NIL Thread (Name, Image, Likeness Rule)

[sacraig]

Baylor AD Mack Rhoades fears demands of NCAA transfer portal, NIL will drive head coaches away

The longtime athletic director doesn't like what NIL and transfer portal could mean for coaches

247sports.com

So hire more staff to handle the extra load like Villanova just did. Good grief.

 

[RabidDawgClassic]

Baylor AD Mack Rhoades fears demands of NCAA transfer portal, NIL will drive head coaches away

The longtime athletic director doesn't like what NIL and transfer portal could mean for coaches

247sports.com

Oh boo hoo!

Multi-millionaire grown men will quit because their jobs got harder? Oh no!! Where will we ever find people to fill those high paying opportunities? Give me a break!

And Gen Z is accused of quiet quitting?

 

[SeattleSlim]

Oh boo hoo!

Multi-millionaire grown men will quit because their jobs got harder? Oh no!! Where will we ever find people to fill those high paying opportunities? Give me a break!

And Gen Z is accused of quiet quitting?

It’s not that the job got harder… it’s that the nature of the institutional sport they know has fundamentally changed in a way they can no longer support.

And… it’s not a good idea to stereotype whole generations of people

 

[RabidDawgClassic]

It’s not that the job got harder… it’s that the nature of the institutional sport they know has fundamentally changed in a way they can no longer support.

And… it’s not a good idea to stereotype whole generations of people

The article clearly states that dealing with the portal and NIL is adding to coaches’ “already demanding workload,” and the Baylor AD fears that will drive many of them away.

And again, these are well-compensated grown-ups. If they are put off by the fundamental changes of players having the same freedom of movement that they do while also earning fair compensation, then perhaps it IS time for them to ride off into the sunset. Adapt or die. There will be no shortage of newcomers ready to come in and navigate this new landscape.

 

[sacraig]

It’s not that the job got harder… it’s that the nature of the institutional sport they know has fundamentally changed in a way they can no longer support.

And… it’s not a good idea to stereotype whole generations of people

This is Baylor so he's absolutely whining about protecting millionaires, not the integrity of the sport.

And if they can't support it anymore, I'm sure they can retire happy and wealthy and 1000 more people would happily do the job for half their salary.

 

[SeattleSlim]

This is Baylor so he's absolutely whining about protecting millionaires, not the integrity of the sport.

And if they can't support it anymore, I'm sure they can retire happy and wealthy and 1000 more people would happily do the job for half their salary.

Yeah, … my comments were geared more toward the last paragraph in the article.

 

[Calvin]

Thought this was an interesting read: NCAA may pay for past sins.

TLDR, the NCAA got slammed when losing on NIL, so there is now a case moving along asking for class action status to recover damages going back to 2016. Thery're claiming $1.4 billion, with 75% going to football players, 15% to men's bball. Shockingly, the NCAA says they're wrong.

 

[Mr. Roberts]

Thought this was an interesting read: NCAA may pay for past sins.

TLDR, the NCAA got slammed when losing on NIL, so there is now a case moving along asking for class action status to recover damages going back to 2016. Thery're claiming $1.4 billion, with 75% going to football players, 15% to men's bball. Shockingly, the NCAA says they're wrong.

One small correction - a class action suit means 80% goes to the lawyers, 15% to football players, 3% to basketball, 2% to everyone else.

 

[Second place is 1st loser]

I don't mind the NIL rule of the portal isn't what it is. If guys want to get paid and can get paid, hey, more power to them. Has it gotten out of control? Absolutely.

However, what really has thrown the whole system for a loop is not having to sit a year when transferring. It's free agency every year. It allows guys to basically quit with no repercussions, it makes high school recruiting secondary because why develop a freshman when he can leave after a year vs grabbing an experienced senior who can step right in? The mid majors have become a farm system.

The remedy for this is to 1) eliminate the one and done rule. If a kid wants to go to the NBA and make money right out of High School, then fine, go get paid and 2)bring back the mandatory rule that you have to sit out a year if you want to transfer. If you make a decision, you stick with it. The NCAA rewarded Skyy for quiting on his team mid season. If he wants to do that, fine, but you sit out a year.

What this has created is a distrust by the coaches because they have to assume that no player is guaranteed to return. There's no rules for the player, thus the coaches have to prepare for that. When I see people comment about guys getting recruited over and worrying about them leaving then blame the coach. I cringe. Look what happened to BU this year. His freshmen backcourt just left and he's caught scrambling with no guards. He can't wait until May hoping things work out because if you wait, you're screwed. There's no loyalty on either side right now because not requiring guys to stay at least one year has created a complete distrust on both ends.

1)Give them their money, 2)give them the opportunity to go pro right out of HS and 3)require two years at a school or sit our a year. Problem solved.

 

[mysterio2525]

One small correction - a class action suit means 80% goes to the lawyers, 15% to football players, 3% to basketball, 2% to everyone else.

