NCAA Football 14 News Post

Peter Moore on NCAA Football, "We'll Be Back"

02:39 PM - August 31, 2016 by RaychelSnr

NCAA Football is always going to have a bit of speculation around when/if/maybe someday it will return.

In an interview with IGN, EA Chief Competition Officer Peter Moore added his voice to the chorus of speculation with a rather optimistic tone.

Check out the quotes from the interview compiled by Polygon's Owen Good:

Quote:


	�NCAA Football became the lightning rod for bigger issues regarding college athletes getting paid for their performance, not only in football but all college sports,� said Moore, who was EA Sports president from 2007 to 2011. �And their likeness. It was a sad day when we realized, �We are in the sights of a number of lawsuits.� A number of athletes which were all combined eventually into one singular suit and said, �That�s me.� When your lawyers� fees are more than the revenue you can expect to get in. "It was an unclear future for us,� Moore said. �It was a really sad day and we said, �We just can�t do this anymore.� And one day I know we�ll be back.

Currently there's still no traction for a game to actually make a comeback since the lawsuit's settlement checks are still going out.

As we've reported in the past, NCAA Football will only make a comeback when the legal structures of the NCAA change to allow players to be paid. A game with generic rosters would still not be a legally viable option and most likely several schools would balk at such an effort anyways -- thus it's unlikely anything but a fully licensed game with real players on real teams will be shipped. EA will almost certainly not pursue a college game of any kind unless there is a zero percent chance of a lawsuit.

So while we appreciate Moore's optimism, it does look like we're still in a holding pattern waiting on the NCAA to do something right.

In other words, the world may look like this before a NCAA Football game ships again.

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All

NCAA Football 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 61 jgthedon @ 09/17/16 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sXeInYoFace


	no one is holding a gun to the heads of these kids. if they feel they get mistreated by the ncaa or their respective school by not getting paid, don't play for them and leave. so the schools do make millions off their jersey sales or tv appearances, is that fair? no, it is not, but neither is life, and if anybody told you life was fair lied to you. our soldiers get paid next to nothing to fight and die for our country and athletes get all riled up for free tuition, a top notch education, meals, room and board and so on. the same goes for kaepernick and all those fools kneeling during our National Anthem. don't like it? leave. but that is a total different subject that i probably shouldnt have even mentioned because it has no place on these forums. that just bothers me to no end. sorry for the rant.

U call those ppl "fools" for kneeling but I'd like to think they have a good point in doing it.

# 62 ODogg @ 09/17/16 04:51 PM

No, they're just attention starved lemmings who haven't a clue.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 63 sXeInYoFace @ 09/17/16 06:44 PM

youre right, they are attention grabbers. where was kaepernick and these other clowns "protesting" for all the many other shootings and/or killings (which happen more often at the hands of other people and not cops)? why start now? did those other lives not matter? so they hold a whole nation responsible because of a few bad apples? at the risk of sounding too cliche...dare they go to another country and "protest"...they will become a statistic real fast. i did not mean to hijack this thread and dont mean to preach. this is a great country and we are alotted many freedoms that people take advantage of without realizing how those freedoms came to be.

# 64 BROman @ 09/19/16 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sXeInYoFace


	dare they go to another country and "protest"...they will become a statistic real fast.

That's the beauty of this country- you can love it but still point out its flaws. You can protest things w/o worrying about getting shipped to Siberia or worse.

# 65 Junior Moe @ 09/19/16 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kehlis


	No they don't, the NCAA doesn't care at all about "amateur status" as it has no bearing to them whatsoever.

I don't think that the players should be paid by the NCAA or schools. Most probably couldn't afford it. However, I do believe that the players who have a market should be allowed to capitalize on it without punishment. Only few would, anyway. And there is value in attending a USC over UAB. The schools have value as a brand and that can't be lost. The players, if they're good enough, can capitalize on their efforts and the exposure they receive. Seems like a win win. The schools and NCAA continue making their money and they players who are able can grab a piece of the pie.

# 66 sXeInYoFace @ 09/19/16 10:27 AM

i dont think NCAA will ever pay players because what about all the other athletes who dont rake in big loads of money for the school. the golf team or swim team doesnt have jersey sales or video game sales or sell out a 100,000 seat stadium. i would assume you cant not pay them. i dont know how it would work?

# 67 Junior Moe @ 09/19/16 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sXeInYoFace


	i dont think NCAA will ever pay players because what about all the other athletes who dont rake in big loads of money for the school. the golf team or swim team doesnt have jersey sales or video game sales or sell out a 100,000 seat stadium. i would assume you cant not pay them. i dont know how it would work?

