College sports is a billion dollar industry, and the only ones not allowed to make money are now the players actually playing on the field. You can bet and make money as a fan, a school makes money, 20 coaches get a combined 15 million a year at big schools, but the players can't get a dime?

You are starting with the false assumption that college sports as it is is pure, and not about the money. Wrong!

It is about the money, it's just that coaches, schools, and the ncaa want all of the money. And pure!?????? Lmao, it is corrupt as hell.

Allowing the players to be paid for the product they put on the field will actually make it less corrupt, and more pure. You know, free market capitalism? Getting people to work for free sounds more like some commie dictator scheme than anything else, sorry your blood doesn't run red white and blue, stop being so butt hurt the slaving scheme you love is coming to an end.

So you want to keep a Socialism system in place? I figured the most capitalistic solution would go over big here.

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

As long it's well regulated and strictly for name, image and likeness, I don't have a big problem with it. But the day the athletes become employees of the schools and are paid directly will, indeed, mark the death knell of college athletics.

I think what most of these athletes will find once endorsement deals are available is that they don't have the market value they think they do. The simple fact is most of these players are replaceable and their only real value is derived by the name on the front of their jersey.

There will be a top 1 percent of players who actually are marketable, but those will be almost exclusively offensive skill position players and will only include the elite talents with significant name recognition.

Leave it to that God forsaken state to do something like that - the most do nothing take everything state in the union!

BUbackerinET said:

---

Leave it to that God forsaken state to do something like that - the most do nothing take everything state in the union!

---

This was coming sooner or later, regardless of who introduced/forced the legislation. And frankly, it's the best possible solution to the problem because it leaves players' values to market forces rather than forcing the schools that need their football and basketball profits to fund the rest of their athletic programs to pay all of their athletes some arbitrary salary.

If well regulated and executed, this won't be that big a deal, guys. It will just allow the handful of athletes that have real value to monetize it. For the large percentage of athletes for whom a college scholarship and wide exposure is fair compensation, nothing will change.

Porteroso said:

---

College sports is a billion dollar industry, and the only ones not allowed to make money are now the players actually playing on the field. You can bet and make money as a fan, a school makes money, 20 coaches get a combined 15 million a year at big schools, but the players can't get a dime?

You are starting with the false assumption that college sports as it is is pure, and not about the money. Wrong!

It is about the money, it's just that coaches, schools, and the ncaa want all of the money. And pure!?????? Lmao, it is corrupt as hell.

Allowing the players to be paid for the product they put on the field will actually make it less corrupt, and more pure. You know, free market capitalism? Getting people to work for free sounds more like some commie dictator scheme than anything else, sorry your blood doesn't run red white and blue, stop being so butt hurt the slaving scheme you love is coming to an end.

---

So that scholarship, room, and board are worth zero?

Malbec said:

---

The OP is spot on. If the NCAA caves, it will most assuredly be the death of not just college football, but all of college athletics and sites like SE365. Most importantly, it will end educational opportunities for thousands and thousands of student-athletes.

You can talk all you want about how schools are making all this money off the backs of athletes (very few of those schools make any money at all), but the fact is that this law will not give those student-athletes access to that money. It will be different money; money that will create an unlevel playing field and that will be free from any system to control abuse.

---

The OP and malbec are correct to a point. I can't see, for the life of me, where this court ruling will have any influence in how the NCAA conducts it's business. The NCAA will have this liberal decision tied up in court for years to come. Or at least I hope ! They won't be bending to this idiot judge and his rule.

I ask any of you......why should student athletes get paid from outside entities. I have absolutely no problem with Colleges paying their athletes some kind of stipend.

But then what will non athletes say about it. This will be a huge Pandoras box that shouldn't be opened.

One man's opinion .

fadskier said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

College sports is a billion dollar industry, and the only ones not allowed to make money are now the players actually playing on the field. You can bet and make money as a fan, a school makes money, 20 coaches get a combined 15 million a year at big schools, but the players can't get a dime?

You are starting with the false assumption that college sports as it is is pure, and not about the money. Wrong!

It is about the money, it's just that coaches, schools, and the ncaa want all of the money. And pure!?????? Lmao, it is corrupt as hell.

