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.
Neymar is no longer “on top” at Paris Saint-Germain, says his former Santos coach Muricy Ramalho, with the decision to leave Barcelona for French football considered to have been the wrong one.The Brazil international forward has suggested that he shares that way of thinking.He pushed hard for a move away from Parc des Princes over the summer, after two seasons with PSG, and made it clear that his preference was to return to Camp Nou. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Ox-rated! Dream night in Genk for Liverpool ace after injury nightmare Messi a man for all Champions League seasons – but will this really be Barcelona’s? Are Chelsea this season’s Ajax? Super-subs Batshuayi & Pulisic show Blues can dare to dream Time for another transfer? Giroud’s Chelsea spell set to end like his Arsenal career A record-breaking transfer in the summer of 2017 had been made with the intention of stepping out of the shadow of Lionel Messi and Co. and becoming a talismanic presence in his own right.Neymar has starred for the Ligue 1 champions, boasting 55 goals in 63 appearances, but is lacking the top level competition he enjoyed both in his homeland and Catalunya.Ramalho has told Mundo Deportivo of the decision to head for Paris: “For me, when Neymar was at Santos he was on top and in Barcelona too. “Barcelona and Santos were the best for him. PSG, not so much.”Ramalho, who worked with Neymar at the club that helped to launch his career, is not convinced that a prolific strike rate at PSG adds any weight to the argument that a spell in Ligue 1 has been a success.He added: “Even scoring goals matters little because the French championship is weak.”It could be that Neymar gets his wish and a retracing of his steps to Barcelona is made at some stage.There are, however, several obstacles to overcome before a deal can be done, with Messi recently revealing that that there are still some at Camp Nou that do not want a fellow South American back.He told Metro 95.1: “It is difficult to bring him back.“Firstly, because it was difficult to see him leave, secondly because of how he left.“There are people from the club and the members who do not want him to return.“If it is for sports, Ney is one of the best in the world, but I understand all the other factors.”