USUFans.com

Should the allowing of endorsements go through Nationwide, what MWC team will benefit the most? What MWC team will benefit the least?

I don't intend this thread to be a debate on should it pass or will it. We have three other threads for that.

I think Boise State will benefit the most. They are the biggest team in their state, have no direct P5 competitor, and Boise tends to really rally around them. They also don't have any professional sports to compete with for local endorsement money.

Other winners: Hawaii, Wyoming, possibly New Mexico.

I think we will be the least benefitted. Not only is Cache Valley a small market, (what CV companies will really endorse our athletes? Gossners?) we will be competing against BYU and UoU for endorsement money. BYU has a big enough fan base already that I could really see this as a significant boost to a dying program. All in all, I don't see our athletes getting very much sponsorship and the bigger instate schools getting more.

I think CSU would also be a big loser in this.

I don't think it'll affect AFA much.

USUMAE wrote:Should the allowing of endorsements go through Nationwide, what MWC team will benefit the most? What MWC team will benefit the least?

I don't intend this thread to be a debate on should it pass or will it. We have three other threads for that.

I think Boise State will benefit the most. They are the biggest team in their state, have no direct P5 competitor, and Boise tends to really rally around them. They also don't have any professional sports to compete with for local endorsement money.

Other winners: Hawaii, Wyoming, possibly New Mexico.

I think we will be the least benefitted. Not only is Cache Valley a small market, (what CV companies will really endorse our athletes? Gossners?) we will be competing against BYU and UoU for endorsement money. BYU has a big enough fan base already that I could really see this as a significant boost to a dying program. All in all, I don't see our athletes getting very much sponsorship and the bigger instate schools getting more.

I think CSU would also be a big loser in this.

I don't think it'll affect AFA much.

Mostly spot on. This isn’t good for Utah State.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see UNLV as the biggest winner. Vegas has no problem spending money... I mean could a known fixer sponsor a kid to appear in hot tub commercials?

Thinking as a business person-

The NCAA has official sponsors. For example, AT&T is a "corporate champion"...

If you're AT&T how peeved are you when the star player of march madness comes on saying "AT&T is no good, switch to Verizon!"

or another example:

The College Football Playoff is sponsored by Dr. Pepper.

Dr. Pepper and Keurig are owned by the same company. So if you're Keurig Dr. Pepper do you want the Heisman Trophy winner promoting Nespresso during national championship week?
**
Will bowl sponsors want players who are endorsed by rivals able to use their bowl as a platform for the competing company?

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑

October 3rd, 2019, 1:23 pm

Thinking as a business person-

The NCAA has official sponsors. For example, AT&T is a "corporate champion"...

If you're AT&T how peeved are you when the star player of march madness comes on saying "AT&T is no good, switch to Verizon!"

or another example:

The College Football Playoff is sponsored by Dr. Pepper.

Dr. Pepper and Keurig are owned by the same company. So if you're Keurig Dr. Pepper do you want the Heisman Trophy winner promoting Nespresso during national championship week?
**
Will bowl sponsors want players who are endorsed by rivals able to use their bowl as a platform for the competing company?

How is this any different than NBA/NFL or any pro league? Bowl sponsors will still want the best teams so they get the most eyes.

Look at the numbers and colors of jerseys worn by sponsors that are not approved by the NBA or NFL.

This is a big deal in sponsorships.

USUMAE wrote: ↑

October 3rd, 2019, 12:04 pm

Should the allowing of endorsements go through Nationwide, what MWC team will benefit the most? What MWC team will benefit the least?

I don't intend this thread to be a debate on should it pass or will it. We have three other threads for that.

I think Boise State will benefit the most. They are the biggest team in their state, have no direct P5 competitor, and Boise tends to really rally around them. They also don't have any professional sports to compete with for local endorsement money.

Other winners: Hawaii, Wyoming, possibly New Mexico.

I think we will be the least benefitted. Not only is Cache Valley a small market, (what CV companies will really endorse our athletes? Gossners?) we will be competing against BYU and UoU for endorsement money. BYU has a big enough fan base already that I could really see this as a significant boost to a dying program. All in all, I don't see our athletes getting very much sponsorship and the bigger instate schools getting more.

I think CSU would also be a big loser in this.

I don't think it'll affect AFA much.

I agree with your assessment on BYU. This would re-catapult their program not only because of their large fanbase with deep pockets, but also because Utah county is one of the fastest growing areas in the country. They will have no problem getting massive endorsements.

Another commenter already said it, but I think the other team in MWC that would benefit from this hugely is UNLV.

Could be dark times for the Aggies unless this is heavily regulated.

After reading the law, I'm no longer concerned about different companies being mad if an athlete chooses a different brand to endorse.

But there are more questions than answers.

Mainly:

"67456. (a) (1) A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility."

This works at the begining because the schools think it's all going to be Nike and Gatorade. However, there are only a few ways that anyone is going to be interested in women's athletics from an "endorsement" perspective... it sounds like all fun and games for the state's and universities until some otherwise unremarkable gymnast from UCLA
winds up on PornHub using their university position, and there is nothing the University can do about it because the University cannot make any rules or uphold any standard, or have any limitation.


***************

(2) An athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, including, but not limited to, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, shall not prevent a student of a postsecondary educational institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.

Yes, good luck enforcing that against the NCAA. It sounds about as enforceable as Trump "ordering" companies to move from China

Have you met a collegiate gymnast? Not usually the type of girl that ends up in porn. But I’d watch.