2020 Pac-12 Basketball: UCLA, USC Trending Upward

colorado buffaloes Pac-12 basketball vs oregon

This week in 2020 Pac-12 Basketball belonged to the home team. Across the league, the home team went 9-1 in the 10 games played between Wednesday (2/25) and Sunday (3/1). Teams such as UCLA, USC, and Stanford were given huge boosts to their tournament hopes. However, teams that established themselves as tournament contenders, such as Colorado, Arizona, and Arizona State, had weekends to forget.

Here are the conference standings after the past week of play:

UCLA 12-5 (Overall 19-11)

Oregon 11-5 (22-7)

Arizona State 10-6 (19-10)

Colorado 10-7 (21-9)

USC 10-7 (21-9)

Arizona 9-7 (19-10)

Stanford 9-7 (20-9)

California 7-9 (13-16)

Washington State 6-10 (15-14)

Utah 6-11 (15-14)

Oregon State 5-11 (15-13)

Washington 3-13 (13-16)

UCLA’s 7-Game Winning Streak Propels Them to First Place in 2020 Pac-12 Basketball

UCLA’s weekend got off to a great start against Arizona State on Thursday. Freshman guard Jaime Jaquez Jr. hit a game-winning three with 0.6 seconds left to lift the Bruins to a 75-72 victory. Then on Saturday, they pulled away late against Arizona and won 69-64. The same UCLA team that has the worst loss in non-conference play, to Cal State Fullerton, is now in first place in the Pac-12. Mick Cronin has arguably become a shoe-in for Pac-12 Coach of the Year. The Bruin’s turnaround is great for the conference, as they are one of the most nationally-recognized names in the Pac-12.

It is interesting to think about how the conference is viewed as a whole, because they are the first place team that lost to Cal State Fullerton. Still, the Pac-12 has some good non-conference wins as a conference. Washington, who has the worst record in the conference, has arguably the best non-conference win against Baylor.   

Listen to the Best Pac-12 Football and Basketball Podcast

 Anchor // Apple Podcasts // Spotify // PocketCasts // Google Play // Stitcher // RadioPublic  

Tournament Chances: Trending Up – UCLA has made their case for March, but they have a massive game on Saturday against USC at the Galen Center. Winning this game will give UCLA a share of the 2020 Pac-12 Basketball Regular Season title. If they are able to show up in the conference tournament, they may need to get to the conference championship to cement their spot in the tournament.

Oregon Beats In-State Rival, Frontrunners for 2020 Pac-12 Basketball Regular Season Title

Oregon will get overshadowed by the weeks UCLA and USC had, but the Ducks took care of business against Oregon State 69-54. The Ducks broke their three-game losing streak against the Beavers, as they will attempt to get at least a share of the conference title. Oregon has home games against California and Stanford this week. They are undefeated at home, boasting a 15-0 record at Matthew Knight Arena this season.

Tournament Chances: In the field – Oregon has quality wins in non-conference play. They are near the top of the standings in the Pac-12. The main question for the Ducks is where they will be positioned in the bracket.

Arizona State Takes a Step Back In LA Road Trip

The Sun Devils went toe-to-toe with UCLA Thursday night but were beat at the buzzer. They trailed for most of the game Saturday against USC. Arizona State is an exciting team to watch, and Bobby Hurley has done a great job to get this team on the right side of the bubble. However, losing two straight is a bit of a letdown after their seven-game winning streak.

Tournament Chances: Decent – The Sun Devils will need to take care of business this week against Washington and Washington State, but they should be in the tournament. They are 6-1 at home in-conference, including a resume-boosting win against Oregon. Expect to see the Sun Devils in an 8-vs-9 or 7-vs-10 game.

Colorado Buffaloes Have Worst Week of 2020 Pac-12 Basketball Season in Bay Area

The Buffaloes had a stinker Thursday night in Berkeley, as they lost 76-62 to a California team that they simply should have beat. Colorado had more life Sunday against Stanford, but they were still looking for answers after a 72-64 defeat. This season for the Buffaloes is at a crossroads, as they are no longer in contention for the Pac-12 regular season title. They have accomplished so much this season, and this iteration of the Colorado Buffaloes is probably the best team Tad Boyle has had in his tenure as head coach. However, reputations are made in March, and the Buffaloes will have to start their turnaround from their current three-game losing streak Saturday at Utah.

Tournament Chances: In the field – The Buffaloes have a huge non-conference win against Dayton, who has not lost since Colorado defeated them. They beat Oregon when they were ranked fourth in the country. However, the loss to Cal was probably their worst loss of the season. The Buffaloes need to win at Utah and show up in the conference tournament to ensure that they will still get a top-6 seed on Selection Sunday.

USC Trojans on Right Side of Bubble

USC also beat both Arizona and Arizona State this weekend. They led for the majority of both games. The Trojans got contributions from Jonah Mathews and Daniel Utomi in both games. Their defense also showed up in both games, as they held Arizona and Arizona State to 48 and 61 points, respectively. Both of their games were complete games. If their defense can travel, they will be a tough out in both the conference tournament and the NCAA tournament.

Tournament Chances: Decent – The Trojans have a better NET rating and a head-to-head victory over UCLA, giving them the upper hand over their Los Angeles rivals. However, Saturday’s game at the Galen Center is huge, as it could help USC get a higher seed in the conference tournament. USC has had a more consistent season than UCLA, but the winner of Saturday’s game will regard their season as the better one.

Arizona Struggles, Sean Miller Get Ejected Saturday

Arizona had a tough go on Thursday against USC, as they had one more field goal (16) than turnovers (15) in the 57-48 loss. On Saturday against UCLA, they played better and were leading for most of the first half. However, Sean Miller got ejected with 12:28 remaining in the second half as the Wildcats were leading, 47-44. Arizona was able to hold their own, but UCLA ended the game on an 11-2 run to win 69-64.

Tournament Chances: In – Arizona still has the best NET rating in the Pac-12 conference at number 11. They were able to dominate their non-conference schedule (minus the loss to St. John’s) despite their inconsistencies in-conference. However, every team has had their struggles in-conference, especially on the road. The Wildcats will have a chance to right the ship this week, with home games against Washington State on Thursday and Washington on Saturday.

Stanford Gets Resume-Boosting Win Against Colorado

Stanford was able to beat Utah 70-62 on Wednesday, but they were able to beat a ranked Colorado team 72-64 on Sunday. The Cardinal led the Buffaloes for the majority of the game, and had four starters score in double figures. Stanford was thought of as one of the teams on the outside looking in, but they may be on their way to playing in the First Four in Dayton.

