Quote Originally Posted by Kwizzy View Post
CDJ, is that athletic departments as a whole or specifically football? If football profits are being used to "float" the rest of the athletic department in most cases then I think that skews the numbers quite a bit. And as far as EA not making as much, I don't think they would still be in business if they weren't making plenty of money. Which, in the case of NCAA Football 'XX, is closely related with having accurate teams and rosters.
- I believe that's for athletic departments as a whole. I think the point still stands. If schools have to funnel (football) profits into a fund to reimburse players, smaller sports (starting with men's programs) are going to get the ax. If it ends up that the NCAA has to distribute money on their side, does that mean championships or other NCAA-sponsored events go by the wayside?

- EA doesn't release detailed profits, but I've always thought from articles that a lot of the EA SPORTS titles benefited from the success of Madden NFL and FIFA. By themselves, I'm not sure how profitable any title any of the other titles are. Based on what happened with EA & 2K's basketball titles, I'm sure the cost of dealing with the CLC is pretty expensive.


Though, the case should really be about 'is the NCAA allowing licensees to develop items/products with the likenesses of student-athletes'? Instead, they've done a good job of turning it into the NCAA and licensees making profits off of player likenesses, when in reality the profit (or loss) shouldn't even be an issue. (It's worked as we're talking about it here. ) The plaintiffs know that Americans (particularly as of late) generally seem to not care for perceived large profitable organizations.