NCAA Stands Alone; Video Gamers Mourn…for now.

College Football General35

NCSNCAA14

Get it while you can.

On Thursday, both EA Sports and the Collegiate Licensing Company announced settlements in cases involving more than a hundred thousand current and former student-athletes whose names and likenesses have been used without permission or compensation.

While not all of the terms, nor the consequences thereof, of such settlements are yet clear, two of the immediate issues are that the NCAA now stands alone in its ongoing fight for its now much embattled “rules of amateurism”; and there will be no longer be a NCAA Football video game produced by EA Sports.  At least not next year.

EA Sports and CLC settle lawsuit by Ed O’Bannon plaintiffs; NCAA remains as lone defendant (AL.com)

Terms of the settlements are confidential until presented to the court for preliminary approval, the filing said. “This settlement does not affect Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association,” the court filing stated.

EA, which earlier today announced it won’t produce its 2014 college football video game, reached similar settlements in cases brought by former Rutgers football player Ryan Hart and former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston.

More than 100,000 athletes will be eligible for compensation at varying amounts depending on each class members’ claims, said Rob Carey, an attorney for Keller, the former Nebraska and Arizona State quarterback.

“This is a big day and it’s nice to get one big piece of it resolved,” Carey said. “It’s like you’re already in Vegas and still gambling because we still have the NCAA portion of the case that I think everybody on our team likes better than EA because of the hypocrisy.”

The NCAA, EA and the lead attorney for the O’Bannon antitrust plaintiffs declined to comment about the settlement. An attorney for CLC referred questions to the company, which could not be immediately reached for comment.

Earlier today, the NCAA told USA Today Sports it will fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. Also, EA said its popular college football video game won’t be produced next year and may be gone for good.

–

EA drops football in ’14, settles cases as NCAA fights (USAToday.com)

The NCAA’s resolve seemed almost welcomed by lawyers representing the plaintiffs, who said they are looking forward to being able to concentrate their efforts on one case and one target.

“Fantastic,” Robert Carey said. “We’ll see them in court.”

Said Michael Hausfeld, another lead attorney for the plaintiffs: “The NCAA now stands alone in its hypocrisy. When you hire a new firm to deal with a trial and a firm to deal with an appeal, it doesn’t say a lot about your confidence in your position.”

Warren Zola, who teaches sports law at Boston College’s Carroll School of Management, said Thursday’s settlement leaves the NCAA in a difficult position.

“You are the last defendant standing in a case where everyone else felt that settling was the best solution,” he said.

EA Sports: No NCAA Football 15 video game, series possibly done (CBSSports.com)

“We have been stuck in the middle of a dispute between the NCAA and student-athletes who seek compensation for playing college football. Just like companies that broadcast college games and those that provide equipment and apparel, we follow rules that are set by the NCAA — but those rules are being challenged by some student-athletes.

“For our part, we are working to settle the lawsuits with the student-athletes. Meanwhile, the NCAA and a number of conferences have withdrawn their support of our game. The ongoing legal issues combined with increased questions surrounding schools and conferences have left us in a difficult position — one that challenges our ability to deliver an authentic sports experience, which is the very foundation of EA Sports games.”

“This is probably one of the most disappointing outcomes in recent video game history,” said Jonas Franklin of gaming review site ArmChairEmpire.com “Not only was this one of my favorite games, it was one of the most popular sports franchises out there,” he continues and he is right.

I personally have fond memories over the NCAA Xbox leagues my friends and I put together, it was serious business and some of the best video game memories of my life. Just another way that the NCAA continually finds was to suck.

Discuss amongst yourselves….

–

About Wufpacker

A 2nd generation alumnus and raised since birth to be irrationally dedicated to all things NC State. Class of '88 and '92.

College Football General

Home › Forums › NCAA Stands Alone; Video Gamers Mourn…for now.

Tagged: , ,

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 36 total)
1 2
  • Author
    Posts
  • 09/27/2013 at 3:34 AM #122217
    Wufpacker
    Participant

    Get it while you can. On Thursday, both EA Sports and the Collegiate Licensing Company announced settlements in cases involving more than a hundred th
    [See the full post at: NCAA Stands Alone; Video Gamers Mourn…for now.]

    09/27/2013 at 4:48 AM #122218
    PackerInRussia
    Participant

    I’m all verklempt.
    From a PR perspective, that doesn’t seem to be a big win for the athletes (if the game is gone). So, if EA Sports made a NCAA game using schools’ real names and assigning strength to various aspects of each team (QBs, WRs, LBs, etc.) based on the real players’ strengths and weaknesses, but assigned random height, weight, skin color, jersey numbers, etc., could they still make a game? From a marketability perspective, where’s the line between keeping it “realistic” without infringing on athletes’ rights and making it too unrealistic for people to care. For example, how important is it for people that the game weights teams’ ability based on their actual projected strengths?
    And what do Madden and other NFL games do as far as compensation? Are they paying the NFL or players?

