California could truly become the Golden State for elite college athletes as well as the epicenter of an earthquake shaking college sports.

Under a bill — the Fair Pay to Play Act — passed 31-4 by the California state senate and moving through the legislature, college athletes at schools that receive an average of $10 million or more a year in media rights revenue would be free to make money off the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses, something currently not available to them in the U.S.

They would be allowed to negotiate endorsement deals, appear in video games and have their likenesses on products. Moreover, they would be permitted to engage agents to represent them in seeking and contracting for such deals.

For example, if someone like Vavae Malepeai, a Mililani High graduate at the marquee USC tailback position, were to have a record-breaking season for the Trojans, he could negotiate for a cut of the revenues from jerseys that carry his name or items that feature his likeness should the legislation pass and be implemented during his career.

If a video game maker wants to digitize his image slicing through Pac-12 opponents, Malepeai or his successors could collect royalties depending on when the measure goes on the books.

What’s more, schools would be prohibited from taking away an athlete’s scholarship, reducing the amount of aid or declaring them ineligible.

It is forward-looking, potentially ground-shaking legislation that would allow elite athletes across the sporting spectrum — volleyball, soccer, softball, tennis, baseball, you name it — to receive value on their talents without crossing the messy line that would make them employees of the schools they represent.

That’s been an important consideration in the debate about whether athletes should be able to cash in on their abilities.

Of course, it has sent a cold shiver through NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis and, you suspect, many of the member campuses.

If you are, say, UCLA, that could seriously cut into the $280 million apparel deal the school signed with Under Armour three years ago.

But for the NCAA, which has for a half-century been determined to keep the athletes under the thumb as chattel, it is one of the worst nightmares imaginable.

Because if California enacts this legislation other states would be compelled to follow. Not necessarily out of a progressive attitude toward athlete rights, but more likely because their schools would lose out in recruiting.

How long do you think it would take legislatures in Alabama, Ohio, Texas or Michigan to pass similar or even more athlete-advantageous bills to keep their schools competitive?

We know how seriously the NCAA is taking it by the strident, blackmail tone of the letter sent by its president, Mark Emmert, to California lawmakers saying it could be, “… impossible to host fair national championships” in the state. Also implied is that athletes in the state could be declared ineligible.

Emmert maintained in the letter, “…when contrasted with with current NCAA rules, as drafted, the bill threatens to alter materially the principles of intercollegiate athletics …”

No, what it would do is redirect a portion of the billions in revenue that the NCAA, its member schools, athletic administrators and coaches now have all to themselves.

Reach Ferd Lewis at flewis@staradvertiser.com or 529-4820.