Could a body (maybe Congress) prohibit tying NIL funds to a specific school? It could solve this problem of bidding-driven transiencies

#27
#27
The only way I see to start to correct this pendulum swing is contracts. Players become contracted with the school that pays them (believe that starts in 2025). The contracts have buy out clauses that the player or other school must pay for breaking the contract.

Not sure if that will require a collective bargaining agreement and unionization, but it seems to work in the NFL.

So, long-term CFB will be very very similar to NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KHVol and Advol
#28
#28
Manchester Vol said:
Eventually, a governing body will have to make some rules that everyone has to abide by. There’s too much shoot from the hip bull crap and it’s pissing off everyone.
Click to expand...
That governing body already exists (NCAA) and has basically been castrated when it comes to restricting an individual's right to make money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#29
#29
The NCAA is not going to do anything about it. But i think once a player enters the portal and transfers to another school, he or she should have to stay there for at least two years. He or she should not be able to transfer every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodlawn VOL
#30
#30
I plan to build a time machine and go back and place some very large wagers on NCAA failures and the stock market, Once I am filthy rich I plan to fund the TN NIL collective to max and make us the greatest team money can purchase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#32
#32
Congress writes and passes legislation. It goes to the President for approval and is either signed into law, or not signed (vetoed). Congress can then make changes and go about the process again, or vote to override the presidential veto and it becomes law.

Then, the Supreme Court can intervene as to the constitutionality of said law(s).

Since the Supreme Court has laid out their opinions regarding NIL and basically an adult's right to profit off of NIL, I just don't know how it becomes legal to put any limitations on it as it stands now, in it's current state....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan and MemphisVol77
#33
#33
SockeyeVol said:
Could a body (maybe Congress) make it illegal to tie NIL funds to a specific school?

That would solve the transfer and turnover issue right there. The best athletes make NIL money based on other factors (just like endorsements in the pros) and there are no bidding wars among schools.

Meanwhile, schools themselves can still compensate everyone on the roster using the new cap system. For any athlete not marketable enough to make money off straight endorsements and jersey sales...



sports.yahoo.com

With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval?

College football’s more professionalized era arrives in July, and historic powerhouses like Ohio State and Texas could lose both their inherent recruiting advantage and their financial edge.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
What has Congress ever fixed? Everything they touch is ruined. The last thing this country needs is more govt involvement in their lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#34
#34
I’m not sure how to allow players to earn unlimited money, and keep the college game a beloved sport with fan emotional ties. I do believe these first few years are gonna be the best opportunities for current players. Something will definitely change they sets parameters on how these earning can be achieved. They will begin getting revenue sharing from the schools, but NIL will likely be tied to “name, image, likeness” where players will not be paid from a pool of money to pay players but players will actually rely on their name etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SockeyeVol
#35
#35
The real problem is that previous rules made it a violation for a player to earn money from endorsements, which is unconstitutional.

The problem now is that NIL is supposedly for an endorsement but its really just a passthrough for pay to play. This is the real issue. Nobody gives a crap about stud player endorsing super cookies, or at least it is not worth $1m in any universe. But it may well be worth that to the university to get him to play so the collective gives him the money and calls it for NIL - but everyone involved knows thats BS.

THAT cannot remain. The IRS, if no other agency, cares about such things, so that they can classify your earnings accurately (so they can better tax them).

True NIL would be for players who are well known because they have a strong following - like LSU gymnast Livvy Dunne, who could go anywhere and command attention because people follow her even more than just the school. That kind of thing is going to have to be removed from the pay to play part to have any real transparency. And it will be given time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia and SockeyeVol
#36
#36
a vol n tears said:
I’m not sure how to allow players to earn unlimited money, and keep the college game a beloved sport with fan emotional ties. I do believe these first few years are gonna be the best opportunities for current players. Something will definitely change they sets parameters on how these earning can be achieved. They will begin getting revenue sharing from the schools, but NIL will likely be tied to “name, image, likeness” where players will not be paid from a pool of money to pay players but players will actually rely on their name etc.
Click to expand...
You said it better than i. It doesnt seem Like it's really NIL money anymore, it's more "pass the plate" money, and it's the main funding source for all these bidding wars...and the transience that results.

it's dark money
 
#37
#37
Gandalf said:
The real problem is that previous rules made it a violation for a player to earn money from endorsements, which is unconstitutional.

