SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

[BadAssHskr]

Adam rittenberg suggested on the radio that as unified as the big 10 is, he couldnt see any scenerio that individual teams will stay, as far as the big 10 is concerned


So well......

[malowry]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Well, it looks like NCAA 14 is going to be my last NCAA game for a while. It's sad how money has completely ruined one of my favorite game franchises, but oh well. I guess that's an extra $60 for me next year.

[seasprite]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

To blow your mind..

The founder and former CEO of CLC is the current AD at Alabama.

And.......Alabama was the first to join the CLC

[SECElit3]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Sadly, I think this is the end of an era. Removing the signature logos and conference names from the game will drive a lot of players away. Honestly, this takes a tremendous amount of authenticity out of the game. I don't know what to expect from here on out, but the future of this franchise looks pretty darn bleak from where I stand.

[seasprite]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Maybe this will force EA to produce a better product with having to not rely on the NCAA and conference branding.

[BenGerman]

Re: SEC, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Name some. Because from what I've seen, college sports are not money makers for schools.

And remember, if you're going to play football players, you have to pay scholarship athletes for every sport. It's just not something schools can afford.

Which is entirely besides the point that scholarship athletes already get enough as it is.


On topic: Im sure we'll be seeing more conferences backing out as they get a chance to meet about it. We'll probably see real schools playing in conferences like the "Pacific Conference" and "Southern Conference", etc.

Just to name a few...

Alabama's athletic department made $124 million dollars last year, Texas' made $120 million, Ohio State made $116 million, Florida's made $106 million, and Tennessee made $101 million. Like I said, just do a little research and you will see where I'm coming from.

I won't get into the whole "college athletes already get paid enough in scholarships" nonsense, but I will note that there are a lot of people (myself included) who could argue that that is not at all true either.

Anyway, athletic departments make a lot of money (not all, but most D1 schools), and plenty enough to give each of their athletes 50-100 bucks a week to quell all of this stuff.

[Cryolemon]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

I wonder what EA will do? In all honesty it's only gonna take one individual school backing out of the game to send the rest of the cards tumbling down.

Agreed, it's only going to take one college to jump and that will kill it in my opinion.

[OReilly10]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

So its over.


It would be great if we got a nice comprehensive "F.U." patch from EA that somehow increased customization possibilities and also added the playoff option.

[slick589]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

So its over.


It would be great if we got a nice comprehensive "F.U." patch from EA that somehow increased customization possibilities and also added the playoff option.

If only there was a way to merge madden with NCAA and release one comprehensive football game.

[DrPhibes]

Re: SEC, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Pandora's box has been opened.

EA had a good run, but the series has been living on borrowed time for a while (going back even to Sam Keller, when the first smoke appeared).

I don't believe any university of any type of CFB prominence would even consider individually signing on. There is too much potential risk and there is no deal lucrative enough for them to go through a potential headache over a video game. It just won't be worth their while.

[malky]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Agreed, it's only going to take one college to jump and that will kill it in my opinion.

Which is going to happen, if you have eyes

1 NCAA bail
2 Stanford and Kansas thinking about leaving the clc
3 SEC bail
4 BIG ten bail
5 PAC 12 bail

Seriously if you can't figure out the next few steps, you're not paying attention

[fistofrage]

Re: SEC, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Pandora's box has been opened.

EA had a good run, but the series has been living on borrowed time for a while (going back even to Sam Keller, when the first smoke appeared).

I don't believe any university of any type of CFB prominence would individually sign on. There is too much potential risk and there is no deal lucrative enough for them to go through a potential headache over a video game. It just won't be worth their while.

Actually, the first smoke appeared when EA had the Hawaii "Mascot" in the game and he wasn't licensed through the school or something. But he sued them for using his likeness and they quickly settled with him. I think that was 2003 or 2004. If they couldn't say he was just a random generic person dressed up in Hawaiian garb, then they couldn't really say the same thing about a player who's height, weight, hair color, position, throwing hand, and uniform number all matched up directly with their real life counterparts.

[Ky3217]

Re: SEC, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Just to name a few...

Alabama's athletic department made $124 million dollars last year, Texas' made $120 million, Ohio State made $116 million, Florida's made $106 million, and Tennessee made $101 million. Like I said, just do a little research and you will see where I'm coming from.

I won't get into the whole "college athletes already get paid enough in scholarships" nonsense, but I will note that there are a lot of people (myself included) who could argue that that is not at all true either.

Anyway, athletic departments make a lot of money (not all, but most D1 schools), and plenty enough to give each of their athletes 50-100 bucks a week to quell all of this stuff.

Congratulations. You named a few of the very small number of schools that actually make money. And no, most D1 schools do not make money. In fact, only 23 did.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/25/ncaa-report-shows-many-college-programs-in-the-red/

And actually no. After you factor in expenses, the colleges you named didnt make nearly as much money as you think they did.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/05/07/ncaa-finances-subsidies/2142443/

Compare a scholarship athlete to a student who has to pay their way through college, and you will see that they indeed do, get enough.

So once again, schools cant afford it. At least not right now. Maybe they could if they say, cut a bunch of sports programs. Im sure that would please a lot of people.

[awill25]

Re: SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Guys, I don't know whats so hard to see right now. I mean take the rose colored glasses off. No University in the land wants to deal with the liability from a video game. IT IS NOT THAT PROFITABLE FOR THEM. They don't need the "advertising" of being in a video game either. Just silly to think so. In the past, the NCAA delt with everything. I'm sure the schools probably could care less about being in the game. What's it to them? But with possible ramifications, and the monster that is the NCAA not there to buffer the friction...this is GAME OVER. Sad day, yes. But lets be realistic.

[Sparkles]

Yupp it looks like we're done here :/