The news today of the sec big10 and pac 12 leaving isn't big because of the tangible part of the game that is being lost(logos, names, and such just like the ncaa) its just a sign of what is coming next. major schools like alabama, texas, oklahoma, USC, and ND will begin to follow suit.

Im afraid this is going to be a trickle down effect. NCAA pulled, SEC BIG TEN Big 12 pulled, next the schools in those conferences will pull. It sucks but its the only way to stay away from the lawsuits. If the big schools go everyone will go. Maybe we can have a divison 2a game! lol

yeah, I disagree with the article, I think the game is dead.

This is disappointing and sad, but it was good while it lasted. Now what's the next sports game we'll likely lose?

EA can be innovative and create a sandbox high school/college football game or continue to try to piece together a "licensed" game. I hope they choose correctly.

THey have teambuilder in place already, flesh that out more. Add a play creator. Add real penalty/game sliders. Custom schedules and conferences are already in the game.....

This should be an easy decision on direction IMO.

A couple of questions for the community: If EA loses level of authenticity within the game (schools & conferences) will it cut the development budget of this game and/or move it to the Madden series? Why would they put the same level of investment into the game if it isn't fully licensed/complete?
I think the point that history shows that non-licensed games sell far less is completely true and a major focus of EA at the moment with it's decision making. EA isn't about niche product, it's about high end AAA developed video games. If EA wanted to keep a piece of the pie they would probably approach a small developer as a subsidiary and tell them to produce a college football game to minimise their own risk.

Frankly, to an outsider and an Australian who is only just getting into college football, it's pretty sad. I see how passionate and intense the fans, games, rivalries and stories are within college football and it is really something. To see litigation come between passion and love for the game and into the realms of profit and power is disappointing.

EA just needs to include some killer art and customization tools for logos, fields, stadiums, players etc. Essentially, let the community get access to the creation tools for a fee and charge a monthly subscription for the game engine ($5). They still get their $60, they don't have to pay any license fees and just patch updates for new features and modes 2 or 3 times a year, that way you ensure people keep their subscriptions up. Something like this I think is the new future of sports gaming so the companies can shave costs and the users get an updated game pretty much year round.

Unfortunately, game is dead. Let's sue O'Bannon's a**!!!!

Shame on O'Bannon? Shame on the schools. Shame on the ADs, the conferences. Shame on the NCAA and CLC.

The O'Bannon and Keller suit has had an effect on the current college players. According to an ESPN survey in their college football preview 65% of current players surveyed think they should be paid for their video game likenesses. As much as we may want to scream about the O'bannon suit or say well they get room and board. Players do not get paid outside of that like many other college students who can hold year round jobs. I understand and I am upset it may be the end of the game but could you imagine the kind of screaming we would have if NBA or NFL players were not paid a percentage for jersey sales or their likeness appearing in in games. We're blaming someone that bombed in his post college career. If it wasn't him or Keller it could be TE 83 who played for East Carolina in 2008 or OLB 46 for Central Michigan next year. It could have been a player from a 1 AA school NCAA 2004. O'Bannon gambled and is winning and we are blasting him over a video game. The fact that schools the NCAA and CLC are banking money on a billion dollar industry over 2 sports and the players get an education and diddly squat otherwise for 4 years is stunning. Here's a better question are Universities that are selling throwbacks WITH NAMES paying those players IE is Rex Kern getting a check from OSU for his Jersey sales OR Bo Jackson from Auburn? Or Earl Campbell from Texas? If they are why shouldn't current players get a cut? We sit here and complain about someones face mask or hair not being right because it doesn't reflect the actual player.

If the conferences pulled out its just a matter of time before universities follow suit. And its a smart business move. Because they have to protect themselves. Just as the NFL did when their retired players wanted a cut of MADDEN money that they were not getting.

Yeah lets blame O'Bannon for doing something not only for himself but every other player who has come before or since. Lets Blame him for standing up for college players whose jersey shirt and likenesses have been used without their permission for years. When they sign with a university the School acts like they own them.

Shame on O'Bannon? He brought it to our attention. Shame on us for blaming him.

Video Games are just visible target to go after but the larger issue is the exploitation of NCAA athletes in revenue generating sports. I'm not exactly sure how it would work but if EA wants to put out a college football video game they will have to sacrifice profits by sharing them with the ncaa athlete. Obviously you can't pay the players outright but maybe you setup scholarship funds in the name of ncaa athletes or have jobs and internships available. We all know EA would rather scrap the game than sacrifice any profits so I don't think it looks good for a future game.

What is obannon on really trying to accomplish here? If he wants players to be paid, how would it be done? If you split the profits amongst every college football player, how much would you really get? Or is he just trying to make a point and put a dent in the ncaas pockets?

This may be an ignorant question, but what do most NCAA schools spend the income from their sporting teams on? Reinvestment? Do they have 'shareholders'? Do the deans/administrators make ridiculous incomes?
The reason I ask is that I'm confused. Part of me wants to think that the student athletes should get paid, but what do the schools spend their income on? If they use it to pay their professors, research staff, research projects, improve facilities, pay contractors, etc, then what is the major issue?
I'm not from the US so I don't know, but if you are in college and want to eat food, how much does it cost? Is it subsidized? Would it cost more and be unaffordable to most students food prices were based on market rates?

It seems like a really grey situation on who is right/wrong and who deserves what, and what the fallout could potentially be for the other thousands upon thousands of students and facilities that are essentially an overhead for the university. Unless every university has a scrooge mcduck type money pit that the dean swims through every day...

Comment #10 just nailed it... You exploit something for long enough, it's going to eventually blow up in your face. The fact it's taken this long to happen is what surprises me the most.

you seem to forget that majority of these players are getting a FREE education. how much is that worth?

Very little compared to the money being made from their services...

This is a huge deal. Let's stop trying to kid around and sugar coat it. When the SEC pulled out, that was the game going on life support. Now all it will take is one, JUST ONE, major school out of the 125+ to back and.....That's it. Put it in the ground.