 03:33 PM
There is an easy alternative - the NCAA could simply license the schools/universities and a publisher (whether EA or another) could make a game featuring those schools. If the rosters were fictional (and did not bear any likenesses to actual players), and there was no create/edit players, or roster sharing (and yeah, I love create/edit players in any sports game, but this is a compromise), then I believe the game would be perfectly consistent with this case. Personally, I couldn't care less whether real players are in the game anyway - I play franchise, so current players are gone soon anyway (I just root for the laundry!).
 
# 11 jmaj315 @ 09/30/15 03:34 PM
NCAA football 2020 coming to stores near you
 
# 12 turbineseaplane @ 09/30/15 03:53 PM
Wish they'd just release new games with generic everybody and allow unofficial roster importing.

Solved
 
# 13 GLO @ 09/30/15 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike24forever
GLO,

No one paid to watch you study or write an exam, or made a video game of you doing it. I'm an educator and I believe student athletes deserve at least a guaranteed 4 years of education and an ability to make money off of their image, above and beyond their scholarship. Of course education has value, but so does their image.
Fair point. To counter, then let them take the money they get paid from their image and use that to pay for their education. (just like the rest of us that had to work full or part time jobs to get through college). I understand it's a fine line argument either way, the thing that bothers me is how often this discussion is framed in the (false) context of these student-athletes not having any money for food or other things. I am also an educator and have known plenty of student athletes that are doing more than fine with all the "extras" that come along with being a high profile college athlete.

As it stands right now the education is "payment" in the form of a scholarship. If they want to make the millions that a coach or college executive make then let them work hard and earn it over time just like those adults did. There is nowhere in the work force where 18, 19 or 20 year old kids can come into an organization and demand to be paid as much as the CEO or top execs, no matter how "famous" they are. (other than Hollywood and I doubt anyone would argue that Hollywood is the structure we should follow for work-force compensation?)

I'm fine with the change to pay the players, but if that happens then remove the scholarships and give them to kids who can't make millions from endorsement deals. If an 18 year old kid gets a 2 million dollar contract from Nike, the $25k tuition shouldn't be a problem.

By arguing that they need to get paid and also keep the scholarships you are de-value-ing the education that the scholarship is paying for. There's no way around it.

Truth is there probably isn't a neat and clean answer for this....
 
# 14 ODogg @ 09/30/15 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbineseaplane
Wish they'd just release new games with generic everybody and allow unofficial roster importing.



Solved

This is what they should do!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
# 15 ODogg @ 09/30/15 04:11 PM
Just completely randomize rosters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
# 16 canes21 @ 09/30/15 05:36 PM
I think we all would support that. There's no need to compromise and leave out a roster editor. EA cannot be held responsible for user created rosters even if they are shared on a massive scale. EA got in trouble for having the rosters matchup in the way they did. Each position, player number, class, etc. matched up with the real player's, they just had no name. That got them into trouble.

But like the article states, the NCAA has a policy in place as of now that does not allow anymore NCAA video games to be made. I would love to see that be removed now and we get a random roster game next year, but we all know what is likely.
 
# 17 McG @ 09/30/15 06:03 PM
Nobody buys the "student athlete" thing anymore. Maybe from the early '90's all the way back to the start of college athletics, then yes of course. Schools during that period weren't getting paid hundreds of millions of dollars annually back then. Also, professional athletes (with the same recognition as their "student athlete" counterparts) during that time frame, weren't getting paid much more than a successful college grad. So it actually made sense to try to sell the world on the, "free education to play for their university" idea. Well those days are long gone and a lot has changed since this was a legitimate way to compensate their athletes.

The earning potential for NCAA sports exploded in the late '80's-early '90's along with professional athletes and the entire landscape of sports overall changed. So at this point, of course the NCAA wants to keep the amateur status on their athletes. Just look at how they go after any player or institution like rabid dogs that tries to receive cash for play. For instance I'll use the "SMU Death Penalty" as precedent, it was handed down in 1987 and basically shut down the program. Why, because the NCAA knew that if the type of money that was being thrown around became commonplace, then the NCAA would cease to exist. The NCAA knew exactly what they had then and they know now more than ever, what they still have. They are clinging on to the idea of "student athlete" like someone holding on for life at the end of rope hanging over a cliff.