Tournament Chances: 50/50 – Stanford is squarely on the bubble, but they have a huge opportunity at Oregon on Saturday. No team has gone into Eugene and won this season, and beating Oregon along with a win against Oregon State may be enough to get Stanford into the tournament. They may have another opportunity for a resume-boosting win in the Pac-12 tournament. However, Saturday feels like a must-have for the Cardinal, or else they may be NIT-bound.

Can Pac-12 Basketball Get Seven Teams Into the Tournament in 2020?

The Pac-12 getting six teams into the tournament looked like a pipeline dream a month ago. Now, they could get seven teams into the tournament. Teams that were afterthoughts not too long ago, like Arizona State and UCLA, have turned a corner and have become different teams in the second half of the conference season. It will be interesting how the selection committee ultimately views the parity in the conference, but this season it looks like it has helped the conference. A season after having only three teams in the tournament, the Pac-12 could have more than half their teams dancing in the NCAA Tournament.

Pac-12 Basketball: A Weekend of Parity Shakes Up Standings

Pac-12 Basketball- Oregon UCLA

The 2020 Pac-12 Basketball season turned on its head this past weekend as parity was on full display. Arizona State has surprised many, as they took over sole possession of first place in the conference, going 2-0 against Oregon and Oregon State. Oregon, Colorado, and Arizona were only able to split their games.

First off, here is how the top seven teams in the Pac-12 Standings looked before last Thursday night’s games:

Colorado 9-4

Oregon 9-4

Arizona 8-4

Arizona State 8-4

USC 8-5

UCLA 8-5

Stanford 5-7

Here is how the top seven looked by the end of the weekend:

Arizona State 10-4

Oregon 10-5

UCLA 10-5

Colorado 10-5

Arizona 9-5

USC 8-7

Stanford 7-7

Pac-12 Basketball has been as unpredictable as ever in 2020. Who would have thought a few weeks ago that Oregon would lose a road to Arizona State then beat Arizona in Tuscon? Who would have thought that Colorado would sweep the season series with USC, but lose to a UCLA team that looked lost in Mick Cronin’s first year in charge?

Arizona State Takes First Place in Pac-12 Basketball 2020

The Sun Devils had just lost to Washington State in Pullman on January 29, 2020, to drop to 3-4 in league play. Since then, they have racked up seven straight wins. The Sun Devils squeaked by Oregon State, 74-73, on Saturday night. However, they got their signature win of the season last Thursday against Oregon, 77-72. The Sun Devils never trailed in the game, and the team is coming together at the right time. They had to take advantage of their opportunity against the Ducks. Now, the Sun Devils are looked at as a team that could cut down the nets in Vegas at the Pac-12 Tournament.

Listen to the Best Pac-12 Football-Basketball Podcast

Colorado Lets Golden Opportunity Slip on Senior Day

The Buffaloes went 1-1 in their last two home games of the 2019-20 season, as they beat USC and then lost to UCLA. However, against USC they saw a 12-point second-half lead dwindle to one before pulling out a 70-66 win. Against UCLA, the Buffaloes led by 10 points in the second half before UCLA used a 20-3 run to help them secure a 70-63 win. CU has now seen two double-digit second-half leads turn into losses in two of their last four games. The Buffaloes need to show much more consistency if they want to make a deep run in March. That consistency will need to start Thursday at California.

Oregon Rebounds with Huge Win At McKale Center Saturday

Oregon gave their fans some heart-pounding basketball this weekend. First off, the Ducks lost to Arizona State on Thursday, making Saturday’s game against Arizona at the McKale Center even more meaningful. It ended similarly to the first encounter between these two teams, as Oregon squeaked out a 1-point win in overtime, 73-72. Payton Pritchard led the way with 38 points in the victory. Oregon could be looking at a 13-5 finish in-conference, as they close the regular season with home games against Oregon State, California, and Stanford. However, with the parity in the conference, nothing is guaranteed.

Free Throws Achilles Heel for Arizona Against Oregon

Arizona beat Oregon State on Thursday but suffered another tough loss against Oregon. The Wildcats have now lost five straight games against the team that they have competed against as the face of Pac-12 Basketball the past few seasons. Arizona went 10-for-21 from the free-throw line against Oregon. In yet another overtime loss to the Ducks, the Wildcats left too many points on the floor. Arizona has a chance to strengthen their resume as they play USC and UCLA in their next two games.

UCLA Surging, Making Their Case for March

The Bruins had the signature win of their season against Colorado in Boulder on Saturday. On what was supposed to be a senior day celebration for the Buffaloes, the Bruins, led by Cody Riley and Tyger Campbell, were able to pull off the upset. This Bruins team that beat the Buffaloes lost to Cal State Fullerton in December. The Bruins improved to 10-5 in-conference. Mick Cronin has done a masterful job in conference play, and the Bruins could get a first-round bye in the conference tournament. The Bruins still have work to do to make the tournament, but they have two great opportunities against Arizona and Arizona State in the coming days.

USC Has Tough Weekend but has Opportunities Against Arizona Schools

USC lost to both Colorado and Utah this weekend, weakening their tournament hopes. The Trojans have been able to be competitive in Pac-12 play, but they do not have a truly signature win on their resume. Winning against conference-leading Arizona State on Thursday would be a start, but a win against Arizona on Saturday may get more national attention. Not being able to win on the road has hurt the Trojans. Defending home court is a must this week to keep their tournament hopes alive.

Stanford Needs to Finish 2020 Pac-12 Basketball Season Strong

Stanford got Oscar Da Silva back last Saturday in a loss against Arizona. With the help of Da Silva, the Cardinal took care of business against Washington and Washington State this week to get themselves back to .500 (7-7) in the conference. Stanford will have an opportunity this week to improve their resume if they are able to beat Colorado in a home game on Sunday. It will be interesting how the committee views the loss to Colorado where Da Silva got injured, and the subsequent game against Arizona State where he did not play. Stanford could have possibly won both games if Da Silva was in the lineup.

2020 Pac-12 Basketball Regular Season Will Be a Race to the Finish Line

Big games for the upcoming week include the Arizona schools going to Los Angeles to play USC and UCLA. All teams involved could bolster and hurt their resumes in these games. Colorado goes on the road against Stanford on March 1. Both teams could use another resume-building win.

With the surges of UCLA and Arizona State the past few weeks, there are now seven teams in the Pac-12 that could make the case for March. However, the committee will probably only choose five or six teams. There is a case for more, however. The parity in the Pac-12 has produced in a way this season that may get more teams into the tournament. Oregon, Colorado, and Arizona are regarded as the best teams, but the other teams’ abilities to beat these teams have helped their cause for March. It is sure to be a crazy last two weeks of the Pac-12 Basketball regular season before the conference tournament in Las Vegas.