Sad but still better than 100% to a bunch of people who stumbled their way to the finish line and contributed very little

 

[chrisRunner7]

Sad but still better than 100% to a bunch of people who stumbled their way to the finish line and contributed very little

Well, the original post was an exaggeration/mischaracterization of class action lawsuits... no lawyers are taking 80% of 1.4 billion if they win that case. But if he wants to say lawyers suck, sure, I get it.

 

[WhiteHorseWings]

Well, the original post was an exaggeration/mischaracterization of class action lawsuits... no lawyers are taking 80% of 1.4 billion if they win that case. But if he wants to say lawyers suck, sure, I get it.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers, that is. But in any case, no court would approve more than 35%. And an antitrust claim like this would treble the damage award.

But back to your regularly scheduled grumbling about lawyers…

 

[Mr. Roberts]

Plaintiffs’ lawyers, that is. But in any case, no court would approve more than 35%. And an antitrust claim like this would treble the damage award.

But back to your regularly scheduled grumbling about lawyers…

OK - I'll rephrase. You are arithmetically correct on the 35%. The point I was trying to make is that in a class action case, the losing or settling defendant writes a monster check. The plaintiff lawyers get massive, big honking checks. The lead plaintiff will get a noticeable check. The thousands of class members will get very tiny checks. In my personal experience, class action suits are not an effective means to proportionally compensate large numbers of individuals wronged by a large institution. They are more a means to generate large profits for the plaintiffs lawyers and to seek revenge and retribution through damaging or destroying the institution.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

lets put it this way

if you are anything other than a plaintiff in a personal injury case or a real estate closing today, your effed if you need to hire an attorney, in which case you have already lost

 

[DReq]

OK - I'll rephrase. You are arithmetically correct on the 35%. The point I was trying to make is that in a class action case, the losing or settling defendant writes a monster check. The plaintiff lawyers get massive, big honking checks. The lead plaintiff will get a noticeable check. The thousands of class members will get very tiny checks. In my personal experience, class action suits are not an effective means to proportionally compensate large numbers of individuals wronged by a large institution. They are more a means to generate large profits for the plaintiffs lawyers and to seek revenge and retribution through damaging or destroying the institution.

If you know what a class action is for then you know that this is exactly why they work. A large business can cause a tiny amount of damage to each of a million people and by doing so turn a big profit. No single claimant can pursue that claim. Even if that person self-represents in small claims court for their $50 or whatever damage they could prove. Class action is not for people who have actually lost huge amounts and never were for that purpose. If you have lost a large sum you can afford to pursue that claim as an individual.

The only reason business is held accountable for small injuries to large numbers of people is through class action and the lawyers who make those stick have generated huge sums at a huge cost. It is not some magical trick but an enormous effort getting a class certified by a court.

I know to those who have not actually pursued a class action it looks like easy money but it is not and the injured plaintiffs would never recover their money on their own.

I also cannot let stand the claim that is you hire an attorney in a real estate transaction you are "effed" as was stated by the OP is dangerous. Far more people are financially ruined every year by not hiring an attorney when they need to than are by hiring an attorney.

I know this is not a popular statement but I can say I am a reformed attorney having gone through rehab and returned to non-attorney life. I have plenty or bad to say bout the profession but telling people not to get attorneys when they need them is dangerous and irresponsible to create a false narrative about what happens in a lawyer client relationship. There are bad attorneys. There are bad people in all professions and occupations. That does not mean everyone in that occupation or profession is bad. That sort of blanket statement is simply ill-advised and wrong.

I will step off my soapbox. Please feel free to cast your stones. I will ignore them.

 

[Mr. Roberts]

If you know what a class action is for then you know that this is exactly why they work. A large business can cause a tiny amount of damage to each of a million people and by doing so turn a big profit. No single claimant can pursue that claim. Even if that person self-represents in small claims court for their $50 or whatever damage they could prove. Class action is not for people who have actually lost huge amounts and never were for that purpose. If you have lost a large sum you can afford to pursue that claim as an individual.

The only reason business is held accountable for small injuries to large numbers of people is through class action and the lawyers who make those stick have generated huge sums at a huge cost. It is not some magical trick but an enormous effort getting a class certified by a court.

I know to those who have not actually pursued a class action it looks like easy money but it is not and the injured plaintiffs would never recover their money on their own.

I also cannot let stand the claim that is you hire an attorney in a real estate transaction you are "effed" as was stated by the OP is dangerous. Far more people are financially ruined every year by not hiring an attorney when they need to than are by hiring an attorney.

I know this is not a popular statement but I can say I am a reformed attorney having gone through rehab and returned to non-attorney life. I have plenty or bad to say bout the profession but telling people not to get attorneys when they need them is dangerous and irresponsible to create a false narrative about what happens in a lawyer client relationship. There are bad attorneys. There are bad people in all professions and occupations. That does not mean everyone in that occupation or profession is bad. That sort of blanket statement is simply ill-advised and wrong.

I will step off my soapbox. Please feel free to cast your stones. I will ignore them.

No argument against your points. My reply was in reference to discussion about a class action suit against the NCAA to recover perceived damages for pre-NIL nonpayment of athletes, which seems to align with your 3rd sentence - the definition of what class action suits are not for.

