And So It Begins….

[VOLINVONORE]

They can demand it, but it doesn't mean the money will be there.

we will see a downward correction in a couple years. the small schools won't be able to pay much at all, and once the bottom drops, it will drag down the rest. it will take time, there will be outliers, but the current money isn't sustainable, and thus it will fix itself.

sure some schools will still be able to buy whoever, but that is going to be pretty limited. and you will see schools thinking about the cost benefits, and opportunity costs associated with high dollar kids. especially if they know that kid is just going to transfer out, why pay him alot to sit on the bench?

Private schools will pay.

 

[LouderVol]

Private schools will pay.

not when they dont have to. or they would be dumb too.

lets just say current rate is 5mil for a 5 star qb. everyone who can pays that.

5 years down the road the rate has dropped to 1 mil. sure a couple schools may still pay 5 million for a guy they believe is once in a generation. but most of them are going to pay 1 million, 1.25 million or something there about. enough to be competitive or the best offer, but they aren't going to overspend just to do it. no private school has enough alum that interested in sports to continuously pay these rates. especially when a lower amount will do.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

not when they dont have to. or they would be dumb too.

lets just say current rate is 5mil for a 5 star qb. everyone who can pays that.

5 years down the road the rate has dropped to 1 mil. sure a couple schools may still pay 5 million for a guy they believe is once in a generation. but most of them are going to pay 1 million, 1.25 million or something there about. enough to be competitive or the best offer, but they aren't going to overspend just to do it. no private school has enough alum that interested in sports to continuously pay these rates. especially when a lower amount will do.

Private schools have paid athletes for years and years. I know some coaches in Atlanta who have coaches in the Private sector and the same things happen in Private schools in Tennessee. Private schools also found ways to get the best high schools athletes to come to their schools. When I was in high school in the 1950s, Dobyns Bennett high schooling Kingsport Tennessee always recruited the best football and basketball players from the smaller schools East Tennessee.. Their parents would hysterically find a really good paying job at Eastman Chemical Company, formally Eastman Kodak. However, our little old Rogersville High school did beat them and Chattanooga Central in basketball.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

They can demand it, but it doesn't mean the money will be there.

we will see a downward correction in a couple years. the small schools won't be able to pay much at all, and once the bottom drops, it will drag down the rest. it will take time, there will be outliers, but the current money isn't sustainable, and thus it will fix itself.

sure some schools will still be able to buy whoever, but that is going to be pretty limited. and you will see schools thinking about the cost benefits, and opportunity costs associated with high dollar kids. especially if they know that kid is just going to transfer out, why pay him alot to sit on the bench?

A salary cap, without Congress providing an Antitrust Exemption, will lead to lawsuits and collective bargaining will be mandatory via the courts, most likely.

If small schools can't pay the minimum negotiated by the players organization, what then?

The players have a skill the colleges want. That's why they paid them for years under the table. Above the table with NIL and revenue sharing, the situation is ripe for the players to negotiate just like pro players.

Teams and leagues either pay players well or fold, historically.

 

[LouderVol]

A salary cap, without Congress providing an Antitrust Exemption, will lead to lawsuits and collective bargaining will be mandatory via the courts, most likely.

If small schools can't pay the minimum negotiated by the players organization, what then?

The players have a skill the colleges want. That's why they paid them for years under the table. Above the table with NIL and revenue sharing, the situation is ripe for the players to negotiate just like pro players.

Teams and leagues either pay players well or fold, historically.

where is this salary cap coming from? Nothing is saying the kid CAN'T be paid 5 million a year. just no one is PAYING 5 million a year under real market forces. nothing says an employer has more than they want to, above minimum wage.

If there is a deal, there will likely be tiers to that deal. just like the NFL rookie deals are lower than the rates established players get. yeah, the better kids will want to go to the schools in the higher tiers, but there won't be room for all of them. any deal would cap number of players too. and really it will just be formalizing what is already going on.