Allowing the players to be paid for the product they put on the field will actually make it less corrupt, and more pure. You know, free market capitalism? Getting people to work for free sounds more like some commie dictator scheme than anything else, sorry your blood doesn't run red white and blue, stop being so butt hurt the slaving scheme you love is coming to an end.

---

So that scholarship, room, and board are worth zero?

---

That's fair or even overcompensation for most college athletes. All this law does is allow players to monetize the value they have beyond that. I think what we'll find is for most, that value doesn't actually exist.

Malbec said:

---

The OP is spot on. If the NCAA caves, it will most assuredly be the death of not just college football, but all of college athletics and sites like SE365. Most importantly, it will end educational opportunities for thousands and thousands of student-athletes.

You can talk all you want about how schools are making all this money off the backs of athletes (very few of those schools make any money at all), but the fact is that this law will not give those student-athletes access to that money. It will be different money; money that will create an unlevel playing field and that will be free from any system to control abuse.

---

This. Most schools don't make money from athletics. College athletes already receive benefits from being good at their sport...they get a free college education, free room, and free board. Let's not also forget that they CHOOSE to do this...no one forces them.

bear2be2 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

College sports is a billion dollar industry, and the only ones not allowed to make money are now the players actually playing on the field. You can bet and make money as a fan, a school makes money, 20 coaches get a combined 15 million a year at big schools, but the players can't get a dime?

You are starting with the false assumption that college sports as it is is pure, and not about the money. Wrong!

It is about the money, it's just that coaches, schools, and the ncaa want all of the money. And pure!?????? Lmao, it is corrupt as hell.

Allowing the players to be paid for the product they put on the field will actually make it less corrupt, and more pure. You know, free market capitalism? Getting people to work for free sounds more like some commie dictator scheme than anything else, sorry your blood doesn't run red white and blue, stop being so butt hurt the slaving scheme you love is coming to an end.

---

So that scholarship, room, and board are worth zero?

---

That's fair or even overcompensation for most college athletes. All this law does is allow players to monetize the value they have beyond that. I think what we'll find is for most, that value doesn't actually exist.

---

I absolutely loved NCAA football but I never thought the players looked like the real thing.

SEC has been doing this for years?

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

UGWBBear said:

---

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

---

New York, South Carolina and Florida may be following California's lead.

fadskier said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

College sports is a billion dollar industry, and the only ones not allowed to make money are now the players actually playing on the field. You can bet and make money as a fan, a school makes money, 20 coaches get a combined 15 million a year at big schools, but the players can't get a dime?

You are starting with the false assumption that college sports as it is is pure, and not about the money. Wrong!

It is about the money, it's just that coaches, schools, and the ncaa want all of the money. And pure!?????? Lmao, it is corrupt as hell.

Allowing the players to be paid for the product they put on the field will actually make it less corrupt, and more pure. You know, free market capitalism? Getting people to work for free sounds more like some commie dictator scheme than anything else, sorry your blood doesn't run red white and blue, stop being so butt hurt the slaving scheme you love is coming to an end.

---

So that scholarship, room, and board are worth zero?

---

The education is definitely worth zero, given how most of those fruits, nuts, and flakes in California act.

NCAA needs to quit being the NFL's D League. Those that can go pro can go to the minors (like baseball and now basketball) and the rest can go to college. The point of going to college should be to go to college, not playing football.

The oxen that get gored in this are not the fans, they can still watch their teams play (I haven't been, but I understand that UMHB fans enjoy the hell out of football games there), but the sports administrators, coaches and TV networks will take it in the nuts. Good riddance.

BUGWBBear said:

---

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

---

You all seem to think this is isolated to California.

They are just the first. The tide is changing, and everyone who thinks it is a violation of ethics needs to be reminded that billion-dollar sports industries associated with academic schools is already an ethical corruption in itself.

Anyone on Baylor campus can profit from their likeness EXCEPT the student-athletes which is utterly non-sensical. Just because they attend a university should not prevent them from making money on the side.

Regardless of which side of the fence on the likeness issue you are, we all agree that schools directly paying players is wrong (which this law is not about). Yet we don't bat an eye at scholarships which are essentially a regulated form of that.