NCAA Addressed NIL Compensation Before the United States Senate

College basketball is in full swing! The NCAA and college basketball fans are gearing up for the March Madness tournament.  In the weeks to come, fans will fill out brackets predicting which teams they believe will make it to the Final Four. The NCAA again stands to generate a billion dollars from the tournament, which is the organization’s biggest moneymaker of the year. Fans will relish in the excitement of Cinderella teams and major upsets. The NCAA will undoubtedly be raking in the money. However, the NCAA will also be spending money as it continues its work behind the scenes to preserve the amateur collegiate model. The farce of amateurism is being challenged at every turn. The challenge currently gaining the most traction is those from several state legislatures with name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation bills. 

States with Proposed NIL Compensation Bills

Several state legislatures have proposed legislation seeking to give college athletes the ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) and to sign with agents. Last year, the state of California signed the Fair Pay to Play Act into law. Since then,  several other states followed suit proposing similar legislation. While the Fair Pay to Play Act will not take effect until 2023, two similar bills in Florida may become effective much sooner. Florida currently has two college athlete name, image, and likeness bills before its state legislature. One is before the house and the other one is before its senate. State lawmakers are not the only ones seeking to expand college athlete rights. The federal lawmakers are too.

Specifically, Congressman Mark Walker introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act seeking to give college athletes NIL rights. Senator Chris Murphy released a series of reports detailing the myriad of reasons reform is necessary for college sports. All of these critiques of the current collegiate sports model have put the NCAA in the hot seat. The organization has been backed into a corner where it has no choice but the address the elephant in the room. In fact, the NCAA was forced to address that elephant at a Senate hearing last week. 

Name, Image, and Likeness Informational Podcast

The NCAA is in NIL Compensation Crisis Mode

The college athlete NIL compensation issue has taken the NCAA by storm. The NCAA is in full crisis mode. They have realized that there is a strong possibility that several states could enact different laws to address NIL compensation. The NCAA does not want that to happen. As such, the NCAA has turned to the federal government for help. In fact, the organization has spent big money in an attempt to persuade federal lawmakers in their favor. The NCAA and two conferences spent at least $750,000 last year lobbying federal lawmakers to make reforms that favor the current collegiate model. The NCAA is sparing no expense to preserve amateurism.

Amateurism is the notion that college players simply play for the love game and are not paid. The NCAA purports that amateurism keeps collegiate sports distinct from professional sports. They further purport that if college athletes were paid, fans would lose interest. The NCAA maintains that its rules prohibiting payment help ensure that college athletes are not taken advantage of. As such, college athletes are not allowed to receive any type of payment outside of their cost-of-attendance scholarship or other NCAA approved benefits. However, many feel that the NCAA and the collegiate sports system as a whole are in fact taking advantage of the very athletes they claim to protect.

Why is College Athlete NIL Compensation on the Radar of so many Lawmakers?

College sports are a billion-dollar industry. Coaches, athletic directors, and conferences commissioners receive million-dollar salaries. Conferences receive billions of dollars from television broadcasting contracts. Top ranking NCAA officials receive million-dollar and upper six-figure salaries as well. Meanwhile, the athletes are limited to their scholarship. College athletes keep very strenuous and demanding schedules to perform their sport. Most spend at least 40 hours per week on athletically related activities. Despite their major time investment, they are not allowed to receive a bigger piece of the pie. A scholarship is valuable, however, the athletes deserve a bigger piece of the pie they generate for everyone else. It is for these reasons that lawmakers are working so hard to expand the rights of college athletes.

Last week, the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Manufacturing, Trade and Consumer Protection held a hearing on the name, image, and likeness matter in Washington, D.C. NCAA president Mark Emmert attended the hearing where he was questioned on the NCAA’s handling of a number of issues. Most notably he was questioned and criticized the NCAA’s handling of James Wiseman’s case.

Wiseman was suspended for 11 games for money that his mother received from Penny Hardaway. Wiseman’s mother took the money for moving expenses while Wiseman was in high school. At the time, Wiseman knew nothing of the transaction between his mother and Hardaway. The NCAA also ordered Wiseman to pay the money back. Due to the NCAA’s decision, Wiseman decided to leave college and prepare for the 2020 NBA Draft on his own. The NCAA’s unfairly punished Wiseman for something he had nothing to do with. 

The Senate Subcommittee Urged to NCAA to Swiftly Find a Solution 

In light of the NCAA’s poor handling of Wiseman’s case and several others in the past, several Senators did not appear to be overly confident that the NCAA would not drag their feet on the NIL compensation issue.  Emmert stated that he would work with the schools and relevant decision-makers to make a decision as soon as possible. However, Emmert also stated that the NCAA may need Congress’ assistance in developing a uniform manner to address the NIL compensation issue.

The NCAA desperately wants to avoid having several states with different NIL compensation laws. The Senators at the hearing urged the NCAA to quickly offer a solution to this issue. In April, the NCAA is expected to make another announcement about their plans for NIL compensation. Hopefully, it will be something meaningful for the athletes. Given the NCAA’s general reluctance to give athletes a bigger price of the pie, it seems doubtful. 

2020 Pac-12 Basketball Season: Setting Up for a Crazy Finish

2020 Pac-12 Basketball Season: Setting Up for a Crazy Finish

Pac-12 basketball has put itself in position to get five teams into the 2020 NCAA Tournament. Each team can improve their potential seed in the NCAA Tournament if they perform well. However, with the volatility of play in the 2020 Pac-12 Basketball season, multiple scenarios are in play as teams approach the home stretch of the regular season. 

Colorado Buffaloes Leading the 2020 Pac-12 Basketball Standings

Record: 19-5 (8-3 Pac-12)

Key wins: VS Dayton (in Chicago), VS Oregon

Bad losses: VS Oregon State, at UCLA

The Buffaloes are in line for a six seed in the 2020 NCAA Tournament as of right now. They have been able to pull off huge resume-building wins against Oregon and Dayton, who both got places in the Selection Committee’s Top 16 seeds as of right now. Even though they are first in the Pac-12 standings, the Buffaloes have not been respected nationally as much as a conference leader should be.

Colorado has a huge opportunity to make an impression on the committee when they head to Eugene to play Oregon on Thursday. The Buffaloes also have the opportunity to avenge both of their bad losses at Oregon State (Feb. 15) and at home against UCLA (Feb. 22). If the Buffaloes can win out after the Oregon game and beat opponents not named Arizona and Oregon in the Pac-12 tournament, they will probably stay on the six-line as far as the NCAA Tournament is concerned. However, if the Buffaloes can pull off the upset in Eugene, win out, and be impressive in the Pac-12 Tournament, a top-four seed could be in the cards for them.