2 5stars has gone to a non-P5 school out of high school. The houston DT a couple years ago, and Justin Hunter. Cormani McClain was committed to do so before following Prime to Colorado. so its not like some tiered system is going to create a new dynamic that didn't already exist.

and I always get a chuckle when people complain about all the NEW payments through NIL and just wish kids were getting paid under the table before. as if that is somehow different. either way its not amateurism. either way the kid is getting paid to go play football somewhere. the only difference is we have a better understanding of the dollar amount, and suddenly its some huge moral issue where people can't watch the sport anymore.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

where is this salary cap coming from? Nothing is saying the kid CAN'T be paid 5 million a year. just no one is PAYING 5 million a year under real market forces. nothing says an employer has more than they want to, above minimum wage.

If there is a deal, there will likely be tiers to that deal. just like the NFL rookie deals are lower than the rates established players get. yeah, the better kids will want to go to the schools in the higher tiers, but there won't be room for all of them. any deal would cap number of players too. and really it will just be formalizing what is already going on.

2 5stars has gone to a non-P5 school out of high school. The houston DT a couple years ago, and Justin Hunter. Cormani McClain was committed to do so before following Prime to Colorado. so its not like some tiered system is going to create a new dynamic that didn't already exist.

and I always get a chuckle when people complain about all the NEW payments through NIL and just wish kids were getting paid under the table before. as if that is somehow different. either way its not amateurism. either way the kid is getting paid to go play football somewhere. the only difference is we have a better understanding of the dollar amount, and suddenly its some huge moral issue where people can't watch the sport anymore.

That's part of the deal the NCAA is cutting with the courts. I believe the schools will be limited to $20M in revenue sharing, though I doubt that exact amount is set in stone yet.

That amounts to a salary cap for each team. Once the courts almost certainly declare the players are employees...... after all, sharing revenue they helped the schools make looks exactly like an employer/employee relationship.

Why should the NCAA or group of schools be able to establish a "this is the most you can pay" limit on a school?

Pro sports get away with that based upon Antitrust Exemptions.

 

[lawgator1]

SIAP

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/30/sport/ncaa-drop-transfer-rule-division-i-athletes-justice-department/index.html

Another nail in the coffin of the charade that the players will have a shred of identity with their first schools.

Or the second. The third. And so on.

 

[LouderVol]

That's part of the deal the NCAA is cutting with the courts. I believe the schools will be limited to $20M in revenue sharing, though I doubt that exact amount is set in stone yet.

That amounts to a salary cap for each team. Once the courts almost certainly declare the players are employees...... after all, sharing revenue they helped the schools make looks exactly like an employer/employee relationship.

Why should the NCAA or group of schools be able to establish a "this is the most you can pay" limit on a school?

Pro sports get away with that based upon Antitrust Exemptions.

I thought the 20 mil was NIL-esque funds from the school? not a salary.

the 20 million is a cap on how much the schools can pay, not a cap on how much the players can make. as far as I have seen the players will be able to get other NIL deals outside of the 20 million.

the NFL doesn't limit the player's ability to make NIL money outside or above the NFL salary cap.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I thought the 20 mil was NIL-esque funds from the school? not a salary.

the 20 million is a cap on how much the schools can pay, not a cap on how much the players can make. as far as I have seen the players will be able to get other NIL deals outside of the 20 million.

the NFL doesn't limit the player's ability to make NIL money outside or above the NFL salary cap.

How dumb can the NCAA be to expect that they'll be able to call it NIL and cap how much a school can offer when they've lost every case so far trying to cap NIL?

That's EXACTLY what Alston was about: the NCAA can't limit reasonable educational benefits to players. After that 9-0 decision, the NCAA saw what was coming and approved NIL for players. They've since lost or are losing EVERY attempt to limit NIL, including in the Nico case at UT.

Now, repackaging it via direct compensation from the schools, they still want to try to "cap the schools" ability to compete in the free market. It was illegal via Antitrust in Alston and it will still be illegal.

 

[LouderVol]

How dumb can the NCAA be to expect that they'll be able to call it NIL and cap how much a school can offer when they've lost every case so far trying to cap NIL?