The NCAA, under the pressure of multiple states, is going to have to make a compromise here in order to preserve its authority as a regulating body. If it doesn't, several states will probably follow suit and essentially do away with the NCAA--thereby fracturing the uniform body and maybe even create an entirely new organization to replace it.

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

That's where the NCAA needs to step in and set some clearly defined rules and prevent schools from putting their hands where they shouldn't.

It's gonna happen in Texas. Just watch. Not because it's right or wrong but out of greed for wins on the football field. UT and aggy will not be outbid by any California school.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

NCAA needs to quit being the NFL's D League. Those that can go pro can go to the minors (like baseball and now basketball) and the rest can go to college. The point of going to college should be to go to college, not playing football.

The oxen that get gored in this are not the fans, they can still watch their teams play (I haven't been, but I understand that UMHB fans enjoy the hell out of football games there), but the sports administrators, coaches and TV networks will take it in the nuts. Good riddance.

---

I think you just touched on the actual solution to this issue -- giving those uninterested in attending college an alternative path to a professional career. Unfortunately, that would require the NFL and NBA to accept their role in creating this problem and create a viable minor league system for players right out of high school. The NBA has tried to do that with the G League, but the NFL has no real incentive to follow suit as long as the NCAA provides them with a free farm system and absorbs all the heat for the players' playing/living conditions.

fadskier said:

---

Karab said:

---

BUGWBBear said:

---

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

---

You all seem to think this is isolated to California.

They are just the first. The tide is changing, and everyone who thinks it is a violation of ethics needs to be reminded that billion-dollar sports industries associated with academic schools is already an ethical corruption in itself.

Anyone on Baylor campus can profit from their likeness EXCEPT the student-athletes which is utterly non-sensical. Just because they attend a university should not prevent them from making money on the side.

Regardless of which side of the fence on the likeness issue you are, we all agree that schools directly paying players is wrong (which this law is not about). Yet we don't bat an eye at scholarships which are essentially a regulated form of that.

The NCAA, under the pressure of multiple states, is going to have to make a compromise here in order to preserve its authority as a regulating body. If it doesn't, several states will probably follow suit and essentially do away with the NCAA--thereby fracturing the uniform body and maybe even create an entirely new organization to replace it.

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

That's where the NCAA needs to step in and set some clearly defined rules and prevent schools from putting their hands where they shouldn't.

---

It's not the schools that will be the problem, per se. It going to be boosters, companies with ties to schools. It's going to put a HUGE divide between the Ohio St's, Bama's, Texas' etc and the rest of us. That divide is already there and widening. This will make it worse.

---

My brother and I had this discussion yesterday and he made a good point. Those schools already own recruiting nationally. As long as the scholarship limit remains in place (and it will), things won't change that much.

whitetrash said:

---

Karab said:

---

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

---

Hello, 17 year old star basketball recruit. Adidas would like to sign you to an endorsement contract worth millions. All you need to do is go play for an Adidas school. Coach Self would like to visit with you. Try not to stare at his toupee.

---

Adidas will go out of business quickly paying 17-year-old basketball recruits millions. Those payments will be in the tens of thousands -- as they already are -- not millions.

fadskier said:

---

Karab said:

---

BUGWBBear said:

---

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

---

You all seem to think this is isolated to California.

They are just the first. The tide is changing, and everyone who thinks it is a violation of ethics needs to be reminded that billion-dollar sports industries associated with academic schools is already an ethical corruption in itself.

Anyone on Baylor campus can profit from their likeness EXCEPT the student-athletes which is utterly non-sensical. Just because they attend a university should not prevent them from making money on the side.

Regardless of which side of the fence on the likeness issue you are, we all agree that schools directly paying players is wrong (which this law is not about). Yet we don't bat an eye at scholarships which are essentially a regulated form of that.

The NCAA, under the pressure of multiple states, is going to have to make a compromise here in order to preserve its authority as a regulating body. If it doesn't, several states will probably follow suit and essentially do away with the NCAA--thereby fracturing the uniform body and maybe even create an entirely new organization to replace it.

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

That's where the NCAA needs to step in and set some clearly defined rules and prevent schools from putting their hands where they shouldn't.

---

It's not the schools that will be the problem, per se. It going to be boosters, companies with ties to schools. It's going to put a HUGE divide between the Ohio St's, Bama's, Texas' etc and the rest of us. That divide is already there and widening. This will make it worse.