The problem now is that NIL is supposedly for an endorsement but its really just a passthrough for pay to play. This is the real issue. Nobody gives a crap about stud player endorsing super cookies, or at least it is not worth $1m in any universe. But it may well be worth that to the university to get him to play so the collective gives him the money and calls it for NIL - but everyone involved knows thats BS.

THAT cannot remain. The IRS, if no other agency, cares about such things, so that they can classify your earnings accurately (so they can better tax them).

True NIL would be for players who are well known because they have a strong following - like LSU gymnast Livvy Dunne, who could go anywhere and command attention because people follow her even more than just the school. That kind of thing is going to have to be removed from the pay to play part to have any real transparency. And it will be given time.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. Outside of a few very specific cases, the NIL value of almost all college player is, pun intended, nil.
If they had real NIL values commensurate with these six and seven figure numbers that get tossed around today, then players would have walked the moment anyone told them they couldn't play for a college and also endorse or sponsor products. Why would anyone with a durable 750,000 dollar NIL brand care about being eligible for a college sport? Just tell the team "later" and go cash those checks.

Oh but wait, they didn't. How weird. It's almost as if the value really comes from the university logos on the jerseys. Well, that and the horde of obsessed donors who are willing to shell out what it takes to win off the field, so they can see their beloved team win on it. Meanwhile NIL is simply a wink-wink arrangement that exists solely so people can say "the school isn't paying the player." Wink wink. One cannot help but think that even a light amount of investigation could prove otherwise.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf and SockeyeVol
#38
#38
Voltopia said:
Absolutely correct. Outside of a few very specific cases, the NIL value of almost all college player is, pun intended, nil.
If they had real NIL values commensurate with these six and seven figure numbers that get tossed around today, then players would have walked the moment anyone told them they couldn't play for a college and also endorse or sponsor products. Why would anyone with a durable 750,000 dollar NIL brand care about being eligible for a college sport? Just tell the team "later" and go cash those checks.

Oh but wait, they didn't. How weird. It's almost as if the value really comes from the university logos on the jerseys. Well, that and the horde of obsessed donors who are willing to shell out what it takes to win off the field, so they can see their beloved team win on it. Meanwhile NIL is simply a wink-wink arrangement that exists solely so people can say "the school isn't paying the player." Wink wink. One cannot help but think that even a light amount of investigation could prove otherwise.
Click to expand...
The schools are literally not paying the players.
 
#39
#39
Gandalf said:
The real problem is that previous rules made it a violation for a player to earn money from endorsements, which is unconstitutional.

The problem now is that NIL is supposedly for an endorsement but its really just a passthrough for pay to play. This is the real issue. Nobody gives a crap about stud player endorsing super cookies, or at least it is not worth $1m in any universe. But it may well be worth that to the university to get him to play so the collective gives him the money and calls it for NIL - but everyone involved knows thats BS.

THAT cannot remain. The IRS, if no other agency, cares about such things, so that they can classify your earnings accurately (so they can better tax them).

True NIL would be for players who are well known because they have a strong following - like LSU gymnast Livvy Dunne, who could go anywhere and command attention because people follow her even more than just the school. That kind of thing is going to have to be removed from the pay to play part to have any real transparency. And it will be given time.
Click to expand...
The only thing the IRS cares about is the amount the athletes get from NIL. They don't care about anything else.
 
#40
#40
S.C. OrangeMan said:
NIL is subordinate to those federal laws, not true other way around. You can't dismantle that for NIL without affecting the rest of it.