That's EXACTLY what Alston was about: the NCAA can't limit reasonable educational benefits to players. After that 9-0 decision, the NCAA saw what was coming and approved NIL for players. They've since lost or are losing EVERY attempt to limit NIL, including in the Nico case at UT.

Now, repackaging it via direct compensation from the schools, they still want to try to "cap the schools" ability to compete in the free market. It was illegal via Antitrust in Alston and it will still be illegal.

except that the 20 million doesn't cap what the players can get. that is the part you are missing. the players can still earn NIL outside of that 20 million. there is no cap on them to be an anti-trust issue. unless the schools try to add that, but so far I haven't seen it.

again its the same in the NFL. the SALARY is capped the NIL is NOT.

players in both will be able to earn as much as they can generate. its only NIL from one source that is partially limited. but they can still get OTHER NIL deals.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

except that the 20 million doesn't cap what the players can get. that is the part you are missing. the players can still earn NIL outside of that 20 million. there is no cap on them to be an anti-trust issue. unless the schools try to add that, but so far I haven't seen it.

again its the same in the NFL. the SALARY is capped the NIL is NOT.

players in both will be able to earn as much as they can generate. its only NIL from one source that is partially limited. but they can still get OTHER NIL deals.

So you think it would fly legally if the NCAA tried to say, a company can only provide $20M in NIL to students. Period. That's all. No more.

It's blatantly anti-competitive to set a limit on how much compensation a team, business, etc can offer. That's exactly like a group of companies in an industry saying: we're only going to pay XXX and no more. The workers can't negotiate with us beyond that.

Collective bargaining exists for a reason. You can't just arbitrarily "cap compensation" in any form and not get sued.

The NCAA is continuously losing cases trying to regulate what, when, and how NIL can be used. Yet here they are again with a "cap" on what schools can offer. Of course it's another Antitrust lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

[LouderVol]

So you think it would fly legally if the NCAA tried to say, a company can only provide $20M in NIL to students. Period. That's all. No more.

It's blatantly anti-competitive to set a limit on how much compensation a team, business, etc can offer. That's exactly like a group of companies in an industry saying: we're only going to pay XXX and no more. The workers can't negotiate with us beyond that.

Collective bargaining exists for a reason. You can't just arbitrarily "cap compensation" in any form and not get sued.

The NCAA is continuously losing cases trying to regulate what, when, and how NIL can be used. Yet here they are again with a "cap" on what schools can offer. Of course it's another Antitrust lawsuit waiting to happen.

again you are completely misunderstanding the whole thing.

there is no cap in the compensation a player can get. none, zero.
there is a 20 million cap in the member schools NIL payments.
the players can still go get other, multiple, NIL deals outside of the member schools. There is no restriction on that. this 20 million will be ON TOP of the current NIL deals which is legal.

and its purely a Name Image Likeness. the students earning outside of Name Image Likeness is not restricted. their earnings from Name Image Likeness is also not restricted. there is no anti-trust issue. the schools payments are capped, not the student's earnings.

My job doesn't have to give me eleven million dollars just because I ask for it to avoid an antitrust suit. I can't claim they are colluding when no one will give me eleven million dollars in an anti trust suit. my ability to go out and try to earn 11 million dollars is not capped by my employer paying me a reasonable wage. that is the same thing going on here. the players earning is not capped.

as I understand it the 20 million per year is a court negiogated number, that is still getting reviewed, so it may end up more or on some scale, X% of sales or payments to the schools or whatever. so I very much doubt there are going to be too many cases challenging the very ruling that gave them direct payments from the school. my understanding as well is that if players accept payment from the 20 million they can no longer make anti-trust claims against the schools, again court negiogated, not the NCAA.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

again you are completely misunderstanding the whole thing.

there is no cap in the compensation a player can get. none, zero.
there is a 20 million cap in the member schools NIL payments.
the players can still go get other, multiple, NIL deals outside of the member schools. There is no restriction on that. this 20 million will be ON TOP of the current NIL deals which is legal.

and its purely a Name Image Likeness. the students earning outside of Name Image Likeness is not restricted. their earnings from Name Image Likeness is also not restricted. there is no anti-trust issue. the schools payments are capped, not the student's earnings.