---

You mean the boosters that are already manipulating the system in the recruiting process by hiring people to influence kids in high school? All this might do is cut out the middle men or at least change the middle men to commercial businesses.

Corruption is always going to be there--it's the American way. This law is designed to allow people to make money from their likeness--which they were born with.

Again, this is where the NCAA needs to lean forward and be proactive in regulating the issue if it wants to survive. It's already failed to uphold the same standards for various other penalties and people are questioning its worth. It was designed to protect student athletes yet doesn't seem to advocate for students at all anymore.

longtimebear said:

---

Malbec said:

---

The OP is spot on. If the NCAA caves, it will most assuredly be the death of not just college football, but all of college athletics and sites like SE365. Most importantly, it will end educational opportunities for thousands and thousands of student-athletes.

You can talk all you want about how schools are making all this money off the backs of athletes (very few of those schools make any money at all), but the fact is that this law will not give those student-athletes access to that money. It will be different money; money that will create an unlevel playing field and that will be free from any system to control abuse.

---

The NCAA will have this liberal decision tied up in court for years to come.

---

As others have said, I don't see how this is liberal. I think people are reacting emotionally because it's coming from California. It's a pretty pro-capitalism/ anti-socialism move.

In any case, it opens a can of worms. Agreed with others who say this would be better than the schools paying players, in which case the arms race would rapidly dwindle the field of competitive teams. This just allows players to sign autographs, get into a local auto commercial, etc. For the majority of athletes, this will be a minor thing.

This issue is boosters, large and small, lining up to make endorsement deals with recruits.

Colleges need to get back to being colleges. Most don't make money off of their athletic programs, but the highly compensated Athletic Administrators (at schools, conferences and the NCAA), highly compensated coaches, highly compensated sports personalities, and highly profitable networks make tons of money. These people literally cannot let go of the golden goose of college athletics.

bear2be2 said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

Karab said:

---

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

---

Hello, 17 year old star basketball recruit. Adidas would like to sign you to an endorsement contract worth millions. All you need to do is go play for an Adidas school. Coach Self would like to visit with you. Try not to stare at his toupee.

---

Adidas will go out of business quickly paying 17-year-old basketball recruits millions. Those payments will be in the tens of thousands -- as they already are -- not millions.

---

After I posted that I reconsidered that it's probably the other way around. Sign with the major Nike schools (Bama/OhioSt/UT/LSU/Florida) or major Adidas schools (KU basketball/Aggy/Louisville) and you'll get an endorsement contract with a lot more zeros attached than if you sign with a BU/IowaSt/MissSt/Purdue/etc.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

This issue is boosters, large and small, lining up to make endorsement deals with recruits.

Colleges need to get back to being colleges. Most don't make money off of their athletic programs, but the highly compensated Athletic Administrators (at schools, conferences and the NCAA), highly compensated coaches, highly compensated sports personalities, and highly profitable networks make tons of money. These people literally cannot let go of the golden goose of college athletics.

---

Agreed.

It's why I hope the XFL (or something like it) succeeds. If collegiate sports disappeared and transitioned to semi-pro leagues, the world would be better off.

Karab said:

---

fadskier said:

---

Karab said:

---

BUGWBBear said:

---

Karab said:

---

Okay, Chicken Little.

All this does is force the NCAA to develop some rational rules so that players can make money off their likeness.

If they NCAA outright opposes this, it'll be the death of the NCAA.

So let's just enjoy the fact that we are finally going to get another NCAA Football game in the next few years.

---

The NCAA is far bigger than Nutfyuk Newsom and the State of California.

This is not the way you change things. Supreme Dictator Newsom doesn't believe in any other way.

Players should get some sort of stipend, depending on their background...I have no problem with that.

But they're not pro athletes either, demanding billions a year to take a fyucking knee either. At least not until they get talked into the NFL after their freshman year or later.

If the schools want to talk to the NCAA like adults and work out a compromise? Cool!

But if no, those schools are athletically ineligible for sanctioned events once the law is in effect.

---

You all seem to think this is isolated to California.

They are just the first. The tide is changing, and everyone who thinks it is a violation of ethics needs to be reminded that billion-dollar sports industries associated with academic schools is already an ethical corruption in itself.

