Count Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith among them though.Like most college athletic department employees at this point, Smith is holding the NCAA company line, and raising some questionably salient points and concerns. From ESPN:“My concern with the California bill — which is all the way wide open with monetizing your name and your likeness — is it moves slightly towards pay-for-play,” Smith said, “and it’s very difficult for us — the practitioners in this space — to figure out how do you regulate it. How do you ensure that the unscrupulous bad actors do not enter that space and ultimately create an unlevel playing field?“One of our principles is try to create rules and regulations to try and achieve fair play.[…]Smith acknowledged that Ohio State, which has an enormous alumni base and abundant resources, would have an “unbelievable competitive advantage” over a lot of other schools from a system like this, but he is still against it.A few things:No one believes that we’re going to move towards some new model with no regulations.“Unscrupulous bad actors” are already incredibly prevalent in college sports. Go look at the scandals in college basketball. Anyone who believes college football is immune to similar forces is extremely naive. Go read Steven Godfrey’s excellent 2014 SB Nation feature “Meet the bag man” for how that works in major college football.College football already has a tremendously unlevel playing field. In a given year, there are maybe a half-dozen true title contenders, and that list is pretty static from year to year. There’s also an argument to be made that elite players could find more value in being a “big fish in a small pond” with a model that allows them to profit off of their likeness.Ohio State already has a huge competitive advantage. That isn’t going to change drastically, no matter what happens in the sport.The NCAA has floated ridiculous ideas, like the notion that it will cast out California schools if the Fair Pay to Play Act is implemented by 2023. People like Dabo Swinney swear that they’ll enter a new profession and give up their multi-million dollar contracts if players are able to get paid.In reality, that is all noise.Right now, elite programs collect tens of millions of dollars, and the players get scholarship money towards a degree that they may be able to use to study something that they’re actually interested in. That is often not even the case. It is very hard to argue that it is a fair system, and change feels more inevitable than ever.[ESPN] COLUMBUS, OH – DECEMBER 04: Ohio State University athletics director Gene Smith listens during a press conference at Ohio State University on December 4, 2018 in Columbus, Ohio. At the press conference head coach Urban Meyer announced his retirement and offensive coordinator Ryan Day was announced as the next head coach. Meyer will continue to coach until after the Ohio State Buckeyes play in the Rose Bowl. (Photo by Kirk Irwin/Getty Images)California is looking to change college athletics as we know them. The state has signed into law the Fair Pay to Play Act, which would bar the NCAA and its schools from preventing college athletes from profiting off of their likeness.The law is set to go into effect in 2023. Between now and then, you can expect the NCAA to try its best to fight it hard.California is not alone though. States as politically diverse as Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Texas have all floated similar laws.It is rare to see an issue with this kind of bipartisan support, and while not everyone is on board with athletes getting paid salaries by schools, the number of people against athletes being able to pick up outside endorsements is dwindling.
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to RedditRedditShare to 電子郵件Email Retailer The Source to open 20 small box stores based on key consumer spending by LuAnn LaSalle, The Canadian Press Posted Feb 1, 2013 3:47 pm MDT The Source electronics chain will open 20 new stores this year, expecting its small-store strategy with popular products, including cellphones, to attract consumers.More than half of the new stores will open in Western Canada, The Source president Charles Brown said Friday.“In spite of the cautious economic forecast, we continue to see strong consumer spending in key categories, things like headphones and mobility and home entertainment,” Brown said from Toronto.“The beauty of our model with the small store is you can go into a fairly small market and have that store be profitable. You don’t need a massive market for a 2,000-square-foot store,” he said.Telecom giant BCE Inc. (TSX:BCE) bought The Source in July 2009 to complement its Bell wireless products and services.“That’s starting to be a growing part of our business,” Brown said.The announcement comes a day after major retailers Best Buy Canada and Sears Canada announced layoffs totalling some 1,600, a move analysts blamed on the popularity of online shopping and the shrinking demand for super-sized brick-and-mortar stores.“We’re really accessible — 70 per cent of Canadians live within five kilometres of a Source store. So we’re in your neighbourhood. That fits the trend of where things are going today,” Brown said.The company already has 700 small-box locations across Canada, and says about six per cent of its business comes from online sales.It also plans on renovating 50 stores, in addition to the new stores which will expand the 67 stores it opened last year, Brown said.He said almost 900 full-time and part-time jobs will be created for the 67 stores opened last year and the 20 stores to open this year.Retail analyst Len Kubas of KubasPrimedia Consultants said The Source isn’t in direct competition with Best Buy or Sears.“Most people who go to The Source are probably going to need a sales person to help (them) with what they want,” Kubas said from Toronto.“You go for a little extra service, you go for personal attention which you may not get to the same degree in a big box store.”Many of the stores doing business as The Source are former Radio Shack stores.The name was changed after U.S.-based Circuit City acquired the Canadian operations.Circuit City later declared bankruptcy and closed all its U.S. locations but the Canadian business survived when it was acquired by BCE Inc.