My job doesn't have to give me eleven million dollars just because I ask for it to avoid an antitrust suit. I can't claim they are colluding when no one will give me eleven million dollars in an anti trust suit. my ability to go out and try to earn 11 million dollars is not capped by my employer paying me a reasonable wage. that is the same thing going on here. the players earning is not capped.

as I understand it the 20 million per year is a court negiogated number, that is still getting reviewed, so it may end up more or on some scale, X% of sales or payments to the schools or whatever. so I very much doubt there are going to be too many cases challenging the very ruling that gave them direct payments from the school. my understanding as well is that if players accept payment from the 20 million they can no longer make anti-trust claims against the schools, again court negiogated, not the NCAA.

You seem to misunderstand why the NCAA just today abandoned fighting transfers and why they will abandon limiting the school's NIL.

From Alston, the Supreme Court has basically said: the NCAA business model is not compensating athletes for their work, essentially laying out that the athletes ARE employees.

What controls employee compensation LEGALLY is the market. So, if your market value is $11M and your employer and other like employers can collude to only pay you $1M........ yes, you can sue and win. They cannot "wage fix" without an Antitrust Exemption.

What started this whole mess was schools valued their athletes WELL beyond the value of an scholarship and paid them illegally. Players and teams and states are suing the NCAA saying: They are wage fixing. They are not allowing us to compensate, via the NIL process, our players as the market sees fit.

That's EXACTLY why TN sued over Nico and Donde Plowman destroyed the NCAA in her response to the NCAA investigating UT. The NCAA CANNOT regulate player compensation in any way.

Everyone here praised Donde for telling the NCAA to piss off on telling UT how it can recruit using our NIL collective. It will be the same thing related to the NCAA telling schools how to use the school's NIL collective. Why not?

 

[LouderVol]

You seem to misunderstand why the NCAA just today abandoned fighting transfers and why they will abandon limiting the school's NIL.

From Alston, the Supreme Court has basically said: the NCAA business model is not compensating athletes for their work, essentially laying out that the athletes ARE employees.

What controls employee compensation LEGALLY is the market. So, if your market value is $11M and your employer and other like employers can collude to only pay you $1M........ yes, you can sue and win. They cannot "wage fix" without an Antitrust Exemption.

What started this whole mess was schools valued their athletes WELL beyond the value of an scholarship and paid them illegally. Players and teams and states are suing the NCAA saying: They are wage fixing. They are not allowing us to compensate, via the NIL process, our players as the market sees fit.

That's EXACTLY why TN sued over Nico and Donde Plowman destroyed the NCAA in her response to the NCAA investigating UT. The NCAA CANNOT regulate player compensation in any way.

Everyone here praised Donde for telling the NCAA to piss off on telling UT how it can recruit using our NIL collective. It will be the same thing related to the NCAA telling schools how to use the school's NIL collective. Why not?

because the NCAA doesn't limit the earnings of the individuals any more. it only limits the payments of the member institutions. the players can still go out and get all the NIL they want. their pay isn't capped. the 20 mil NIL is NOT direct employment. the schools still are not directly employing their players. they are paying them for their Name Image and Likeness, but not employing them.

Nico getting paid 8 million from Spyre can/will still happen. the school can now also throw in whatever number it wants, up to 20 million. but if Spyre wants to pay Nico 50 million he can still get that. there is no cap on how much Nico can earn. If Nico deserves 100 million nothing the NCAA is doing will stop that. only the school's payments are capped.

there is no cap on what the player can make in total. there is no anti-trust issue here.
*assuming the court case goes forward as is*

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

because the NCAA doesn't limit the earnings of the individuals any more. it only limits the payments of the member institutions. the players can still go out and get all the NIL they want. their pay isn't capped. the 20 mil NIL is NOT direct employment. the schools still are not directly employing their players. they are paying them for their Name Image and Likeness, but not employing them.