An antitrust exemption won't affect NIL because the schools and the NCAA don't pay NIL.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. An Anti-Trust exemption would give the governing body of college athletics authority to make enforceable rules about without violating Anti-Trust. That's the only reason they can't make enforceable rules about it now, because to do so would violate Anti-Trust. These issues go away if Congress grants an exemption (again politically, it would need to be conditional on revenue sharing to pass), but it's 100% doable, in fact Congress is the only body that can fix this. That's a sad situation for college athletics to be in, but it's the lay of the land.
 
#41
#41
unfrozencvmanvol said:
Wrong again. An Anti-Trust exemption would give the governing body of college athletics authority to make enforceable rules about without violating Anti-Trust. That's the only reason they can't make enforceable rules about it now, because to do so would violate Anti-Trust. These issues go away if Congress grants an exemption (again politically, it would need to be conditional on revenue sharing to pass), but it's 100% doable, in fact Congress is the only body that can fix this. That's a sad situation for college athletics to be in, but it's the lay of the land.
Click to expand...
That really is a bad situation if they are the only ones that can fix it. I wouldn’t trust those morons in Congress to mop a floor. Pretty sure some of them can’t count to 11 without taking off their shoes.
 
#42
#42
Delmar said:
That really is a bad situation if they are the only ones that can fix it. I wouldn’t trust those morons in Congress to mop a floor. Pretty sure some of them can’t count to 11 without taking off their shoes.
Click to expand...
Admittedly, it's a bad situation, but it's their law that is the issue, and they are the only ones who can change it. If it isn't changed, college sports in any form resembling what we have known is over. The non-revenue sports will go belly-up and the revenue sports will become minor leagues and probably ultimately disassociate from the schools. Vols, Inc. might play games in Neyland by contract, but it's over.
 
#43
#43
Ya know what? I don't watch pro sports anymore because of all the nonsense that goes along with it. If college athletics goes down that same road, we all have the option to not support it. At my age, it may not matter to me anyway, but for you young'uns, it's a decision you very well have to make, unfortunately in the not to distant future.
 
#44
#44
If it relies on congress to fix, then go ahead and accept this is the way it is going to be for years and years. Even if a bill is proposed, some group will try to push to kill it by tying it in with poison pill legislation so that both parties can throw their hands up and say "oh, we tried! sorry!"

The real action will not happen until revenue goes down. Right now, schools, players, and TV execs are filling their pockets. They do not have a reason to push for change because at the end of the day they are making more money than they did previously. Also, as others have pointed out: this is a true free market. The actual money earning stakeholders are free to use their talents where they see fit to maximize their profit. That means some player would rather go to Ohio State instead of Tennessee because they make a few grand more there. The free market has winners and losers.

I do think eventually the schools would like to regain their leverage against the players to keep more of the cash coming in though. That would involve contracts, antitrust, collective bargaining, etc. just like the NFL. I thought the future would be having the student athletes become contract employees, but now I believe nothing will change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and S.C. OrangeMan
#45
#45
unfrozencvmanvol said:
Admittedly, it's a bad situation, but it's their law that is the issue, and they are the only ones who can change it. If it isn't changed, college sports in any form resembling what we have known is over. The non-revenue sports will go belly-up and the revenue sports will become minor leagues and probably ultimately disassociate from the schools. Vols, Inc. might play games in Neyland by contract, but it's over.
Click to expand...
The revenue sharing deal says that it just saved the non revenue sports.
 
#46
#46
unfrozencvmanvol said:
Wrong again. An Anti-Trust exemption would give the governing body of college athletics authority to make enforceable rules about without violating Anti-Trust. That's the only reason they can't make enforceable rules about it now, because to do so would violate Anti-Trust. These issues go away if Congress grants an exemption (again politically, it would need to be conditional on revenue sharing to pass), but it's 100% doable, in fact Congress is the only body that can fix this. That's a sad situation for college athletics to be in, but it's the lay of the land.
Click to expand...
You're missing the obvious. An ATE wouldn't affect NIL at all.

Again, see the tons of NIL deals that pro athletes get, deals that aren't affected by their sports' ATEs a whit.

