RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
Jumer’s was good enough for Bob Knight — not that that’s a ringing endorsement in my book or anything.
College Athletics Enters Revenue Sharing Era
- Status
Old person flashback at the mention of Huey's.... awesome place to wander the way too small aisles.
Battle89
- Cary-Grove, the better Trojan team
Fun to speculate and we'll see how it plays out. All I know for sure is that for every person who worked on this agreement, there will be 20 others who are trying to find the loopholes and best ways around it. Some of those 20 will succeed, and then the rest of the 20 will copy them.
At some point it will no longer seem to society to be odd or illegal for Person A to want to give Player B money to 'attend' University C. It's just pro sports now.
Battle89
- Cary-Grove, the better Trojan team
If you are looking for NIL money from Jumer's, I've got a bridge to sell you too.Jumer’s was good enough for Bob Knight — not that that’s a ringing endorsement in my book or anything.
Speculating out loud here, but my expectation is that IF the NCAA decides it can police the merit of individual contracts, they will wind up back where they started and lose in court. I suspect by now they understand this, but I've underestimated them before. There's a legitimate market for these athletes, and their value under any given set of contract circumstances will be difficult to dispute. The businesses that can afford to pay for NIL are going to be ones with relatively deep pockets, so that should solve itself. Money currently running through collectives, well, those entities may need to get creative to find ways to move the funds, but since they will already have the revenue side taken care of, I have faith in them to deal with any rules set by the CSC. And on the new university funds of $20mil, that can be used to cover anything the other funds can't. That's a general sketch of where I see things heading, but who knows.
The underlying conflict that got us here was the NCAA being completely out of alignment with the athletes. Among other issues, a black market developed over decades to address the discrepancy while the athletes' value kept rising. It remains to be seen what incentives or conflicts will come from the new structure, but my hope is that the CSC is given a role and rules that the conferences and athletes back. If either side doesn't, or the CSC tries to insert itself for it's own reasons, I expect we'll get a whole new set of issues, and wind up back in court.
Adding to the fun and chaos, with the conference realignments we have seen, should we think about introducing the soccer concept of promotion/relegation? If you finish last in the Big, you are relegated to the MAC.
Jay Bilas (also studied law) has his take on it.
TLDR; he seems to think NIL will stay, but be more "orderly" with Deloitte and arbitration. Has some insight on how the past NCAA model has made for some messed up thinking. Loved this (paraphrasing): if you don't want to be sued, stop breaking the law. The NCAA has been breaking the rules every chance it gets.
TLDR; he seems to think NIL will stay, but be more "orderly" with Deloitte and arbitration. Has some insight on how the past NCAA model has made for some messed up thinking. Loved this (paraphrasing): if you don't want to be sued, stop breaking the law. The NCAA has been breaking the rules every chance it gets.
Well I know at least a few members are celebrating this that hated the current NIL structure.
We're going to go back to back room deals, bag men, and under the table payouts and we'll be one of the the few 25 programs that won't do it. At least this is the historical context of the Weber/Groce years.
This is not good for our programs but the Kansas and Kentuckys of the world are celebrating this hard - no doubt.
And the beloved will be used to increase the bid.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
The hard truth about back room deals — it’s much easier to hide $10 thousand than it is $2 million. That’s take quite a hefty bag and spend it incorrectly, the IRS will come a calling.
Amen, brother.
That’s why you have the pros like World Wide Wes do it. It’s an entire industry. It’s very naive to think this can’t happen when it’s literally been happening the entire history of collegiate sports.
At least coach OA knows the game so hopefully this go around we could participate.
Are our Euro guys in danger of losing their NIL?
Curbelo Fanboy
BERTBALL IS LIFE
Problem is the MAC & similar leagues may well drop down to a revamped Division I AA (FCS). I could see a fair amount of schools deciding it's just not worth it in the deep end any more & dropping down a level where there is less financial pressure. Could see some big D2 schools moving up & some of the smaller D1's dropping down to form a new division.
A league like the MAC may be safe but some of the low D1 football leagues may go away or drop down en masse. More changes are still to come & IMO none of it is good.
Of course if a school drops down, the revenue drops, but there is a real possibility that by dropping down, the cash outlay required to be competitive will drop also. There's a calculation where if your expenses drop more than revenue you actually come out ahead from the present situation.
A league like the MAC may be safe but some of the low D1 football leagues may go away or drop down en masse. More changes are still to come & IMO none of it is good.
Of course if a school drops down, the revenue drops, but there is a real possibility that by dropping down, the cash outlay required to be competitive will drop also. There's a calculation where if your expenses drop more than revenue you actually come out ahead from the present situation.
To the broader point of revenue sharing, I would think the settlement should allow schools to sign some players for more than 1 year, and contracts to have penalties/buyouts that reduce the incentive to transfer. It's still early days, but that may be one positive that comes out of it.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
They discussed this on Saturday Sportstalk a couple of weeks ago. The NIL rights are in perpituity, which likely means it would be struck down with the first legal challenge.
And according to the attorney who was a guest on the show, the conference actually holds the NIL rights, not the individual schools. Presumably, that's why Morez Johnson went to Michigan, as he might not have been able to transfer out of the conference and maintain his current NIL standing.
Why so? If exclusive NIL rights were part of the revenue agreement that was included in the settlement the judge approved, I would expect it to hold. That said, I have no idea if that was part of the settlement, or this is the schools (yet again) overplaying their hand. I believe this same judge is overseeing the agreement for something like 10 years, so issues should be resolved more quickly than if it was started from a new lawsuit.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
Primarily because of the in perpetuity part — meaning the School/conference would own an individual athletes NIL rights forever, and courts would likely deem that to be too much restraint.
I believe the assignment of their NIL rights ends with their eligibility.
That would certainly make more sense. Otherwise it's hard to imagine the judge would include it in the settlement.
These contracts are not part of the settlement. It appears all Big Ten schools are using similar language (probably drafted in league with the conference to create some uniformity), but ultimately these are contracts between the schools and the players. The contracts have been drafted to try and adhere to the House settlement, but the court is not going to review and pre-approve every contract that will be entered into by every player and school.
Commentary from a legal website. This leads me to believe that the restrictions may be targeted, which to my thinking makes a lot more sense than some of what has been discussed in this thread. The legal sites I've checked have more questions than answers and expect a lot of this will get challenged on some level. One related thing that was brought up earlier was states passing legislation to stop the NCAA from enforcing rules against their schools.
...the manner in which the NCAA will alter, change, and interpret its rules surrounding the prohibition of NIL payments remains untested. The NCAA initially prohibited all forms of NIL compensation by third parties but has now agreed to a rule where it prohibits only those payments from “associated entities and individuals” (which include donors and collectives) providing payments for reasons that are not a “valid business purpose” related to “the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit.” The NCAA has previously placed significant restrictions on the level of collaboration that is permitted between schools and collectives, and it is unclear how the prohibition against NIL payments by “associated entities and individuals” will be construed.
...the manner in which the NCAA will alter, change, and interpret its rules surrounding the prohibition of NIL payments remains untested. The NCAA initially prohibited all forms of NIL compensation by third parties but has now agreed to a rule where it prohibits only those payments from “associated entities and individuals” (which include donors and collectives) providing payments for reasons that are not a “valid business purpose” related to “the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit.” The NCAA has previously placed significant restrictions on the level of collaboration that is permitted between schools and collectives, and it is unclear how the prohibition against NIL payments by “associated entities and individuals” will be construed.
- Status