[mattrp]

Well as I stated, I agree that an outright ban on outside work isn’t fair. So I do agree with you that it’s a little ridiculous the way the system is currently set up.

Also, I think the ncaa rulemaking concerns use of the athlete’s likeness — I’m pretty sure that would cover the school’s own use to promote their programs so in fact I think it means that the schools would also be paying the student athlete for that use. And that becomes the problem - in its current form it’s not well thought out.

But my point is slightly different: I’m saying the policy disproportionately impacts a few athletes at a few top schools. And doesn’t resolve the issue of allowing students the ability to earn an income if they need to or desire to. The ncaa is trying to thread a needle and in doing so is making bad policy. The only athletes who stand to benefit are going pro anyway... you’re telling me they can’t wait a few years and simply focus on their degree and supporting their school’s program?

[jalgos_eminator]

> And doesn’t resolve the issue of allowing students the ability to earn an income if they need to or desire to.

I don't understand what you're arguing here. This is exactly what this was meant to do, allow athletes to earn money on the side by themselves by getting endorsements, running camps, give private lessons, etc.

> you’re telling me they can’t wait a few years and simply focus on their degree and supporting their school’s program?

A decent number of them will flame out in the pros after making basically no money, even relatively high round draft picks. So no, they can't wait because their income is artificially being stunted by the NCAA and by extension the schools. College athletics is a $10 Billion industry, god forbid the athletes everyone watches on TV get a piece of the pie.