I don't see the NCAA paying the players directly. IMO, they shouldn't either. Plus it would get complicated with all the other sports and stuff. But it would be nice if say DeShaun Watson got a little something on the sale of his jersey in the Clemson book store. Or if Nike or Pepsi wanted him to pitch a product. Let him do so and keep his "amateur" status. If someone wants him to sign autographs for a few hundred let him and others like him. Just make the NCAA aware and keep everything above board. My problem with it is that the NCAA Is keeping these guys/gals from earning money on their own all the while they are.

# 68 tessl @ 09/19/16 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junior Moe


	I don't think that the players should be paid by the NCAA or schools. Most probably couldn't afford it. However, I do believe that the players who have a market should be allowed to capitalize on it without punishment. Only few would, anyway. And there is value in attending a USC over UAB. The schools have value as a brand and that can't be lost. The players, if they're good enough, can capitalize on their efforts and the exposure they receive. Seems like a win win. The schools and NCAA continue making their money and they players who are able can grab a piece of the pie.

Then you open the game up to exactly what the NCAA is trying to prevent - boosters paying players.

# 69 FarFromEer @ 09/19/16 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junior Moe


	I don't see the NCAA paying the players directly. IMO, they shouldn't either. Plus it would get complicated with all the other sports and stuff. But it would be nice if say DeShaun Watson got a little something on the sale of his jersey in the Clemson book store. Or if Nike or Pepsi wanted him to pitch a product. Let him do so and keep his "amateur" status. If someone wants him to sign autographs for a few hundred let him and others like him. Just make the NCAA aware and keep everything above board. My problem with it is that the NCAA Is keeping these guys/gals from earning money on their own all the while they are.

The problem is that the top players won't be signing autographs for "a few hundred", you will have big time donors offering big bucks to top high school recruits to get them to come to the school they want, and continually paying them for performing well on the field. For these top donors, money is not really an object. Having their team win the national championship is the only thing they care about. The result will be a handful of schools competing for the national championship and everyone else stuck in a land of mediocrity, probably spinning down in a financial death spiral.

I'm not saying that the players shouldn't have a chance to cash in on their name and success, and I always feel bad for the ones that get career ending injuries before reaching a payday. If anything is allowed, it needs to be regulated (a national commercial is worth X, a local commercial is worth Y, an autograph signing is worth Z). NCAA Football is a cash cow for many not on the school's payrolls. However, for many schools, it is only a way to pay for all of the other athletic programs as well, like the Olympic sports. If you look at the overall health of athletic departments, the NCAA reports there are 15-25 profitable programs each year (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/spo...-up-the-bills/). No way the schools can afford to contribute to student-athletes in some sports, but not others.

# 70 Junior Moe @ 09/19/16 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tessl


	Then you open the game up to exactly what the NCAA is trying to prevent - boosters paying players.

You'll never get the shadyness out of collegiate sports completely. But I do believe that if players have a way to earn a little cash legally (by legal I mean without running afoul of NCAA rules) then that would cut down on players getting involved with boosters and such. I really do believe these guys want to do right. Just provide a means for them to. Cant blame a guy for seeing the billions get thrown around in TV contracts and coaches raking in millions and not see the big deal in taking a few hundred dollars or something.

# 71 Junior Moe @ 09/19/16 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcfeenathan


	The problem is that the top players won't be signing autographs for "a few hundred", you will have big time donors offering big bucks to top high school recruits to get them to come to the school they want, and continually paying them for performing well on the field. For these top donors, money is not really an object. Having their team win the national championship is the only thing they care about. The result will be a handful of schools competing for the national championship and everyone else stuck in a land of mediocrity, probably spinning down in a financial death spiral. I'm not saying that the players shouldn't have a chance to cash in on their name and success, and I always feel bad for the ones that get career ending injuries before reaching a payday. If anything is allowed, it needs to be regulated (a national commercial is worth X, a local commercial is worth Y, an autograph signing is worth Z). NCAA Football is a cash cow for many not on the school's payrolls. However, for many schools, it is only a way to pay for all of the other athletic programs as well, like the Olympic sports. If you look at the overall health of athletic departments, the NCAA reports there are 15-25 profitable programs each year (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/spo...-up-the-bills/). No way the schools can afford to contribute to student-athletes in some sports, but not others.

I 100% agree. That's why I think it should be regulated and the NCAA have specific introductions on who and how players get compensated. Don't like it,then don't sign up to become an NCAA athlete. See if that offer is still there for you without the exposure the NCAA and respective schools provide.

Players choosing schools and stuff will forever be a dirty game I think. Whether that's with boosters or coaches and coaching staffs. I'm moreso talking about once the players actually become college athletes. I don't think the big boosters paying players ala Miami is as prevalent these days. But if they are then I believe that's all the more reason to allow players to earn something on their own. There by diminishing donor influence. There are only a handful of players actually worth any real money, anyway.