Listen to the Best Pac-12 Football and Basketball Podcast

 Anchor // Apple Podcasts // Spotify // PocketCasts // Google Play // Stitcher // RadioPublic  

Oregon Ducks Still Regarded as Best Team in 2020 Pac-12 Basketball, but Bad Losses Mounting

Record: 18-6 (7-4 Pac-12)

Key wins: VS Arizona, VS Seton Hall (Battle 4 Atlantis)

Bad losses: VS North Carolina (Battle 4 Atlantis), at Washington State, at Oregon State

The Ducks were the preseason pick to win the Pac-12. They were also the only team in the Pac-12 who was in the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee’s Top 16 seeds as of right now. Oregon was listed as a 4-seed.

However, the Ducks received that seeding before losing to Oregon State in Corvallis on Saturday night. This loss is the second bad conference road loss the Ducks have had. They have to show consistency on the road and defend home court to stay in position to obtain a top-four seed. Their first test defending home court will be Thursday against the conference-leading Colorado Buffaloes.

Arizona Wildcats: Inconsistency Caught Up to Them on Home Floor

Record: 16-7 (6-4 Pac-12)

Key wins: VS Colorado, VS Illinois

Bad losses: VS St. John’s (Al Attles Classic), at Oregon State, VS UCLA

Arizona had only lost to Gonzaga on their home court before UCLA beat them by 13 points Saturday night. This loss is brutal for Arizona’s prospects of landing a top-four seed in the NCAA Tournament. Arizona needs to prove they can beat teams that they should beat, and their first test will be this Thursday when they are on the road to face California.

The Wildcats will have another opportunity to beat Oregon at home on February 22 after losing to them by one point in an overtime thriller in Eugene. If Arizona can win this game and perform well in the conference tournament, there could be an argument for them to be a top-four seed. Right now it looks like they are in line for a spot on the five or six line.

Stanford Cardinal Have to Possibly Navigate Next Few Games Without Oscar da Silva

Record: 16-7 (5-5 Pac-12)

Key wins: VS Oregon 

Bad losses: at California, VS Oregon State, at Utah

The Cardinal are 1-4 in their last five games. They have losses to California, Oregon State, Utah, and Colorado. However, they have a huge win against Oregon sandwiched in between two two-game losing streaks.

Stanford may be without big man Oscar da Silva for the foreseeable future after he suffered a head laceration. Oscar da Silva collided with Colorado forward Evan Battey in Saturday’s game, and had to get stitches because he was bleeding. The injury could have been worse, but luckily da Silva is “going to be okay,” according to Stanford spokesperson Zack Reynolds.

Stanford plays Arizona, Oregon, and Colorado each one more time before the conference tournament. They will probably have to win at least one of these three games to be ensured of a tournament selection, and they cannot have any more bad losses.

USC Trojans Need to Right Ship After Three-Game Losing Streak

Record: 17-7 (6-5 Pac-12)

Key Wins: VS LSU (Basketball Hall of Fame Classic), VS Stanford

Bad Losses: at Washington

USC is currently on a three-game losing streak. However, they are still being projected as a nine or ten seed in most brackets. The Trojans could add to their resume, as they still have a trip to Boulder to play Colorado and a home date with Arizona on their schedule. They are in the same boat as Stanford. If the Trojans can win one of these two games and have an admirable showing in the Pac-12 Tournament, they will probably make the tournament.

USC beat an LSU team that was undefeated in SEC play before losing two straight this past week. However, they have a stinker on their resume, as they lost by 32 points to the last-place team in the conference in Washington. It will be interesting to see how the committee judges this loss by the Trojans, because Washington was still with point guard Quade Green in this game. Green was ruled academically ineligible for the rest of the regular season after this game.

Team That Still Has Opportunities in 2020: Arizona State

15-8 (6-4 Pac-12)

Key Wins: VS Arizona, VS USC

Bad Losses: @ Washington State

Arizona State will probably be living life on the bubble until Selection Sunday on March 15. They are 5-1 in their last six games, with wins against Arizona and USC. If the Sun Devils can beat Stanford and USC and have a decent showing in the conference tournament, they can make an argument for being included in the field in March.

However, Arizona is the best win of the season for the Sun Devils. Washington State is their only truly bad loss, but beating Oregon will be more important for Arizona State than it will be for any other team playing them the rest of the way. Coupling an Oregon win with a run in the Pac-12 Tournament will make a decision on whether the Sun Devils should be in the tournament a tough one for the committee.

Rest of Teams in Pac-12 Need to Win 2020 Conference Tournament to Make the Field

Washington, Washington State, Oregon State, California, UCLA, and Utah all have to hope they can have a magical weekend in Las Vegas from March 11-14. All of these teams have beat at least one of the teams that are projected to be in the tournament. However, winning the conference tournament ensures an automatic berth into the tournament. With how the Pac-12 has been playing out, anything is possible in the tournament.

As of right now Colorado, Oregon, Arizona, Stanford, and USC look like the five teams that will be representing Pac-12 Basketball in the 2020 NCAA Tournament. With how college basketball has been this season, there will probably be madness that occurs before March. It will be interesting to see if there is a team that can achieve consistency in a Pac-12 conference where consistency seems impossible. If the beginning of February college basketball has been any indication, the rest of the month will be crazy.

Pac-12 Conference Needs To Get Six Teams Into NCAA Tournament

2020 Pac-12 Basketball Season: Setting Up for a Crazy Finish

The 2020 College Basketball season has already brought the madness that is usually seen in March. There is no clear-cut favorite, and the AP Top 25 constantly changes from week-to-week. Pac-12 Basketball has brought the craziness in the 2019-20 season, as unpredictability has been the theme of the conference so far.

The Pac-12 only had three teams in the NCAA Tournament in 2019 (Washington, Arizona State, and Oregon) and one team in the National Invitation Tournament (Colorado). This season, the conference is looking to have far more teams in the tournament.

Joe Lunardi, the most prominent “Bracketologist”, had five teams in his NCAA Tournament field for 2020 as of January 21. These five teams include Oregon, Colorado, Arizona, Stanford, and USC.

The Pac-12 Basketball Favorites: Oregon, Colorado, Arizona

The Pac-12 conference could end up making an argument to have six or seven teams make the tournament come Selection Sunday, which is March 15.

Oregon is widely regarded to as the best team in Pac-12 basketball. Currently, the Ducks are 15-4, with a 4-2 mark in Pac-12 play. Led by senior Payton Pritchard, the Ducks have impressive non-conference wins against Memphis and Seton Hall at neutral sites. They also won an overtime thriller against Michigan. However, Oregon lost to Washington State this past Thursday. The Ducks have not always been consistent but should be at least a top-4 seed come tournament time.