Nico getting paid 8 million from Spyre can/will still happen. the school can now also throw in whatever number it wants, up to 20 million. but if Spyre wants to pay Nico 50 million he can still get that. there is no cap on how much Nico can earn. If Nico deserves 100 million nothing the NCAA is doing will stop that. only the school's payments are capped.

there is no cap on what the player can make in total. there is no anti-trust issue here.
*assuming the court case goes forward as is*

What gives the NCAA the right to limit how NIL is provided from the school is EXACTLY why Donde Plowman ripped them a new one and the state of TN (and many other states) are suing the NCAA.

They are suing on Antitrust, that is anti-competitive, rules which the NCAA wants to enforce on how schools recruit with NIL.

Establishing a cap on ANY entity that offers NIL, school or business, is obviously anti-competitive and trying to artificially control the money available to the workers.

Imagine if all the fast food chains got together and made a deal that their payroll was $XXX per store, period. No store can offer more than that. That's wage fixing, obviously.

Remember, NIL deals are separate. They aren't "lumped together" deals but individual, unconnected contracts between businesses and players. You can't say, "we're not limiting how much a player can make overall" and have that matter when you ARE limiting how much a player can make via the school. It's still wage fixing because the NCAA is attempting to cap the market via the schools.

 

[LouderVol]

What gives the NCAA the right to limit how NIL is provided from the school is EXACTLY why Donde Plowman ripped them a new one and the state of TN (and many other states) are suing the NCAA.

They are suing on Antitrust, that is anti-competitive, rules which the NCAA wants to enforce on how schools recruit with NIL.

Establishing a cap on ANY entity that offers NIL, school or business, is obviously anti-competitive and trying to artificially control the money available to the workers.

Imagine if all the fast food chains got together and made a deal that their payroll was $XXX per store, period. No store can offer more than that. That's wage fixing, obviously.

Remember, NIL deals are separate. They aren't "lumped together" deals but individual, unconnected contracts between businesses and players. You can't say, "we're not limiting how much a player can make overall" and have that matter when you ARE limiting how much a player can make via the school. It's still wage fixing because the NCAA is attempting to cap the market via the schools.

there may be pending lawsuits based on the 20 million, but it is certainly not why Donde went after them with Nico.

The NCAA was trying to implement a wage cap before. they got smacked down. and NIL opened wide, except for schools NIL deals. because they were capping the students pay from ANY source.
The NCAA as a part of a separate ruling is having to open up NIL for the schools as well. because they were saying that the schools couldn't pay.
now the schools can pay. and its not collusion because the NCAA didn't say at all what any one student could make. these students would have to prove that the 20 million dollar SCHOOL limit artificially caps their pay in a negative manner based on some form of collusion to prove its an anti-truss issue.

as you mention with market forces there is always a cap, I will never be paid eleven million dollars to do my job. doesn't matter where I go to work. same with the college players. the issue will be proving there is collusion to cap pay BELOW the market value. the market value for these players is still out there, beyond the NCAA's 20 million, nothing is capping that.

If Nico's value was 8 million dollars. and UT only gave him 1 million so they could pay all their other athletes, it would not be a competition, anti-trust issue. Because Nico is still able to go to that free market to make up the rest of that 8 million, or even more. UT may only pay 1 million, but Nico could make 25 million MORE on the open market, not school based, NIL. his pay isn't capped. the school's NIL payments are not a wage/salary. there is no collusion to set Nico's payment at only 1 million, because he isn't only getting paid 1 million dollars. he is still getting 8 million, 25 million or whatever.

it would be an issue if the NCAA tried to say the 20 million was the ONLY NIL that was allowed. but they aren't.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

there may be pending lawsuits based on the 20 million, but it is certainly not why Donde went after them with Nico.

The NCAA was trying to implement a wage cap before. they got smacked down. and NIL opened wide, except for schools NIL deals. because they were capping the students pay from ANY source.
The NCAA as a part of a separate ruling is having to open up NIL for the schools as well. because they were saying that the schools couldn't pay.
now the schools can pay. and its not collusion because the NCAA didn't say at all what any one student could make. these students would have to prove that the 20 million dollar SCHOOL limit artificially caps their pay in a negative manner based on some form of collusion to prove its an anti-truss issue.

as you mention with market forces there is always a cap, I will never be paid eleven million dollars to do my job. doesn't matter where I go to work. same with the college players. the issue will be proving there is collusion to cap pay BELOW the market value. the market value for these players is still out there, beyond the NCAA's 20 million, nothing is capping that.