    09/27/2013 at 5:23 AM #122219
    Wufpacker
    Participant

    PIR, I would think NFL issues are covered in collective bargaining agreements between NFLPA and the league, and any respective agreements between the league and producers of products.

    As far as college, the whole thing has to do with the NCAA, “amateurism”, and paying players.

    The NCAA is fighting for it’s life here basically, and they’re on shaky ground. Depending upon how this plays out, it could be one more nail in their overall coffin. And possibly a big one.

    Right now, EA just wants out of the middle of it. Once it’s all settled, especially if the NCAA goes down, I’d be surprised if new agreements weren’t in place quickly such that the series could then continue.

    While I’m not an EA NCAA Football fanboy like some (the most recent one I own is ’04), thus maybe I’m not the best one to speak to this….

    There is a definite plus to the realism aspect. But the games are made such that one can customize strengths, appearances, names, etc.

    So to make my way around to addressing your point, lol….for the consumer, it seems EA could continue to produce a customizable game. But currently, personalization, including school/team names, logos, stadiums, etc., on the part of EA, would be a no no.

    My suspicions are that EA has no fully customizable product ready for next year, and even if they did they probably aren’t confident in it’s profitability, mostly for the reasons you layed out.

    ie…where is the line that makes it worth it to produce such a product?

    09/27/2013 at 7:20 AM #122220
    BJD95
    Keymaster

    How much of the “full cost of attendance” stipend would be covered if the D1-A schools’ athletes received 50-75% of the video game licensing fee?

    Seems like a win-win all the way around to me. Guess it makes too much sense to the greedy-ass powers that be. I’m sure they think this will cause gamers to revolt against the athletes and be a PR win. Because they are THAT stupid.

    09/27/2013 at 8:41 AM #122221
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    ^BJD95, one of the better ideas I’ve seen to defray tuition costs using said fees.

    And I’m guessing, like Wufpacker, EA just wasn’t prepared for an alternative this year. But you can expect those games back, just in a modified form. Any artist has some creative license. Assigning players skill levels, sizes and weights, is arbitrary. Or allow players to build their own teams and assign numbers, etc.

    I still say the NCAA and its member institutions will come out smelling like a rose on this one. As long as they are tax exempt organizations, there will be no paying of players.

    09/27/2013 at 9:33 AM #122222
    SaccoV
    Participant

    Two things: 1) WhiteShoes67, I ask this question without full understanding, so don’t think that I’m goading here … how does the NCAA justify its tax exemption? 2) Am I reading this correctly that the NCAA is settling, and then challenging the settlement?

    09/27/2013 at 10:01 AM #122223
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    SaccoV, check out http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2010/02/21/Is-the-NCAA-Fulfilling-its-Tax-Exempt-Status.aspx to learn about the NCAA tax exempt status. It’s a bit dated but still a good summary.

    And no, the NCAA isn’t settling, only the licensing company and EA Sports.

    If the NCAA has to start sharing revenue directly with individual players, or even establishing a trust for individual athletes or groups of athletes, then it’s paying players. If it, or the member school, is paying players, then those payments are taxable. Tuition, etc. It ain’t happening. Is the NCAA a mockery? Yes. But as TJfoose and others have pointed out, the direct benefits these athletes receive is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. I’m all for changes, but paying college athletes is ridiculous.

    09/27/2013 at 10:15 AM #122224
    Wolfpack93
    Participant

    I am one of those fans in the endzone (the one wearing red just to the left of the goalpost). How do I go about adding myself to the lawsuit for compensation?

    09/27/2013 at 10:19 AM #122225
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    ^…lol. I really wish I’d have followed this more. But for the life of me, I don’t understand why EA and the licensing company bailed. I’m sure they have fantastic attorneys. I just don’t get it. On the surface, the case against EA and CLC looked stronger. Will be interesting to see if O’Bannon’s class case against the NCAA gets certified. For one opinion, see http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130619/ncaa-ed-obannon-hearing-primer/index.html. I just don’t see it. There are plenty of comparable organizations who operate like the NCAA, claim tax exempt status, yet earn buttloads of money. Seems to me the plaintiffs have to prove that the NCAA should not be tax exempt, something that the IRS hasn’t seemed fit to do. There’s just no escaping that tax exempt organizations are giving those players a forum to enhance and display their value. The players didn’t have to agree to that arrangement, but they did.

    09/27/2013 at 11:01 AM #122226
    Tyler_Durden
    Participant

    The ncaa is beyond hypocritical. (Read “Undue Process” by Don Yeagar). Look down the road in chapel hill – fake classes created to keep functional illiterates on the field to generate revenue. Penalty? Slap on the wrist.

