A bill submitted Thursday by Senator Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) will allow college football players to authorize their names for college football video games.
Murphy’s bill introduced As part of an ongoing effort to reform NCAA’s outdated rules for managing player images and portraits. The NCAA will allow college athletes to get sponsorship and approval as states across the country have moved to allow college athletes to make money from their name and image rights. We sought the help of the federal government by creating the rules.
However, the new bill has some important differences from what the NCAA and its member schools require in the new regulations. And two days after EA Sports announced that it had resumed development of a new college football game.
You can read the bill completely here. Murphy wrote a Yahoo Sports editorial on January 27 about a large college sports company.
College football game as early as 2022
EA Sports announced on Tuesday that it will release a college football game by 2022. Details about the release aren’t given much, but company executives said they’re working on a fake roster for each team. In previous versions (the game was last created in 2013), game players were built to match real players, even if the name wasn’t included in the game.
Murphy’s bill gives EA Sports the opportunity to purchase a group license from players to include their name in the game. The license allows players to be rewarded for appearing in the game. The lack of compensation in previous games due to NCAA archaic rules was a central belief in the O’Bannon proceedings.
This game is also known as “E Sports College Football” and does not include NCAA in the title. The company said it has not obtained an NCAA license for the game.
Other important differences
Most importantly for college athletes, Murphy’s bill will prohibit meetings and NCAAs from limiting the amount of money players can earn.
The bill is clearly different from the bill submitted by Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) In December. The bill, introduced when the Republicans were the majority in the US Senate, was friendly to what the school wanted. In short, the NCAA proposed in April that it would need to strictly regulate third parties paying players.
In a May letter to Congress, a member of the Power Five Conference stated that players would need to be in school during the semester to qualify to make money from their name and image rights. ..
Murphy’s bill does not give the NCAA antitrust protection, and it is much easier to challenge the NIL rules. In January, the NCAA postponed voting for NIL reform after being warned by the Department of Justice that it could violate antitrust laws.
In the end, there may be a compromise between Murphy’s and Wicker’s bill, while the Democratic Party now has a 51-50 majority in the Senate. The majority may be in favor of Murphy’s law.
Other articles on Yahoo Sports:
Introvert. Beer guru. Communicator. Travel fanatic. Web advocate. Certified alcohol geek. Tv buff. Subtly charming internet aficionado.
