Home
NCAA Football 14 News Post



You read that headline right. As the Ed O'Bannon vs. the NCAA lawsuit continues onwards in the courts, both sides are jockeying for what could be a blockbuster trial by next summer.

In a recently filed study, EA and the College Licensing Company (CLC) claim that less than 25% of all men's basketball and football players were actually represented in EA's college athletic video games with their correct height, weight, home state and position.

EA and the CLC, while arguing against the fact they don't use college athletes is claiming that they do in fact use some college athlete likenesses right down to their correct height, weight, home state and position. This seems highly counterproductive simply because we don't know the exact boundaries for how the study was done. If it required an exact match, then a player being 10-20 pounds too heavy or light would mean they weren't exactly represented, which seems to actually indicate more players than claimed are actually somewhat well represented within the game.

Earlier in the winter, it was revealed that some NCAA e-mails tend to indicate that they knew about the use (but not use) of players likenesses in all but name.

"The issue for me is that the names and likenesses are rigged into the games now by illegal means, meaning that many of the video game players have the features, it's just that our membership doesn't benefit from it," then NCAA Vice President Greg Shaheen wrote.

The e-mails also revealed that the NCAA and EA have looked at trying to find ways to include real player names into the games, with no definitive ways to pull that feat off just yet.

Thanks to the O'Bannon lawsuit, talk about whether to pay college football players is becoming a hot topic. This morning, Oklahoma Head Coach Bob Stoops chimed in, "I don’t get why people say these guys don’t get paid. It’s simple, they are paid quite often, quite a bit and quite handsomely."

The O'Bannon and Sam Keller lawsuit alleges that the NCAA and EA Sports, amongst other entities, have been illegally profiting off of college athletes likenesses with no direct return to the athletes. This is an exceptionally important case which we have been following for several years now, as EA Sports stands to lose $1 billion if an unfavorable ruling for EA is handed down.

It is our position that if Keller and O'Bannon do prevail, college football video games will likely cease to exist due to much higher licensing costs and little return on investment.

Where do you stand on this case as of right now?

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All
NCAA Football 14 Videos
Member Comments
# 41 Herky @ 04/11/13 06:31 PM
O'Bannon and Keller both weren't good enough to stick in the pros so they have to try and make money this way.

What a couple of no talent hacks.
 
# 42 ActLikeYouCrow @ 04/11/13 06:50 PM
i always felt this was a crappy argument when posters would use it as an excuse for ea not having accurate rosters. especially when the inaccuracies never seemed to hurt the traditional powers whose fanbase you would expect to be buying the most games. this is new territory, there was no legal line that made ea and the ncaa safe whether we're talking 25% completely accurate or 90% mostly accurate.
 
# 43 loccdogg26 @ 04/11/13 07:02 PM
What u guys fail to realize is that this lawsuit was coming of regardless of Keller's name is on there or not.
 
# 44 loccdogg26 @ 04/11/13 07:27 PM
Speaking of likeness issues: when throwback jerseys are sold who gets the money the school or the player? Didn't EA go through the same thing by putting retired players on Madden? Ie Jim Brown and others.
 
# 45 Sundown2600 @ 04/11/13 09:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herky
O'Bannon and Keller both weren't good enough to stick in the pros so they have to try and make money this way.

What a couple of no talent hacks.
Herky this is not the root of the problem. You can diss O'Bannon and Keller all day and that's cool, but it's all about cause and effect. If the NCAA school presidents actually cared nearly as much about their student athletes as they did about making money for their respective schools and conferences a lot of the mess you are seeing today would not exist.

This Keller/ O'Bannon situation is a by-product of decades of mismanagement and incompetence on the part of the NCAA.
 
# 46 MafiosoNYY @ 04/11/13 09:57 PM
So what happens if the players sue the NCAA for using their likeness on TV? Or jerseys, memorabilia, etc.? Oh of course, they have the rights to use those without paying the players. But according to Greg Shaheen, only the NCAA can screw the NCAA players over by not paying them. That's why he wants to get more money for the NCAA, and not give a dime to the players the suit is about. lol what a joke
 
# 47 NDAlum @ 04/11/13 11:39 PM
Can I file a lawsuit for EA leaving me out of MVP college baseball? I was sooooo pissed.
 
# 48 bxphenom7 @ 04/12/13 01:39 AM
After just being voted "Worst Company in America" (undeserving, of course. I mean there was BP, etc.), EA does it again! lol
 
# 49 JayD @ 04/12/13 08:15 AM
Uh screw you Keller
 
# 50 IlluminatusUIUC @ 04/12/13 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pielet
The NCAA likeness clause they force the students to sign gives them their likeness for "this universe and any an all other universes". That seem reasonable to you? You're falling for this deception. You "getting your college paid" is a one year contract. You suck, guess what, bye bye college being paid for. You're injured? Oh sucks to be you, bye bye scholarship.

The NCAA deserves this. They've been running a massive business enterprise in the guise of "student athletes". No different than the "charity" tax exempt bowl enterprise.
Yeah, the free college education doesn't apply to every athlete. Some of whom are are partial or no scholarship at all and yet still have to abide by the NCAA's draconian rules to maintain eligibility. And as you point out, that scholarship can get yanked at several points for many reasons. It's only in the last few years that the NCAA has allowed schools to offer multi-year guarantees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolt957
In a way, I don't think Sam Keller wins anyway because the NCAA, themselves, uses these players' identities and likenesses and they've NEVER been payed. So why target the video game company? He should be going at the NCAA. But either way, I think it's a lost for him, regardless.
Er, he is. The NCAA is a named defendant.