I'm finished now.

 

[Illini in Italy]

Interesting article from Sports Illustrated this morning . . .

IRS says donations made to NonProfit NIL Collectives are not tax exempt.

" . . . says one school associate athletic director. “What I tell my donors is. ... What charity are you donating to? You’re not. You’re lining kids’ pockets to keep them at your school. That’s not a charity. That’s a way to get around tax laws which leads to tax evasion and opens a whole different can of worms for donors."

 

[BRucks]

Interesting article from Sports Illustrated this morning . . .

IRS says donations made to NonProfit NIL Collectives are not tax exempt.

" . . . says one school associate athletic director. “What I tell my donors is. ... What charity are you donating to? You’re not. You’re lining kids’ pockets to keep them at your school. That’s not a charity. That’s a way to get around tax laws which leads to tax evasion and opens a whole different can of worms for donors."

One of our collectives, ICON collective, is telling donors that their contributions are tax deductible since they are set up as a 401(c)(3) nonprofit. At least they were telling donors that as of this writing: https://www.news-gazette.com/newsle...cle_b7273030-8b44-5f0f-9d44-ec77ab211e8b.html

 

[WhiteHorseWings]

One of our collectives, ICON collective, is telling donors that their contributions are tax deductible since they are set up as a 401(c)(3) nonprofit. At least they were telling donors that as of this writing: https://www.news-gazette.com/newsle...cle_b7273030-8b44-5f0f-9d44-ec77ab211e8b.html

My wife works with them. They take donations and require recipients to donate time to nonprofits. It’s legit.

 

[2qtslow]

We give money to collectives so they can pay kids to attend their chosen school. That is not a charitable purpose and thus should not be deductible as a charitable contribution. The fact that the kid spends a few minutes per month at a charity does not alter the real purpose of the entire scheme.

 

[Illini in Italy]

My wife works with them. They take donations and require recipients to donate time to nonprofits. It’s legit.

One of our collectives, ICON collective, is telling donors that their contributions are tax deductible since they are set up as a 401(c)(3) nonprofit. At least they were telling donors that as of this writing: https://www.news-gazette.com/newsle...cle_b7273030-8b44-5f0f-9d44-ec77ab211e8b.html

I'm thinking that there are going to be a bunch of surprised donors. I agree with the quote - these are donations to a charitable cause, they are donations to steer players (note I don't refer to them as 'kids') to "pitch your product/service" (attend your school).

 

[Govoner Vaugn Fan]

Depends on the situation. If you own an auto dealership, for example, and pay a player a couple grand a day to hang around the showroom and sign autographs... that's a legitimate advertising/promotion deductible expense. Paying a player to cut a radio or tv commercial endorsing your business... same thing. If you give to a middleman who passes the money on to the player... it could get iffy but you would likely be ok if you have the player do something of value for your business or charity. I would think you might have problems if you, or a middleman just hands out a monthly check with the task of just playing ball.

 

[BretMyBeachHouse]

Depends on the situation. If you own an auto dealership, for example, and pay a player a couple grand a day to hang around the showroom and sign autographs... that's a legitimate advertising/promotion deductible expense. Paying a player to cut a radio or tv commercial endorsing your business... same thing. If you give to a middleman who passes the money on to the player... it could get iffy but you would likely be ok if you have the player do something of value for your business or charity. I would think you might have problems if you, or a middleman just hands out a monthly check with the task of just playing ball.

I'm not sure what you're addressing here.

Of course, endorsement money is a deductible business expense. Although there might be some limits to this based on fair market value.

GIving money to a player as an individual for some ridiculously overpriced "endorsement" is likely not going to create an IRS problem. If I give you 100K to say something nice about me on twitter, that's my business.

The issue here is whether I can give a not for profit 100K with the understanding that they'll use it to pay you 100K to say something nice about the Boys and Girls club on twitter. As shady as it might appear to some, it may be legal.

I've got to think this type of thing has been vetted now and in the past. Not for profits bring in speakers to events and the donations to cover that honorium are deductible, I'd think.

The good news is that the University doesn't seem to have exposure here.

 

[Battle89]

I'm not sure what you're addressing here.

Of course, endorsement money is a deductible business expense. Although there might be some limits to this based on fair market value.

GIving money to a player as an individual for some ridiculously overpriced "endorsement" is likely not going to create an IRS problem. If I give you 100K to say something nice about me on twitter, that's my business.

The issue here is whether I can give a not for profit 100K with the understanding that they'll use it to pay you 100K to say something nice about the Boys and Girls club on twitter. As shady as it might appear to some, it may be legal.

I've got to think this type of thing has been vetted now and in the past. Not for profits bring in speakers to events and the donations to cover that honorium are deductible, I'd think.

The good news is that the University doesn't seem to have exposure here.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

a 501(c)(3) needs to be approved by the IRS
they have already said that an NIL collective is NOT a legit charitable organization

individuals giving money to NIL collectives are going to find its not tax deductible. it is however, for businesses , likely an allowable ordinary business expense like advertising or marketing is