Colorado is one of the most experienced teams in the Pac-12, led by junior McKinley Wright IV. The Buffaloes have an effective supporting cast with Tyler Bey, D’Shawn Schwartz, and Evan Battey to name a few, but sometimes the offense looks stagnant, especially in losses against Kansas and this past Saturday against Arizona. The Buffaloes have wins against Oregon and Dayton which should help their cause. If they can build upon their 14-4 (3-2 Pac-12) record, they should be strongly considered to be a top-4 seed come March.

Listen to the Best Pac-12 Football and Basketball Podcast

The Arizona Wildcats are having a bounce-back season in wake of the bribery scandal involving DeAndre Ayton a few years ago. The Wildcats are 13-5 (3-2 Pac-12) this season, but also have been inconsistent thus far in conference play. They have defended home court in conference play, defeating opponents by an average of 21.7 points per game. However, they lost to both Oregon and Oregon State.

Pac-12 Basketball NCAA Tournament Hopefuls: Stanford and USC

USC and Stanford are currently the top two teams in the conference standings, with each having a 4-1 conference record, respectively. USC won against Stanford in Los Angeles this past Saturday 82-78. The Trojans and Cardinal have both not been shown any respect nationally. Neither team is ranked, but they are both 15-3 this season.

Stanford is USC’s most notable win, however. The Trojans lost by 32 to Washington in conference play, and Oregon will be the first ranked team they play this season. The only ranked team Stanford has played was Kansas, and they lost 72-56.

Non-Conference Schedule Hurting Pac-12 Basketball

The Pac-12 as a conference needs to work on their non-conference schedule in basketball, especially given how the conference was perceived at tournament time last year. Larry Scott’s goal should be to have at least half the league in the NCAA Tournament each season.

The conference needs to have a partnership with one of the other major conferences. The Big Ten/ACC Challenge and Big 12/SEC Challenge are both great for college basketball and bolster both conference’s resumes. The Pac-12 should look to possibly partner with the Big East or even one of the other conferences to help with the non-conference schedule.

Best Non-Conference Win For Pac-12 Basketball: Washington Over Baylor

Washington beat Baylor 67-64 in the Armed Forces Classic on November 8 in Anchorage, Alaska. Baylor was just awarded the number-one spot in the AP Poll on Monday. Washington has struggled in conference play with a 2-4 record. The Huskies will be the most prominent Pac-12 teams that will be living life on the bubble until March because they beat Baylor.

In the end, there should be at least four teams in the NCAA Tournament for the Pac-12. USC should end up getting in if they end with a winning record in conference play. Beyond that, Washington is the conference’s best hope to get half the teams from the “conference of champions” into the tournament. The Pac-12 needs to live up to its slogan and accomplish this feat. The season has been crazy, but hopefully the committee will take notice of the product the Pac-12 is putting out there this season.

NCAA Aims to Stop Graduate Transfers in College Football and Basketball

NCAA is trying to block Graduate transfers in college football and basketball

Millions tuned in to watch the Men’s March Madness Championship game. The University of Virginia (UVA) took on Texas Tech in a game that turned out to be a thrilling, seat clinching exhibition. College basketball fans witnessed UVA clinch its first NCAA Championship when they defeated Texas Tech in overtime. While it was a first for UVA, the game may have been the last for graduate transfers like Matt Mooney and Tariq Owens of Texas Tech as the NCAA aims to stop graduate transfers.

Mooney and Owens landed in the Final Four due to one of the NCAA’s rare rules that actually benefits college athletes. That rule is the graduate transfer rule. However, that rare benefit that the college athletes receive may be reduced drastically if the NCAA adopts a proposed change later this month.

College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

The Graduate Transfer Rule

The current graduate transfer rule gives college athletes a certain level of autonomy. The graduate transfer rule allows college athletes who have completed their four-year degree and have remaining eligibility to transfer to another school and compete as a graduate transfer without having to sit out a year. The athlete must enroll in a graduate program. The current graduate transfer rule actually makes sense. An athlete who has remaining eligibility and has completed his undergraduate degree at one university should be free to use his remaining eligibility at the graduate school of his choice.

The rule allows college athletes to freely decide where to pursue their graduate education while providing the opportunity for them to continue playing the sport they love. Due to the freedom the rule provides college athletes to take control over their careers, it should come as no surprise that the rule is under fire.

Critics Issues With the Graduate Transfer Rule

Some feel that college athletes abuse the system. Critics argue that college athletes only use the rule as an opportunity to play in hopes of making it to the pros, rather than focusing on their graduate degree. Some liken the graduate transfer rule to the one-and-done rule because some graduate transfers leave after only playing one year. A study from 2012 found that only one-third of men’s basketball and one-quarter of football graduate transfers earn their graduate degree after two years. Due to this concern, a reform to the graduate transfer rule has been proposed.

The New Proposal

The proposal requests that colleges commit to providing two years of scholarship to each graduate transfer unless the athlete completes the degree in one year. In sum, the school must be willing to give up a scholarship the next year for each graduate transfer they take unless the graduate transfer finishes his degree in a year. This proposed rule change will only affect men’s and women’s basketball and football. That is right, this change will only affect the major revenue-producing sports.

If Adopted the Proposal Will Essentially do Away With Graduate Transfers

There are several issues with this proposal. One is that it is not practical to think that any graduate student will finish their program in one year. This is especially true in regards to college athletes, who are balancing the demands of their sport with academics. Another issue is that if this rule is adopted, graduate transfers will no longer be an attractive option to coaches. Most coaches will not want to forfeit a scholarship for the next season to get a graduate transfer or two. The benefits simply do not outweigh the cost. For this reason, the proposed change would drastically limit college athletes’ ability to seek opportunities as graduate transfers.

College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

This proposal does not benefit college athletes at all. It takes away college athletes’ ability to pursue a graduate degree of their choosing while playing. Yes, an athlete could play as a graduate if he remains at his original school. However, that may still put the athlete at a disadvantage. What if the original university does not have the athlete’s desired graduate program? Now the athlete is unfairly forced to chose between their preferred graduate program and what is probably their last opportunity to play their sport on the big stage.

Another issue is that yet again, the rule unfairly affects the athletes who participate in the major revenue-producing sports. This very fact shows that the proposal has little to do with making sure athletes are getting their graduate degrees. This proposal is all about control. Proponents of the proposal want to control every move men’s basketball and football players make. There is nothing about this proposal that benefits the college athletes. It does the opposite by severely limiting men’s and women’s basketball players and football players options.

What Will the NCAA Do?