The NCAA use the whole "student athlete" argument and bring up how much a college education costs, then they act like it somehow is an actual cost to the university. The literal cost to put another few people in a class is minimal, especially when compared to what the average "big TV sport" athlete brings to the school annually. That's without even factoring in what a star player can bring in. The "student athlete" argument is an obvious copout by the NCAA and also for the colleges involved. They know that if they have to pay the players then it will effect the bottom line significantly. I mean has anyone been on a major universities campus lately? Any of you that attended that school even 10-15 years ago go, go have a walk around your former campus and tell me if you recognize it. I'm not even talking about the athletic facilities, I mean the department buildings. Sure, some of the money comes from alumni donations, but a huge chunk comes from the athletic department. It's like when a drug dealer drives around the hood in a pimped out ride. Everyone knows how they got a car that costs more than their home, but no one can do anything about it.

I know this is longwinded and if you made it this far, I thank you. What the whole point that I'm trying to make is this. Players should have been getting paid for the last 30 years. They are what you and I pay for when we buy a ticket, get a jersey, put flag on our car, or BUY A VIDEO GAME. Or what ESPN/ABC, CBS, FOX, etc. pays for when they hand over billions of dollars for the rights to show games on TV. We pay for the players name on the back of the jersey, because if they weren't good, very few would watch, if any. Sure, we all have love for whatever university we attended or that we grew up supporting. With that said, when push comes to shove, we wouldn't be spending our hard earned money if the team was full of average no-body's, aka regular students. No we are paying for ATHLETES, athletes that just happen to also be students. So it's time for the NCAA to give up this feeble notion and give the athletes that pay for their school what they deserve, proper financial compensation.
 
# 18 Skyflame21 @ 09/30/15 09:03 PM
I don't understand why NCAA football simply cannot have all the teams, leagues, bowls, etc and simply have players that are randomly generated.

Then allow guys from this forum or anyone that would like to edit the names, attributes, height and weight, etc. if they have an EA Share then no one will be making any money off players and we can get back to the best part... Fun and enjoyment of college football.
 
# 19 canes21 @ 10/01/15 01:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyflame21
I don't understand why NCAA football simply cannot have all the teams, leagues, bowls, etc and simply have players that are randomly generated.

Then allow guys from this forum or anyone that would like to edit the names, attributes, height and weight, etc. if they have an EA Share then no one will be making any money off players and we can get back to the best part... Fun and enjoyment of college football.
This is perfectly legal and had EA went this route from the beginning, we would possibly not be here. What is stopping EA from making a game right now is the fact that the NCAA has a policy in place that restricts the production of anymore collegiate sports video games I believe and the article here also states that.

If the policy can be removed, EA or anyone else that is willing can get the licenses from the CLC and the schools themselves and get everything they want into the game and then run generic rosters that can be edited and shared.
 
# 20 Junior Moe @ 10/01/15 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by canes21
This is perfectly legal and had EA went this route from the beginning, we would possibly not be here. What is stopping EA from making a game right now is the fact that the NCAA has a policy in place that restricts the production of anymore collegiate sports video games I believe and the article here also states that.

If the policy can be removed, EA or anyone else that is willing can get the licenses from the CLC and the schools themselves and get everything they want into the game and then run generic rosters that can be edited and shared.
I think that's just for the NCAA itself not licensing. The schools and universities are free to do whatever they like. So if EA or 2K could get all schools onboard (probably impossible at this point) then it could be feasible. It just wouldn't have the NCAA seal, name or logo anywhere. It would probably be a legal nightmare to put together and wrangle up all the schools.

I don't think the universities paying the players is the right move. Sure, the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world could afford it, but most schools wouldn't be able to. Also, the universities and NCAA are providing them the stage to showcase their talent ( of which about 1% go pro) and offer an education. The players should be able to make money off their likeness, though. If Pepsi want's to pay Cardale Jones 10K for a commercial, let him! If someone wants to pay Todd Gurley 4 grand for some autographs, let him! At the same time, the NCAA gets to use their likeness in videogames and on TV while they are enrolled. The NCAA is clearly making money off the players just spread the wealth and stop hoarding it. There's enough for everyone.
 

« Previous12345Next »

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.