I like the NCAA football series quite a bit, but I think the NCAA and the universities have been playing a rigged game for a long time. The end result may not be that the schools have to pay the players (nor should it be IMO) but that players are allowed to be paid by third parties. And I don't know if that's really a bad option TBH.

FWIW, this exact issue was on The Daily Show this week

(http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/th...tly-fair-rules)
 
# 51 Cryolemon @ 04/12/13 02:39 PM
I've been saying for a long time that the answer to this really is have players sign a voluntary form when they join a D1 college sports team that says "I give [school name] and the NCAA the permission to use my name and likeness for any reasonable and lawful purpose, including but not limited to, marketing, TV and video games". Anyone who doesn't sign isn't in the game and gets replaced in the most generic way possible (all QBs are white, 6'5", 250, pocket passers, etc)
 
# 52 da ThRONe @ 04/12/13 06:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkcil
Pay them already...the "value" of an education is highly subjective. The value of a dollar...not so much.
I don't know if the NCAA should pay them. However they shouldn't block them from getting paid from other legit sources though.
 
# 53 da ThRONe @ 04/12/13 06:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryolemon
I've been saying for a long time that the answer to this really is have players sign a voluntary form when they join a D1 college sports team that says "I give [school name] and the NCAA the permission to use my name and likeness for any reasonable and lawful purpose, including but not limited to, marketing, TV and video games". Anyone who doesn't sign isn't in the game and gets replaced in the most generic way possible (all QBs are white, 6'5", 250, pocket passers, etc)
Why would anybody in their right mind sign this?
 
# 54 da ThRONe @ 04/12/13 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BJNT
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Kids that are on academic scholarships and band scholarships are getting the same free education, room and board, etc that kids on athletic scholarships are. The only difference, the kids on band and academic scholarships are allowed to make money off of their own image and the ones that are on athletic scholarships are not. That needs to be corrected.
Thank you. There's no reason these guys shouldn't be able to sign with Nike, Reebok or however. I don't even have a problem with them taking money from boosters.

It doesn't hurt anybody and logically would reduce potential corruption rather than increase it.
 
# 55 Cryolemon @ 04/12/13 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by da ThRONe
Why would anybody in their right mind sign this?
Reasonable question. I'm not a lawyer, so my wording might not be watertight, but I don't see how signing something like that (which would be voluntary) would be massively different to now.
 
# 56 IlluminatusUIUC @ 04/12/13 09:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryolemon
Reasonable question. I'm not a lawyer, so my wording might not be watertight, but I don't see how signing something like that (which would be voluntary) would be massively different to now.
Because if they don't get any benefit from it, why would they sign it? I suppose the argument would be that players want to play as themselves in the game, but other then that they are signing away their likeness rights for no compensation at all.
 
# 57 HeavyWeight @ 04/13/13 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitar4468
I'm still confused why we can see a player on TV, on interviews, highlights for TV, Magazines, etc. Yet their name or likeness in a video game is over the lines?

Secondly, these players did not have to play football. They could live their lives normally if they want. They know what they signed up for. Free school, food, room and board, healthcare, some spending money, grants, and a chance at the NFL. If the players win, they might be screwing over future athletes.
I pray and hope this was sarcasm.
 
# 58 DIRRTY30 @ 04/13/13 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowercasecurtis
This Greg Shaheen seems like one greedy douche. Likeness is being added illegally, please, it's not like the game is being hacked to add in names. All I'm reading is "we (NCAA) aren't getting even more money than we already are, and we clearly need more money so I, I mean we, can buy a new yacht."

I still believe this lawsuit isn't so much about the players getting paid but NCAA execs lining their pockets.
I don't understand why people think the NCAA is suing EA. The lawsuit is by these former players against EA and the NCAA.

Really, if the NCAA and EA can successfully argue that the players are indeed being paid, in terms of the value of the scholarship, which at some schools, for 4 years, can be upward of $160,000, then they might actually win this. If these players don't want their likeness used, then they can also pay their own way through college. Schools sell jerseys with current popular players' numbers on them, but don't use names. Schools, television networks and the NCAA promote games using images and videos of current players. Really, the game is just another form of promotion for college football. And the revenue generated by the licensing brings money into the NCAA, which is then spent on many other things that benefit student athletes.
 
# 59 IlluminatusUIUC @ 04/14/13 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIRRTY30
I don't understand why people think the NCAA is suing EA. The lawsuit is by these former players against EA and the NCAA.

Really, if the NCAA and EA can successfully argue that the players are indeed being paid, in terms of the value of the scholarship, which at some schools, for 4 years, can be upward of $160,000, then they might actually win this. If these players don't want their likeness used, then they can also pay their own way through college. Schools sell jerseys with current popular players' numbers on them, but don't use names. Schools, television networks and the NCAA promote games using images and videos of current players. Really, the game is just another form of promotion for college football. And the revenue generated by the licensing brings money into the NCAA, which is then spent on many other things that benefit student athletes.
Except that's not an option. If these athletes want to play college sports at all, they have to sign away their likeness rights to have amateur eligibility. Take Andrew Luck, for example. His family was already quite wealthy when he enrolled at Stanford. If he could have just forfeited his scholarship for the right to sign endorsement deals he would have done it in half a minute. He likely would have come out way ahead.
 
# 60 bccards13 @ 04/14/13 09:17 PM
I say pay the players out of the NCAA's pocket. Quit making schools take away scholarships from successful students and giving them to athletes and just let the athletes get paid. Most of the really good athletes just take blow off classes to get through to the pros anyway.

The NCAA is too much of a corporation and needs to be reigned in. The players can't even use their own names because they're property of the NCAA. It's ridiculous! Just pay the players, and end this.
 


Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.