Will the NCAA keep the current system, which serves as a major benefit to many athletes? Or will the NCAA in typical fashion swoop in and severely limit the college athletes options? The NCAA will most likely do the latter. This is true especially given the fact that NCAA President Mark Emmert stated that he would not be surprised if the rule was revised.

James Wiseman Decision and the NIL Compensation Timeline Proves NCAA is not Rushing to Change

NCAA Name Image Likeness James Wiseman

The NCAA has done it again! The billion-dollar non-profit organization demonstrated twice last week that it’s primary objective is protecting the sham of amateurism. First, the NCAA proved that it will be dedicated to protecting their self proclaimed noble objective even when it makes no sense and hurts it’s beloved “student-athletes”. The NCAA’s ruling in the James Wiseman case does exactly that. It makes no sense and is harmful to James Wiseman. Secondly, the NCAA demonstrated that they have no intention of allowing college athletes to “benefit” from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) anytime soon when they released their NIL compensation timeline. In their announcement, the NCAA reaffirmed that any college athlete NIL compensation will be consistent with the current “collegiate model.”

The James Wiseman Ruling

Chase Young James Wiseman

The NCAA ruled that potential number one NBA draft pick, James Wiseman, will serve a 12 game suspension and donate $11,500 to charity for a transaction that transpired between Wiseman’s mother and Penny Hardaway. When Wiseman was in high school Penny Hardaway gave his mother $11,500 for moving expenses. At the time, Wiseman was unaware of the transaction between Hardaway and his mother. Hardaway was not Wiseman’s coach although he later became Wiseman’s high school and college coach. Even though Wiseman did not have anything to do with the moving expenses Hardaway gave to his mother, the NCAA decided that he should be punished anyway. How does this make sense?

The answer is that it does not make common sense, it only makes NCAA sense. Per the NCAA’s rules, it is reasonable for Wiseman to serve a 12 game suspension for something he did not do. It is reasonable to require a “student-athlete” to pay what amounts to an $11,500 fine to a charity for an “impermissible benefit”. This is reasonable from an NCAA perspective because no college athlete is allowed to receive any benefit that is not NCAA approved. From a common-sense perspective, this punishment is completely irrational. A rational person would wonder why is Wiseman being punished? He did not do anything wrong. A rational person would also ask where is a “student-athlete” supposed to get that kind of money?

How Can James Wiseman get the Money Without Violating the NCAA’s Rules?

Wiseman’s sport does not allow him enough time to work to earn that kind of money. Perhaps, his family or a close friend could loan it to him. No, that will not work because that is not permissible, just ask Chase Young. Perhaps, random people could donate the money to Wiseman through GoFundMe like ESPN analyst Jay Williams called for people to do.

This seems like a plausible way for Wiseman to get the money. People who feel that Wiseman has been wronged could offer a helping hand. There is only one problem with this approach. Wiseman would not be able to accept the money because accepting the money would likely result in another NCAA violation. Really, what is Wiseman to do to pay this excessive fine that the NCAA has placed on him all in the name “amateurism”?

The NCAA’s NIL Compensation Timeline is a Stalling Tactic​

In addition to the James Wiseman decision, the NCAA showed its resistance to change when it released it’s NIL timeline. When the NCAA released its very lengthy NIL compensation timeline it became clear that the NCAA is stalling. Per the timeline, the NCAA will not vote on the issue until January 2021. This should come as no surprise. Afterall the NCAA is only addressing the issue after being forced to.

NCAA Name Image Likeness NIL Pay college athletes

The NCAA was Forced to Address NIL Compensation

The NCAA formed a working group to address issues surrounding college athlete name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation. They were forced to address the issue under pressure from several state legislatures that introduced bills seeking to allow college athlete NIL compensation. The NCAA also faced pressure from Congress as Congressman Mark Walker introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act. In October, California became the first state to allow college athlete NIL compensation when Governor Newsom signed the Fair Pay to Play Act into law. In October, the NCAA released the findings of the NIL working group. However, the NCAA is not going down without a fight.

When the working group’s findings were released, it became clear that the NCAA is still trying to retain as much power as possible. It has also become clear that the NCAA is going to give college athletes as little rights as possible. The NCAA is dedicated to retaining the current “collegiate model”. The findings did not provide much clarity on the NCAA’s stance on the issue. In fact, it only led to more questions. It seemed like a stalling tactic to slow the momentum of the progress of the NIL compensation movement. The timeline proves that it is a stalling tactic. However, their tactics are not working as Florida is considering legislation that could allow college athletes to profit from their NIL as early as July 2020.

Wiseman’s Decision and the NCAA’s NIL Compensation Timeline Demonstrates that the NCAA will not Change

The NCAA’s decision in Wiseman’s case and the NIL compensation timeline proves that the NCAA is not genuine in making meaningful changes in college sports. The NCAA is only willing to take half measures. The NCAA only wants to give the appearance of change. Their primary concern is retaining control of their billion-dollar cash cow. The NCAA remains dedicated to their cause, even when it is so clearly wrong. Their decision in the James Wiseman case is clearly wrong. The NCAA’s primary motive is showing that they are still in control and dedicated to preserving amateurism at all cost. Once again, the NCAA has proven that some sort of legislation is necessary to push the college athletes’ rights movement forward.

Pressure is on for the NCAA Name, Image, Likeness (NIL) Working Group

NCAA Name Image Likeness NIL Pay college athletes

California Governor Gavin Newsom created a firestorm when he signed the Fair Pay to Play Act into law. Starting in 2023, college athletes in California will be able to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). They will also be able to sign with agents. After the act became law, several states announced plans to enact similar legislation. Among those states, was the state of Flordia. Two lawmakers in Florida proposed bills seeking to give college athletes including NCAA players the ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). Last week, Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis, endorsed the proposed legislation. This is a major development regarding college athlete rights. It could mean that if either of the proposed bills makes it to DeSantis’ desk, he will likely sign it into law. Therefore, Florida could become the next state to allow college athletes to profit from their NIL.

However, the NCAA still has a chance to get out ahead of this NIL compensation issue. The NCAA could amend its rules to allow college athletes to profit from their NIL. The NCAA already has a working group set to address the issue soon. What would happen if the NCAA did just that and allowed college athletes to profit from their NIL? Would that make the Fair Pay to Play Act a non-issue? Would the federal government still enact a law addressing the issue? Before these questions can be answered, it is important to understand why so many state and federal lawmakers have come out in support of college athletes’ rights.

The Reason So Many Legislators are Interested in College Athletes’ Rights

The short answer is because it is the right thing to do. College sports are a billion-dollar industry. It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the blatant inequities in college sports. The benefits that college athletes receive pales in comparison to the benefits that their labor bestows upon others. For example, It was recently reported that several high profile college coaches have access to private jets for personal use. Access to such amenities are apart of their contracts.

