California Gov. Aware Of Potential Consequences For NIL Bill
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he is "not naive about the consequences" of signing into law SB 206, which allows college athletes to profit off of their name, image and likeness, according to Steve Berkowitz of USA TODAY. However, Newsom also said that he does not think the NCAA will "take drastic action against California schools." He said of the NCAA's threats to not allow California schools to compete for championships, "I don't see them doing that for two reasons. One, they can't afford to do that -- can't afford to lose the state of California. It's truly a nation-state. And the economic consequences of it would be profound. And, number two, I don't think they have the legal right to do that" (USA TODAY, 10/1). In L.A., J. Brady McCollough notes USC, Stanford, the Univ. of California system and California State Univ. "all opposed" SB 206 as it moved its way through the state Senate. Those schools "rightfully fear retribution from the NCAA in the form of not being able to participate in championships because of California having a major recruiting advantage." But McCollough writes SB 206 "should not be viewed as an existential threat to California colleges' ability to play big-time sports." Instead, it "might be an existential threat to the NCAA, if the organization moves too slowly to adapt" (L.A. TIMES, 10/1).
TOO BIG TO FAIL? The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Costa & Higgins write the NCAA threatening to ban California schools from competition would "remove some of the most prominent NCAA member institutions from its championships." Such a stance "could prove difficult to uphold if enough other states were to enact similar legislation" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 10/1). CNBC's Tyler Mathisen: "Can you imagine if the NCAA bans California teams from competition?" ("The Exchange," CNBC, 9/30). YAHOO SPORTS' Pat Forde wrote the NCAA "excluding the most populous state and many of the top athletic departments from championship competition would be financially damaging and dramatically lessen the quality of competition in many sports." This is "likely to come down to a compromise of sorts, with California schools and lawmakers now empowered to lead the way on shaping what the future holds" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 9/30). USA Today's Dan Wolken tweeted, "Have heard from numerous people inside college athletics who are very discouraged by how poorly the NCAA is messaging its reaction to the California bill" (TWITTER.com, 10/1).
PLANNING AHEAD: In Ft. Worth, Drew Davison writes this law will have a "significant effect on the college sports world and could directly affect" TCU and other schools with future games scheduled against California schools. TCU has scheduled a home-and-home football series with Stanford in '24 and '27, and TCU AD Jeremiah Donati said those games "potentially" could be impacted. Donati: "Naturally we would not want any of our teams competing with other schools who have artificial and unfair competitive advantages built into their laws that only apply to them" (Ft. Worth STAR-TELEGRAM, 10/1). Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez added, "I wouldn't schedule anyone from California right now if they have different rules than we do and all of a sudden, they're not amateurs." He went on to say he was "very concerned" with the law. Alvarez: "I think it will affect our game greatly. Believe me, I want to do as much as we possibly can for our student-athletes, and we do. Our student-athletes actually live pretty good right now" ("WTMJ Extra," WTMJ-AM, 9/30).