If Nico's value was 8 million dollars. and UT only gave him 1 million so they could pay all their other athletes, it would not be a competition, anti-trust issue. Because Nico is still able to go to that free market to make up the rest of that 8 million, or even more. UT may only pay 1 million, but Nico could make 25 million MORE on the open market, not school based, NIL. his pay isn't capped. the school's NIL payments are not a wage/salary. there is no collusion to set Nico's payment at only 1 million, because he isn't only getting paid 1 million dollars. he is still getting 8 million, 25 million or whatever.

it would be an issue if the NCAA tried to say the 20 million was the ONLY NIL that was allowed. but they aren't.

So why can't the NCAA simply say: no company or school can provide more than XX dollars? They can't because that's a defacto cap. They have zero right to limit ANY entities NIL.

Those are contracts OUTSIDE the sport. If an actor were famous and the school wanted to provide an NIL deal for them, why should anyone be able to limit that?

The Supreme Court via Alston in dealing with educational benefits for athletes ruled 9-0 that the NCAA WAY overstepped in preventing those benefits. It will be the same with NIL.

The NCAA has ZERO right to limit any kind of NIL contract. It's a name, image, and likeness contract. The NCAA regulates SPORTS, not NIL.

All of the lawsuits the NCAA is losing are about them trying to illegally control the market for athletes. It's OBVIOUS that an NIL cap is an attempt to keep schools from "overspending" for NIL in the eyes of the NCAA.

They aren't in a position to make that kind of determination.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

The vast majority of college athletes AREN'T fooling themselves that they'll go pro, BUT some states, like TN, are suing the NCAA out of existence for the advancement of what is essentially the pro conferences of the SEC and B1G.

The people in control, the people throttling the NCAA to lifelessness, are either former students or the states with lucrative university sports franchises.

This is why I'm saying schools like the SEC and B1G schools need to stop destroying college athletics and take their pro businesses away from the schools.

The only way to get college athletics back to being about school is for the big business entities to stop lumping themselves in the "we're just humble colleges with athletic teams" group.

C'mon, UT has $200M per year in athletic department revenue. It's a pro sports enterprise. Separate it from the school already and stop suing the NCAA to death because I PROMISE the next "college athletics organization" is going to look more like NFL/NBA than any of us will like.

Riiiiight. Because smart people just give away a $200 million annual revenue stream and a prestigious sports program, right?

 

[LouderVol]

So why can't the NCAA simply say: no company or school can provide more than XX dollars? They can't because that's a defacto cap. They have zero right to limit ANY entities NIL.

Those are contracts OUTSIDE the sport. If an actor were famous and the school wanted to provide an NIL deal for them, why should anyone be able to limit that?

The Supreme Court via Alston in dealing with educational benefits for athletes ruled 9-0 that the NCAA WAY overstepped in preventing those benefits. It will be the same with NIL.

The NCAA has ZERO right to limit any kind of NIL contract. It's a name, image, and likeness contract. The NCAA regulates SPORTS, not NIL.

All of the lawsuits the NCAA is losing are about them trying to illegally control the market for athletes. It's OBVIOUS that an NIL cap is an attempt to keep schools from "overspending" for NIL in the eyes of the NCAA.

They aren't in a position to make that kind of determination.

thats not how it is playing out in the courts at this moment. the $20 million is a profit sharing thing. its not a hard cap on the schools. I just haven't seen any school say they want to spend more. but that may only be the case because its still part of an active lawsuit and hasn't been set in stone. if it sticks it may be reason for the Big 10 and the SEC to break off. even though 20 million out is hefty chunk of even their TV deals.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

thats not how it is playing out in the courts at this moment. the $20 million is a profit sharing thing. its not a hard cap on the schools. I just haven't seen any school say they want to spend more. but that may only be the case because its still part of an active lawsuit and hasn't been set in stone. if it sticks it may be reason for the Big 10 and the SEC to break off. even though 20 million out is hefty chunk of even their TV deals.