As if it was not enough for some coaches to make severely more money than the governor of the state in which they coach, they have to have access to private jets too.

It is things like this that make it extremely hard to argue that college athletes should not be allowed to have a bigger piece of the college sports pie. Governor DeSantis realized this fact when he was attending a football game. His reason for endorsing the proposed legislation stems from him realizing that members of the marching band can make money promoting music on their YouTube channel. However, the football players who perform in the same field do not have a similar ability to profit from their talents. It is this inherent inequity and unfairness between the rights and abilities of college athletes versus those of other students that have sparked the interest of so many lawmakers.

What Happens if the NCAA Amends its Rules to Allow NIL Compensation?

While state and federal lawmakers are busy drafting college athletes’ rights legislation, the NCAA’s working group plans to address the issue. The working group is expected to announce its findings and recommendations very soon. The pressure is certainly on for the NCAA. Everyone is waiting to see if the NCAA will make recommendations that actually benefit college athletes. If the NCAA does amend its rules to allow college athletes to profit from their NIL, what will that mean for the Fair Pay to Play Act and other proposed legislation?

A World Where the NCAA Allows College Athletes to Profit From Their NIL

If the NCAA amends its rules in a meaningful way to allow NIL compensation, there is a chance that the NCAA could make the need for legislation go away. The Fair Pay to Play Act is not set to go into effect until 2023. Accordingly, the NCAA has time to remedy this situation themselves. However, in order to accomplish that the NCAA has to be willing to make meaningful change and allow college athletes to profit from their NIL and sign with agents with essentially no strings attached. The NCAA should not try to “tether” the endorsements to education or subject them to any other stipulation. The NCAA should do the right thing and allow college athletes to profit from their NIL like the Fair Pay to Play Act other proposed legislation intends to do.

If the NCAA does that there will not be a need for legislation and it will make the Fair Pay to Play Act obsolete. However, the NCAA’s track record paints a pretty bleak picture that they will do that. Furthermore, the stance that members of the working group have taken on the issue does not lead one to believe that meaningful change will be coming from the working group. Based on this, it is likely that some form of legislation will be necessary. However, the true outcome of the NIL compensation working group remains to be seen.

Like Dominos, States are Falling into the College Athlete NIL Movement

compensate College Athletes

Last week, California Governor Gavin Newsom set a trend when he signed the Fair Pay to Play Act into law on LeBron James’ hit show The Shop. The new law will take effect in 2023. The Fair Pay to Play Act will give college athletes in California the ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). Specifically, college athletes will be allowed to garner endorsement deals and otherwise monetize their NIL without losing eligibility. The law also allows college athletes to sign with agents. The Fair Pay to Play Act is proving to be a trendsetter. Several states have announced plans to join the college athlete NIL movement.

Prior to the Fair Pay to Play Act being signed into law, a few other states had plans to introduce similar legislation to comp. Since the Fair Pay to Play Act became law states in almost every region of the country have announced plans to create similar legislation. The NCAA’s threats to ban California colleges from post-season play has been no match for legislators who are determined to do what is right for college athletes. These legislators are determined to create a more equitable college athletics system.

Currently, college athletes propel a billion-dollar college sports industry and are limited to a cost-of-attendance scholarship for their efforts. Meanwhile, coaches’ salaries continue to grow and the non-profit NCAA generates a billion-dollars per year. Several state and federal lawmakers are determined to give college athletes a bigger piece of the pie. Let’s take a look at the states that have joined the college athlete NIL movement since the passage of the Fair Pay to Play Act.

States With Plans to Introduce College Athlete NIL Legislation

In the midwest, Illinois and Minnesota state lawmakers have announced plans to introduce a college athlete NIL bills. Pennsylvania and Maryland are both considering introducing legislation similar to the Fair Pay to Play Act. Several lawmakers in Nevada have stated that they would consider introducing similar legislation. A lawmaker in Kentucky is reportedly drafting a bill addressing college athlete compensation. Perhaps the most notable state to join the college athlete NIL movement is the state of Florida.

Two Florida lawmakers have already filed bills. On October 4, Chip LaMarca filed HB 287. This bill seeks to allow college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. If signed into law, it will become effective on July 1, 2020. Prior to HB 287, Florida representative Kionee McGhee filed HB 251. That bill is also set to become effective on July 1, 2020. HB 251seeks to allow college athletes to receive “specified compensation.” The bill will also create a Florida College System Athlete Name, Image, and Likeness Task Force. With these two bills, Florida is bound to give college athletes the ability to profit from their NIL.

Download the Podcast Detailing CA and the Other States Legislation

The College Athlete NIL Movement has a Potential Newcomer on the Federal Level

The current collegiate model is not only being challenged on the state level. The collegiate model is being challenged at the federal level as well. Earlier this year, U.S. Congressman Mark Walker introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act. The NCAA is exempt from federal taxation as an organization that organizes amateur sports and national championships. The Student-Athlete Equity Act seeks to remove that exemption if the NCAA continues to enforce rules that prohibit college athletes from profiting from their NIL. In addition to this fight at the federal level, the NCAA is about to face another one.

A U.S. Congressman from Ohio is planning to introduce a federal bill similar to the Fair Pay to Play Act. Representative Anthony Gonzalez, a former Ohio State wide receiver, plans to introduce a federal bill that will allow college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Gonzalez would like to see NIL compensation become a reality before 2020. However, he may wait until the NCAA’s NIL working group releases its’ findings before introducing legislation.

Paying College Athletes has Bipartisan Support

As more state and federal lawmakers announce plans to introduce college athlete legislation, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the issue has bipartisan support. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have been vocal in support of the legislation. Perhaps this is because they all can see the blatant inequities in the current collegiate sports system. In a capitalist society, no one can reasonably support the notion that college athletes should be prohibited from profiting from their NIL. The bipartisan support will continue to grow. The NCAA will be forced to enact a meaningful change on the issue or sit back and watch lawmakers do it for them.

California Senate Bill 206 Fair Pay to Play Act Would be a Major Benefit to Impoverished Athletes

California Senate Bill 206 Fair Play Act NCAA Athletes

California is currently the hotbed for the pay-for-play debate in college sports. This is due to the Fair Pay to Play Act that is currently before the California state legislature. Two California state senators have taken action against the injustices that plague the current college sports system. Those senators are Nancy Skinner and Steven Bradford. Senators Skinner and Bradford introduced the Fair Pay to Play Act in hopes of creating a more equitable system for college athletes and particular NCAA athletes in California. The bill seeks to give those college athletes the ability to profit from the commercial use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). The athletes would also be able to sign with agents. The Fair Pay to Play Act has the potential to completely change the landscape of college athletics and the NCAA.