    Going to college doesn’t mean you sign away your rights to your own likeness. That’s absurd out of the box. And the issue of paying players?

    Give them a monthly stipend ala the ROTC cadets (I think it’s up to $400 a month now). There. Oh, and issue said stipend to ALL varsity sport, non-club, athletic scholarship receiving athletes: from Gymnasts to the Lacrosse team. Problem muted.

    09/27/2013 at 11:15 AM #122227
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    ^Of course the NCAA is hypocritical, but if you believe this is really about NCAA athletes getting a share of the pie to distribute among their teammates and other sports programs, I’ve got a pile of poop to sell you. It’s about individual athletes thinking they have individual value beyond what the NCAA and its member institutions provide. I think any good accountant and econonomist can prove otherwise.

    Those players entered into a voluntary agreement with the NCAA. The NCAA and it’s member institutions provided them with a platform and training to improve their skills. If they wanted to enter the market, they could’ve. Get a job. Without the NCAA or colleges, the talent for which they’re seeking compensation is largely worthless.

    09/27/2013 at 12:24 PM #122228
    Wpack222
    Participant

    What’s wrong with the forum , it won’t come up on my computer or IPad.

    09/27/2013 at 12:57 PM #122229
    1time
    Member

    When it all boils down, I can seriously do without seeing any of these likenesses in person, on EA Sports, ESPN, Fox Sports, ABC, CBS, and on and on…

    I’m just wondering how long it will be before someone hires a lawyer to determine, from the date birth forward, how much a parent owes a child for breathing air, taking up space, and just basically being on the planet.

    09/27/2013 at 1:14 PM #122230
    tjfoose1
    Participant

    “It’s about individual athletes thinking they have individual value beyond what the NCAA and its member institutions provide.”

    Yep.

    They don’t get it. Their marketability is due to the school. People pay because they represent the school. They don’t pay to see the athlete.

    Exhibit A: How many of you State fans bought the jersey of your favorite Duke or u*nc All American? How many Meechigan fans are walking around in Braxton Miller jerseries.

    Take the name off the front of the jersey and the marketability crashes.

    Have that same player withdraw from school and play in a county rec league and then gauge his market value.

    How many folks show up and tune in to watch NC State vs u*nc basketball games? How many do the same when those same exact players competed against one another in the summer leagues?

    09/27/2013 at 1:16 PM #122231
    tjfoose1
    Participant

    “I’m just wondering how long it will be before someone hires a lawyer to determine, from the date birth forward, how much a parent owes a child for breathing air, taking up space, and just basically being on the planet.”

    Where you been? I know you meant that as a joke, but you’re not far off from today’s reality. Replace child with government and add global warming. Oops, I mean climate change.

    09/27/2013 at 1:35 PM #122232
    BJD95
    Keymaster

    I would not at all be as interested in NC State athletics if we went back to a “pure amateur” model and were essentially televising intramurals. Nor would I enjoy the games as much if the universities were decoupled altogether.

    The athletes create value, as does the institution. It can be more equitably be a mutually beneficial relationship. It is way too one-sided now.

    You can call my views “insane” or “outrageous” but they are 100% in line with DY.

    09/27/2013 at 1:51 PM #122233
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    ^I respect Dr. Yow, but I have a big problem with this line of thinking, both in principle, and in terms of the financial repercussions.

    If, and it’s a big if, the amateur status of the athlete is not jeopardized by distribution of these moneys, which is what O’Bannon’s attorneys are trying to argue, and you can come up with a way to equitably distribute moneys to offset the costs of athletics, I’m all for it. But if those payments aren’t divided equally and distributed equally, then I see no way that you can justify them as amateurs, or the member institutions or NCAA as tax exempt institutions.

    The O’Bannon lawyers say the lawsuit doesn’t jeopardize amateur status. They claim these payments aren’t income, but compensation for property theft. But I just don’t see how you can make that argument effectively if the IRS says those institutions are tax exempt. It’s the equivalent of me volunteering at the Salvation Army, them using my likeness to solicit for donations, or advertise their services, and me deciding I’d like to sue because the SA somehow benefited from my volunteered time. It doesn’t matter if certain players happen to add some value to the university or if the current arrangement is one-sided. It isn’t a marketplace.

    09/27/2013 at 2:09 PM #122234
    tjfoose1
    Participant

    ” if EA Sports made a NCAA game using schools’ real names and assigning strength to various aspects of each team (QBs, WRs, LBs, etc.) based on the real players’ strengths and weaknesses, but assigned random height, weight, skin color, jersey numbers, etc., could they still make a game? ”

    That’s what a lot of the not-top-of-the-line sports games used to do, and even they used similar or relatable names.