If you're profit sharing with folks who help you make the money, they are either owner/investors or workers.

When the players officially become workers, employees of the school, it will set up a pro situation.

Gone is recruiting. You'll need a draft for parity like every other pro league. Likely gone is the academic side of the athlete's experience because they're employed to play ball, not school. And on and on to NBA, NFL, MLB style businesses.

So, yeah, presenting it as profit sharing is the beginning of the end.

 

[LouderVol]

If you're profit sharing with folks who help you make the money, they are either owner/investors or workers.

When the players officially become workers, employees of the school, it will set up a pro situation.

Gone is recruiting. You'll need a draft for parity like every other pro league. Likely gone is the academic side of the athlete's experience because they're employed to play ball, not school. And on and on to NBA, NFL, MLB style businesses.

So, yeah, presenting it as profit sharing is the beginning of the end.

I am going to be interested in seeing how the number of players gets addressed if they are employees.

you are going to see the rise of the Bear Bryant days of him taking 100 kids in every recruiting class so they can't play for the opposing team.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I am going to be interested in seeing how the number of players gets addressed if they are employees.

you are going to see the rise of the Bear Bryant days of him taking 100 kids in every recruiting class so they can't play for the opposing team.

Roster management, collective bargaining, salary caps, some kind of league parity tools like a draft or something...... just an overturned outhouse full of problems for the schools/NCAA 2.0 to manage.

Employee status is likely coming. UT is in luck because Randy Boyd has professional sports experience.

Long-term, though, this transition is going to be a roller coaster for everyone.

 

[GreveHaller]

Next up: workers comp claims

 

[turbovol]

A salary cap, without Congress providing an Antitrust Exemption, will lead to lawsuits and collective bargaining will be mandatory via the courts, most likely.

If small schools can't pay the minimum negotiated by the players organization, what then?

The players have a skill the colleges want. That's why they paid them for years under the table. Above the table with NIL and revenue sharing, the situation is ripe for the players to negotiate just like pro players.

Teams and leagues either pay players well or fold, historically.

I would love to see lots of schools fold various programs because of this nonsense. What's ironic is that the House behind the lawsuit was a freakin' male swimmer. All swimming programs lose money and therefore exist because of the good grace of the school---they're a service, though there is also, in the case of women's program, the need to follow Title 9. I'm not exactly sure how swimmers or any non-rev student athletes can assert that they're owned NIL money, as they don't make any money for anybody and cost all the schools money. That said, if revenue sharing is mandated, non-rev student-athletes should certainly share in it.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I would love to see lots of schools fold various programs because of this nonsense. What's ironic is that the House behind the lawsuit was a freakin' male swimmer. All swimming programs lose money and therefore exist because of the good grace of the school---they're a service, though there is also, in the case of women's program, the need to follow Title 9. I'm not exactly sure how swimmers or any non-rev student athletes can assert that they're owned NIL money, as they don't make any money for anybody and cost all the schools money. That said, if revenue sharing is mandated, non-rev student-athletes should certainly share in it.

I wouldn't love to see lots of schools fold lots of athletics. I'd love to see the major revenue schools spin their revenue sports off as pro sports businesses, lease the logos, facilities, etc and let normal college athletics attempt to survive on the goodwill of schools, as intended, instead of being financed by another sport.

I get that the revenue schools are far too greedy to walk off from a multi-million dollar revenue stream, but the greed, that pay under the table, win at whatever cost, push the athletes through the academic process however possible, tamper with rosters as soon as the portal existed, outright buy talent via NIL falls on the schools.

It's greed. It's money that has driven the massive business that NCAA football/basketball became but it was never the players who drove the monetization of college sports.

I can't blame them for suing to get their "market value" in the business. I blame the schools and NCAA for seeing that media money and marketing the heck out of what should have remained mostly regional athletics.