The Current Landscape of College Athletics

Currently, college athletes are not permitted to profit from their NIL for athletically related activities. Despite the NCAA’s best efforts to steer everyone away from this fact, college sports are a billion-dollar industry. Everyone gets rich except the players. Conferences and college sports officials garner billion-dollar television broadcasting deals. Coaches, athletic directors, and conference commissioners negotiate million-dollar salaries. Meanwhile, the athletes are limited to a cost-of-attendance scholarship and are prohibited from profiting from their name, image, and likeness. If an athlete seeks to make such a profit, the athlete will be deemed ineligible for competition by the NCAA. How is this fair? The answer is that it is not fair. The Fair Pay to Play Act seeks to remedy that injustice.

On Monday, the California State Assembly unanimously passed the bill 72-0. The bill will now go back to the State Senate for another vote. The bill was amended after it was originally passed in the State Senate. If the bill is passed again in the State Senate, it will go to Governor Gavin Newsome’s desk.

Governor Newsome should sign the bill into law because the Fair Pay to Play Act has the ability to create a more equitable system for college athletes in California. If signed into law, the bill will greatly benefit all college athletes attending school in California. However, the bill could have a profound effect on black college athletes; particularly those who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Fair Pay to Play Act could create an entirely new revenue stream for such athletes by allowing them to acquire a better quality of life not dependent on making it in professional sports.

The Make-up of the Labor Force that Drives the Billion-Dollar Industry

The two sports that generate the bulk of the revenue in college athletics are Division I Football and Division I Men’s basketball. An overwhelming majority of the athletes participating in those sports are African American. In 2018, roughly 48 percent of Division I football players were African American. In 2018, roughly 56 percent of Division I Men’s basketball players were African-American. Even in Division I Women’s basketball, 47 percent of the participants were African-American. Many of these players come from disadvantaged backgrounds and some live in poverty.

Roughly 86 percent of African-American college athletes come from families that live below the poverty line. Generally, many college athletes live at or below the federal poverty line. The National College Players Association conducted a study that compared the room and board portion of each school’s full athletic scholarship to the 2011 federal poverty line.  The study found that 85 percent of on-campus athletes and 86 percent of off-campus athletes lived below the federal poverty line. It is true that college athletes are now given cost-of-attendance stipends. However, in many cases, the cost-of-attendance stipend is not enough for athletes to take care of themselves and their families.

The Cost-of-Attendance Stipend is Simply not Enough

In January 2015, the Power 5 conferences voted to allow college athletes to receive cost-of-attendance stipends. Each school calculates the amount of their cost-of-attendance stipend by considering variables like transportation, tuition and fees, books, and personal expenses. Many college athletes use these stipends to support themselves and their families. For example, Deion Hair-Griffin played receiver for North Texas. He received approximately $3,136 as his cost-of-attendance stipend, which he used to help his mother. His mother sacrificed her food and struggled to pay bills so that her son could play football. Once Deion received the stipend he was able to alleviate some of his mother’s financial stress.

Similarly, Van Smith who played football at Clemson used part of his $388 monthly stipend to cover part of his younger brother’s high school football expenses. Myles Gaskins, who played football for the University of Washington, argued that the stipends are still not enough. Gaskins pointed out that the stipend amount would lead athletes to live below the poverty line due to the high rent cost in Seattle. The stipends have been beneficial to college athletes. However, it is still not enough. This is especially true for college athletes who come from poverty. The implementation of the Fair Pay to Play Act and cost-of-attendance stipends will vastly improve the lives of impoverished college athletes in California.

While the Benefit may not be the Same for all Athletes, all Athletes Stand to Benefit

Opponents of the Fair Pay to Play Act argue that the outcome of the bill will not be successful because it will not benefit all athletes. They argue that the bill will only prove beneficial to the highly sought after elite athletes. However, it is very likely that lower-profile athletes will benefit from this bill as well. Simply having the opportunity to garner an endorsement deal is a benefit. This benefit can go a long way for athletes who come from poverty. Let’s consider the perspective of two former college athletes on the issue of how beneficial the Fair Pay to Play Act will be to college athletes.

Former College Athletes Perspective on the Fair Pay to Play Act

Greg Camarillo is a former Stanford University football player who supports the bill. Mr. Camarillo stated that he is not sure that the bill would have benefited him because he was not a high profile athlete in college. However, he acknowledged the possibility of local businesses giving lower-profile athletes endorsement deals. Mr. Camarillo stated that in his view endorsements are the most realistic way for college athletes to receive payment because most schools cannot afford to pay athletes. He also stated that colleges should not have the power to take away college athletes’ ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness.

Travis Johnson is a California native and former Florida State football player. He believes that finding a way to pay college athletes is long overdue. Mr. Johnson recalled instances where athletes did not have enough money to buy groceries or to travel home for the holidays. He acknowledged that an extra $1,000 per month would go a long way. Mr. Johnson suggested that when a company is interested in endorsing the star linebacker, the company offer some type of deal to each player on the line. That way, even the lower-profile players will have an opportunity to benefit from the Fair Pay to Play Act. This bill could lead to the creation of such a system.

With the Fair Pay to Play Act, College Athletes will not Feel so Pressured to Turn Pro and Degree Completion will Likely Increase

Many college athletes leave school early for the pros because they are desperate to change their social-economic status. While some may wish to remain in college, they feel that they cannot afford to. The Fair Pay to Play Act has the ability to alleviate that stress by creating an avenue for college athletes to garner extra income. Furthermore, the Fair Pay to Play Act will provide financial opportunities for athletes who do not make it to the pros.

Approximately 4 percent of college basketball players were selected in the 2018 NBA draft and approximately 4 percent of college football were selected in the 2018 NFL draft. This means that only a small fraction of college athletes are given the opportunity to receive the true value of their athletic worth. Due to the NCAA’s rules, most college athletes miss their opportunity to take advantage of their skills when they are the most marketable. This simply is not right. The Fair Pay to Play Act can change this by giving all college athletes the ability to profit from their athletic abilities during their prime years in college. 

Opening the door for college athletes to sign endorsement deals, receive compensation from jersey sales and signed memorabilia, and to receive guidance from an agent while in college would dramatically improve the lives of college athletes, especially those who come from poverty. It would essentially create an avenue where college athletes can use their athleticism to build wealth while pursuing their education. Thus, equipping impoverished college athletes with the two most pertinent things needed to get out poverty – money, and education.  Therefore, the Fair Pay to Play Act should be signed into law if and when it reaches Governor Newsome’s desk.