    09/27/2013 at 2:15 PM #122235
    Whiteshoes67
    Participant

    To me, I can see the case against EA and others being stronger, because they’re profiting (per IRS) by the sale of someone else’s likeness. But a school isn’t profiting directly from that sale. They may facilitate it, but as long as they’re using the benefits from that sale to further their mission, which they are, then they can and should do it. That’s the crux of the argument as I understand it.

    09/27/2013 at 2:35 PM #122236
    JEOH2
    Participant

    As a huge fan of the NCAA series…this is devastating. It is almost as bad as when the College Hoops/NCAA Basketball games discontinued. Realism (as close as possible) is a necessity for fans of the game. There are whole files one can download that will name and re-order your roster based on current depth charts. The stadium announcer will even say their name in game.

    Not mentioned here in the comments…EA was all ready to produce another game sans the NCAA. It was the conferences like the SEC, Pac-12 etc who killed this project. EA never cared about the NCAA, all they did was add “authenticity” and the presence of ESPN in the more recent games took care of that part.

    09/27/2013 at 3:09 PM #122237
    MISTA WOLF
    Participant

    My problem with this situation is its a class action lawsuit. Meaning the lawyers are going to get a big peice of the pie. for instance: Say you’ve got 6 law firms working jointly with 20 lawyers. On the otherside you’ve got 250,000 players. The lawyers will get at least 40% of the money. That’s 16 million divided up between 20 people coming out to 800,000 per lawyer. The players lets say receive the other 60%. That’s 24 million divided up between 250,000 coming out to 96 dollars per player. Who’s getting f*cked here?

    I thought it was an honor to be on a video game even with my 63 rating. Not only do these kids look like arses by suing, but they have now ruined it for all the fans of the game and for the future players who won’t get a chance to play as themselves.

    09/27/2013 at 3:11 PM #122238
    MISTA WOLF
    Participant

    I before E. Sorry I was raised to speak and write Yadkinese.

    09/27/2013 at 3:26 PM #122239
    PackFanInLA
    Participant

    ^mista wolf – you hit the nail on the head. The rotten trial lawyers are the only ones to win here. They only need to find 1 or 2 gullible students to be the face of the Lawsuit. Then they can bring suit on behalf of the entire ‘class.’ imagine all the hard-working sw engineers who poured out their heart and soul into making that video game over a 10 year period of time. And as you articulated, the slimebag lawyers will capture almost all of the remaining value after killing the product.

    09/27/2013 at 4:03 PM #122240
    BJD95
    Keymaster

    They did the class action thing because it was the only way to get sufficient publicity and traction. I don’t blame them in the slightest.

    I think it’s simple equity. The revenue sport athletes make all the non-revenue schollys possible, and a sh-t ton of $$ for the school on top of that. Their workload is unquestionably greater.

    They are simultaneously less likely to get “spending money from home” and have no time for a part-time job. Having enough spending money to live like a normal, middle class college student is not a sign of end times. It’s common freaking sense, and would take a lot of the corruption (not all, but quite a bit) out of the equation.

    09/27/2013 at 4:41 PM #122241
    tjfoose1
    Participant

    One of those rare times we’ll have to respectfully disagree.

    And I don’t fully accept the premise that “The revenue sport athletes make all the non-revenue schollys possible”. I don’t think it is [only] the athlete that generates that revenue, but that’s a different matter for a different day.

    Scholarship athletes are free to get jobs anytime they want. They can chose to do anything they want with their time, anytime they want. They can quit their college team and attempt join the professional ranks anytime they chose. Problem is, they have to stop being scholarship athletes to do it.

    Oh. I guess it must not be so bad.

    A school invests hundreds of thousands of dollars (per year, at most of the big boy schools) for each 4, 5, sometimes 6 year scholar athlete. It is the rare exception that an individual athlete returns the amount invested in them.

    It’s not slavery, it’s not abuse, it’s not indentured servitude. No one is forcing the athlete to do anything. They participate in athletics because they want to. Simple economic theory tells us they get something out of it (fame, glory, education, notoriety, etc) more valuable to them then the time and effort they invest.

    Yes, the status quo needs reform. To me, Jeremy Bloom is the cover boy for that issue. And the NCAA is unjust, corrupt, and self serving. But if it is the contention that schools owe the student athletes spending money, then I counter that the those same student athletes therefore owe every player, administrator, coach, fan, referee, grounds crew, stadium architect, construction worker, vendor, etc who came before them for creating the very system and culture that affords them such grandiose opportunities simply because they are good at playing a game.

    Where’s my cut?

    Those that come out signing multi-million dollar contracts, forgive me if I don’t shed a tear. Show me where else I can get that kind of return on a 2-5 year investment my time, all the while having literally 100’s of support staff personnel working full time and overtime to see that I succeed.

    Where’s the universities return for the scholarship athlete who never advances beyond the scout team? Or the cross country runner? Or the swimmer?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 36 total)
1 2
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.