Anyone on Baylor campus can profit from their likeness EXCEPT the student-athletes which is utterly non-sensical. Just because they attend a university should not prevent them from making money on the side.

Regardless of which side of the fence on the likeness issue you are, we all agree that schools directly paying players is wrong (which this law is not about). Yet we don't bat an eye at scholarships which are essentially a regulated form of that.

The NCAA, under the pressure of multiple states, is going to have to make a compromise here in order to preserve its authority as a regulating body. If it doesn't, several states will probably follow suit and essentially do away with the NCAA--thereby fracturing the uniform body and maybe even create an entirely new organization to replace it.

If Nike wants to do a commercial with Jalen Hurts in it and Jalen is the only one who is paid--who cares?

That's where the NCAA needs to step in and set some clearly defined rules and prevent schools from putting their hands where they shouldn't.

---

It's not the schools that will be the problem, per se. It going to be boosters, companies with ties to schools. It's going to put a HUGE divide between the Ohio St's, Bama's, Texas' etc and the rest of us. That divide is already there and widening. This will make it worse.

---

You mean the boosters that are already manipulating the system in the recruiting process by hiring people to influence kids in high school? All this might do is cut out the middle men or at least change the middle men to commercial businesses.

Corruption is always going to be there--it's the American way. This law is designed to allow people to make money from their likeness--which they were born with.

Again, this is where the NCAA needs to lean forward and be proactive in regulating the issue if it wants to survive. It's already failed to uphold the same standards for various other penalties and people are questioning its worth. It was designed to protect student athletes yet doesn't seem to advocate for students at all anymore.

---

So because corruption exists, we shouldn't do anything? If you don't think schools, business etc will pervert this into something, I believe your wrong.

LTbear said:

---

longtimebear said:

---

Malbec said:

---

The OP is spot on. If the NCAA caves, it will most assuredly be the death of not just college football, but all of college athletics and sites like SE365. Most importantly, it will end educational opportunities for thousands and thousands of student-athletes.

You can talk all you want about how schools are making all this money off the backs of athletes (very few of those schools make any money at all), but the fact is that this law will not give those student-athletes access to that money. It will be different money; money that will create an unlevel playing field and that will be free from any system to control abuse.

---

The NCAA will have this liberal decision tied up in court for years to come.

---

As others have said, I don't see how this is liberal. I think people are reacting emotionally because it's coming from California. It's a pretty pro-capitalism/ anti-socialism move.

In any case, it opens a can of worms. Agreed with others who say this would be better than the schools paying players, in which case the arms race would rapidly dwindle the field of competitive teams. This just allows players to sign autographs, get into a local auto commercial, etc. For the majority of athletes, this will be a minor thing.

---

If I'm a wealthy Alabama or UT donor and own several car lots, is there a limit to what I can pay a student to use his likeness? Can a recruit be swayed to my university because I'm going to pay him $40,000 per commercial?

fadskier said:

---

LTbear said:

---

longtimebear said:

---

Malbec said:

---

The OP is spot on. If the NCAA caves, it will most assuredly be the death of not just college football, but all of college athletics and sites like SE365. Most importantly, it will end educational opportunities for thousands and thousands of student-athletes.

You can talk all you want about how schools are making all this money off the backs of athletes (very few of those schools make any money at all), but the fact is that this law will not give those student-athletes access to that money. It will be different money; money that will create an unlevel playing field and that will be free from any system to control abuse.

---

The NCAA will have this liberal decision tied up in court for years to come.

---

As others have said, I don't see how this is liberal. I think people are reacting emotionally because it's coming from California. It's a pretty pro-capitalism/ anti-socialism move.

In any case, it opens a can of worms. Agreed with others who say this would be better than the schools paying players, in which case the arms race would rapidly dwindle the field of competitive teams. This just allows players to sign autographs, get into a local auto commercial, etc. For the majority of athletes, this will be a minor thing.

---

If I'm a wealthy Alabama or UT donor and own several car lots, is there a limit to what I can pay a student to use his likeness? Can a recruit be swayed to my university because I'm going to pay him $40,000 per commercial?

---

Rhett Bomar and Big Red Motors say hello.