OT: UCF Kicker Ruled Ineligible by NCAA due to YouTube Channel
NCAA I guess just feels like making more enemies. Kid is just having fun and earning money for himself and family. I can understand if it was objectionable content but seems harmless enough (didn't see a lot of videos). I really don't think people were flocking to his page solely because he was a UCF kicker but that's his life and I can see why the content would revolve around it.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/07/31/college-football-player-loses-schol…
How dare he make money off his likeness!
Remember when Johnny Manziel made a ton of money signing autographs even though it was illegal in the eyes of the NCAA? People thought it wouldn't matter because he could make money in the pros! Welp....
Athletes should be able to make money doing whatever the fuck they want as long as it is legal in our country. Fuck the NCAA.
If you're looking for sympathy for your argument, maybe don't use Manziel as an example next time. ;-) That asshat "didn't make money in the pros" because he was an entitled, arrogant little shit.
not that Manziel is an asshat.. this is true... but that Texas A&M, the NCAA, the SEC, Adidas, ESPN etc. all made money off Manziel but he wasnt able to...
Based on twitter comments (I know, very reliable source), it sounds like he was told he could keep making money and keep his scholarship if he just stopped referencing the fact that he was a student athlete. He didn't comply so he accepted the consequences he knew were going to happen.
The NCAA was A-OK with him making money off his channel but that's not the main story.
They just told him he can't refer to the fact he's a student-athlete/football player. To me that seems pretty damn fair.
In fact, if I were a high profile player I'd go ahead and start my YouTube channel TODAY. People would recognize me and fans would still come to my page. I don't need Rashan Gary to say he's a football player at Michigan for me to know he's Rashan Gary.
Someone like Peppers? Same thing. This kid is a KICKER at UCF.
IMO, he's just trying to prove a point, which is fine...his right and one I don't completely disagree with. For me, I just think there are 100 other battles with the NCAA worth fighting for that I would put over not stating the fact you're a college athlete on your YouTube page.
Keep your page, keep giving your takes or getting clicks and views...find another way to show your coach how you out-tough people. But whatever, if this is the "stance" he wants to take of all the injustices...I'm not going to be the one to hate on him. But I will laugh and point.
Scott Frost's mom ratted him out to the NCAA. Plus, I am pretty sure his YouTube videos were stupid and he should get disqualified for that reason alone...
Scott Frost's mom is the Cersei of the NCAA football world.
Tough day for NCAA kickers.
Looking at this as an adult, I realize that Lucy is an asshole and a sociopath. Of course, Charlie is an idiot for falling for the same cheap trick, time and again. But still - Lucy lies to her "friend" without blinking, seriously injures him, and shows no remorse whatsoever. She's a budding Hannibal Lecter.
That really was a dark, dark cartoon. Peppermint Patty constantly sexually harrassing Charlie Brown. Pigpen was just a mess (totally filthy, with clouds of dirt-and-vermin flying about him), and Linus was clearly having some developmental issues.
Didn't they have any social workers in Peanutsville?
But they did have cheap psychiatric care, so there's that.
The psychiatrist was also the primary sociopath. And the general response of the audience to this, and to the sociopathic behavior, was laughter.
Schulz understood.
They had social workers, but they were hard to understand, because they spoke like this:
NCAA is correct here.
1) They asked him to demonetize his account a few months ago and he didn't.
2) If they allowed it, what's to prevent a bunch of fans from "watching" videos made by 5* players that enroll in school so they can get the ad money?
They're correct in the sense that their ruling is in accordance with the rules.
They're wrong in the sense that they have stupid archaic rules.
NCAA is going to have to make a choice: give players more of the pie OR let players make money off their talents and skills in the open market.
Or, players could choose to go off and make all that money without even entering college. Signing up to be held to account under the rules of the unverities (individually and collectively) is a voluntary thing. No one is forced to do it. Football players can go play in the CFL or Europe (or semi-pro) without ever going to college, and they can collect their millions for their skills and talents in the open market.
Nope.
1. It's an egregious rule that takes advantage those at a relative disadvantage.
2. The correct move would be to change the rule.
"1. It's an egregious rule that takes advantage those at a relative disadvantage. "
Maybe so but can you imagine a world where people are just allowed to break the rules they don't like? Because I can and I don't want to live there. Yeah, it's a stupid rule but it is one and he knew that.
Just curious.
No, I think that you are all alone in yours.
But you skipped the key part - #2. If they change the rule, then he's no longer breaking it. The NCAA should be able to identify the ongoing irrationality of the rule, and change the damn thing before penalizing yet another kid.
Except that the rule isn't irrational, and so there is no reason to change it. The kicker could have changed his irrational stance, but chose not to. That's on him.
What's to prevent boosters from giving $500 handshakes?
Nothing, and it's a lot more money for the athlete, and a lot less work than "watching" a bunch of YouTube videos that give the maker a very small % of add revenue. Paying athletes outright gets complicated, but they should absolutely be able to profit from their likeness.
So when a scouting service like let's say Rivals makes a bunch of videos of a 5 star player and gets a buch of ad money because fans of teams in pursuit of the 5 star player watch the video, you are ok with it.
But when that same 5 star athlete wants to make money off of his own name by making videos, you are against it?
It seems silly that the kid gave up a scholarship so that he could claim to be a UCF kicker, when the decision to claim to be a UCF kicker was sacrificed so that he could make the claim.
But, as we all agree, college kids make dumb decisions sometimes.
His Youtube hits were harder.
They told the kid he could still monetize the channel but take his football stuff off the page. Gave the kid a waiver so he could continue to play football and make some cash to send home to his family in Costa Rica. I wonder how much he made, because that feels like a silly move on his part.
Warnings to the kid aside, this isn't right. If the kid is kicking FGs on YouTube and making dollars, maybe it puts to question the connection, but frankly, the two appear unrelated.
So, how is it that Trajan Langdon gets paid to play minor league baseball while being a basketball player at Duke (Kenny Lofton - Arizona, Amir Garrett - St. John's), but Jeremy Bloom can't be an Olympic skiier and football player? And this kid can't be YouTube phenom?
NCFF.
EDIT: I admit to never checking his site to see what content he really has (cuz, don't care), but still don't view this as monetizing his athletics. Kids gonna have passions and follow them. He could end up the video editor for Star Wars 15.
At least they granted him a waiver to monetize his YT account. Maybe they will become more flexible as a result, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Jeremy Bloom was pretty good in college and played for a good Power 5 program.
some is stupid, and some is downright evil
Nah, this is on him. The NCAA was going to let him keep making money off his videos. He just had to stop referencing the fact that he was a UCF kicker. He didn't comply. That's just stupid on his part.
Why does it matter if he stated he was a UCF kicker? If it's ok for a school to use his likeness to sell tickets and merchandise, why can't he use the school's 'likeness'?
It's okay for the school to do it because he signed a waiver that allowed the school to do so. The school signed no such waiver.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I would have taken the free education. Depending on how much money he's making that may not be an issue. I don't follow him on youtube (or anybody for that matter) but things can get weird in terms of sustainabiity online wih your subscribers. Hopefully he made the right choice.
August 1st, 2017 at 10:45 PM ^
He was doing this before USF (UCF) and Bama players are already making more than USF (UCF) players.