If a donor comes up as dirty then the NCAA could forbid their athletes from dealing with them. Then they could lose their eligibility if they deal. I kind of think it would clean thing up a little. If there is someone who wants Watson to sign autographs for 2,000$. Run that company/donor through the NCAA, get clearance, and if everything checks out then good for him. Doesn't cost the NCAA or schools a dime and a good player can be compensated. The 3rd string center isn't getting that offer, if one at all. Free market. They could even cap the earnings and have the rest go to a trust for after the player is done playing collegiate sports. Something along those lines is fair to everyone I think.

# 72 sXeInYoFace @ 09/19/16 01:37 PM

think of college football as an internship. you work for free while still making money for someone else. if you do well enough, maybe you get a job with the big boys (the NFL). that is an opinion a coworker of mine had, and it sounds pretty accurate.

# 73 tessl @ 09/19/16 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junior Moe


	You'll never get the shadyness out of collegiate sports completely. But I do believe that if players have a way to earn a little cash legally (by legal I mean without running afoul of NCAA rules) then that would cut down on players getting involved with boosters and such. I really do believe these guys want to do right. Just provide a means for them to. Cant blame a guy for seeing the billions get thrown around in TV contracts and coaches raking in millions and not see the big deal in taking a few hundred dollars or something.

Athletic departments don't have the cash without cutting benefits or eliminating non-revenue sports. All of the coaches are former players who worked their way up to a coaching position.

I'm a big booster for Midwest State located in Sioux Falls, SD (my teambuilder team). I run a car dealership or some other business. I pay a high profile recruit or multiple players to star in a television advertisement and I provide all the players with free vehicles along with any recruit as soon as he commits for starring in these ads. Suddenly Midwest State is competing with Alabama and Ohio State for the top recruiting class. That's the alternative to the current system.

I see this as part of the instant gratification culture today. Getting a full ride scholarship for playing a sport is compensation if you have the work ethic to challenge yourself with a solid degree which will lead to something after college. Since I'm in CoMO and more familiar with Missouri I use the example of a former player named L'Damian Washington. You might remember him for a play he made vs Georgia a few years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVXZyhkzD8U

His Father was murdered when he was 5, his mother had a heart attack and died at his high school basketball game when he was 15. He and his 3 brothers decided to stay together and raise each other rather than go into foster homes. He graduated from Missouri with a degree in psychology. I saw him at a soccer game once with another player named Matt White who graduated with an engineering degree. It would be hard to argue they didn't benefit from college football. Those degrees are theirs for life.

# 74 Junior Moe @ 10/04/16 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tessl


	Athletic departments don't have the cash without cutting benefits or eliminating non-revenue sports. All of the coaches are former players who worked their way up to a coaching position. I'm a big booster for Midwest State located in Sioux Falls, SD (my teambuilder team). I run a car dealership or some other business. I pay a high profile recruit or multiple players to star in a television advertisement and I provide all the players with free vehicles along with any recruit as soon as he commits for starring in these ads. Suddenly Midwest State is competing with Alabama and Ohio State for the top recruiting class. That's the alternative to the current system. I see this as part of the instant gratification culture today. Getting a full ride scholarship for playing a sport is compensation if you have the work ethic to challenge yourself with a solid degree which will lead to something after college. Since I'm in CoMO and more familiar with Missouri I use the example of a former player named L'Damian Washington. You might remember him for a play he made vs Georgia a few years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVXZyhkzD8U His Father was murdered when he was 5, his mother had a heart attack and died at his high school basketball game when he was 15. He and his 3 brothers decided to stay together and raise each other rather than go into foster homes. He graduated from Missouri with a degree in psychology. I saw him at a soccer game once with another player named Matt White who graduated with an engineering degree. It would be hard to argue they didn't benefit from college football. Those degrees are theirs for life.

I get the point about athletic departments. I know that only about a dozen or so really make money after its all said and done. That's why I don't agree with the schools or NCAA paying the players directly. The NCAA and say, Ohio State, is a brand. JT Barrett choose Ohio State over Toledo for a reason. He benefits from attending there, too. That and a four year scholly is compensation enough, IMO. Just allow the players who have a market to make them something too. That's all I'm saying.

In my hypothetical world the NCAA could ban both the student athletes and schools from dealing with you. Punish the shady actors.

I disagree on the "intern" analogy. Yes. A degree is very valuable. And the onus is on each individual to pursue one that can lead to a bright future. However, we know that in many cases the schools push players into certain areas of study to free them up. Look at UNC basketball when McCants, May and Felton were there. That kind of stuff happens and it tells you just how much of a business college athletics has become. Even the ones in legitimately working to attain a good degree have so much time tied up in their sport that most cant work a part time job somewhere. I know there guys aren't exactly starving but let make a little money from their sports feats if its there.

# 75 ODogg @ 10/04/16 10:33 AM

Yesterday the Supreme Court refused to hear The O'Bannon case which likely means we are much further away from getting NCAA games back..so disappointed

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Previous 1 2 34Next »

More Links

Peter Moore on NCAA Football, "We'll Be Back"