Any legislation that tries is going to be shot down by the Supreme Court. As a follow on to their NCAA vs Alston decision. That decision was 9-0 from a court that is bitterly ideologically divided. They can't agree on where to go fir lunch, but they basically said that the NCAA's entire model is illegal. Congress can't make it magically legal, even with an ATE.

There's another angle that is lurking in the background. Since the NCAA defines their model by basing it on not paying fair market value, as soon if they get an ATE that let's them restrict transfers and NIL, stand by for the Constitutional lawsuits based on the 13th Amendment. Congress can't get around that one
 
Last edited:
#49
#49
S.C. OrangeMan said:
You're missing the obvious. An ATE wouldn't affect NIL at all.

Again, see the tons of NIL deals that pro athletes get, deals that aren't affected by their sports' ATEs a whit.

Any legislation that tries is going to be shot down by the Supreme Court. As a follow on to their NCAA vs Alston decision. That decision was 9-0 from a court that is bitterly ideologically divided. They can't agree on where to go fir lunch, but they basically said that the NCAA's entire model is illegal. Congress can't make it magically legal, even with an ATE.

There's a other angle that is lurking in the background. Since the NCAA defines their model by basing it on not paying fair market value, as soon if they get an ATE that let's them restrict transfers and NIL, stand by for the Constitutional lawsuits based on the 13th Amendment. Congress can't get around that one
Click to expand...
I think an ATE would create a process for some endorsement deals to fall under a Collective Bargaining agreement. I believe that is why the NFL does not suffer from the same NIL difficulties as college.

NFL is limited by salary cap. Endorsement deals are separate of course. Nobody cares about Mahomes deal with State Farm, but if Jerry Jones had not signed Dak Prescott to a 60 mil contract earlier this year and instead signed him to a 20 mil contract, then hired Dak for 40 mil a year for his NIL to be on a bunch of commercials advertising Jerry World, it would probably get reviewed by the NFL for trying to bypass the salary cap. Not saying Jerry couldn't do that legally. He can pay Dak whatever he wants. But probably the NFL would qualify that as "salary" and it would count against the Dallas Cowboys salary cap.

I believe that is what subset B is about:

NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement​

Article 13
Salary Cap Accounting Rules​

Section 4
Definition of “Salary”​

(a)
“Salary” means the compensation in money, property, investments, loans or anything else of value to which an NFL player (including Rookie and Veteran players and players whose contracts have been terminated) or his Player Affiliate is entitled in accordance with a Player Contract, but not including Benefits. Salary with respect to any period shall include all Salary actually payable with respect to such period under the terms of a Player Contract and all Salary attributable to such period under the terms of this Agreement.
(b)
A player’s Salary shall also include any and all consideration received by the player or his Player Affiliate from a Club or Club Affiliate, even if such consideration is ostensibly paid to the player for services other than football playing services, if the NFL can demonstrate before the Impartial Arbitrator that the consideration paid to the player or Player Affiliate for such nonfootball services does not represent a reasonable approximation of the fair market value of such services as performed by such player. The Impartial Arbitrator’s determination may take into account, among other things: (1) any actual dollar amounts the player or Player Affiliate received for similar nonfootball playing services from an independent third party; and (2) the percentage of total compensation for nonfootball services received from third parties versus the Team or Team Affiliate.
Click to expand...

Article 13, Section 4 | NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) | Over The Cap

NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement | Over the Cap
overthecap.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and Voltopia
#50
#50
S.C. OrangeMan said:
Exactly. It's a minority opinion, but it's silly and control freakish by those that do it.
Click to expand...
We shall see. I don’t know that it will be a minority opinion after a few years of this mess. I already know plenty of alumni and avid fans who don’t like it. In fact, most of the fan group I run with.

I don’t think NIL is widely hated but I believe the transfer portal is. Especially an unregulated portal and the tampering by other schools. Not much anybody is going to do about it right now. I’m going to reserve judgement on how this works out until I see it for a few years as more problems come to light. And there will be more problems. You can write that down.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top