Some have suggested players could be compensated by selling their autographs or by being permitted to market themselves. While Emmert said the latter is at least being discussed, he says the autograph issue seems like a non-starter. [Emphasis added.]

The reason I can see there being some movement on that isn’t because it doesn’t violate the NCAA’s sacred rule of amateurism.  Face it, the extra subsidy Emmert’s already on board for crosses the pay for play line no matter how hard he wants to deny it.  Nah, the reason it’s got a shot, however slight, of happening is because it won’t cost the schools anything.  Which is more than you can say for pursuing O’Bannon all the way to the Supreme Court, especially if the NCAA comes out on the losing end of the stick.

Am I being cynical?  Is there any other way to be about this?