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

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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 I'm 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.

So, are you and your buddies Communists? You know, the group that hates the free market and that wants to control other people?

If not, isn't schizo - or at least wildly hypocritical - to love the free market for oneself but advocate that college athletes can't take full advantage of it?

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

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

I have discussed this with you before, and you are incapable of hearing or understanding, but for the benefit of others so that they will not be confused by you.

Participation in NCAA football is voluntary. In all walks of life, you can voluntarily join an organization, employment or what have you, and become subject to their rules. The NCAA previously had rules against NIL. The reason those rules are no longer enforceable is because it has been ruled that the NCAA as formerly organized was a monopoly, in violation of the Antitrust laws. The 9-0 decision by the Supreme Court was simply affirming that the NCAA as organized violated Antitrust. Antitrust is a law passed by Congress. Congress is free to change its own laws. If Congress granted the NCAA (or some replacement government body an antitrust exemption, for example, let's say the exemption was granted based on 50% revenue sharing with student athletes). If 50% of the revenue was paid to student athletes, then at that point the NCAA would be in the safe harbor and would no longer be violating Antitrust. In essence, Congress would have said "we don't care that you are a monopoly, provided that you follow these rules, i.e. revenue sharing, etc.". If the NCAA complies, it can then turn around make rules based on voluntary participation, i.e. if you want to play college athletics, you have to agree to these rules, those rules can include regulation of transfers and NIL. A 13th Amendment challenge is baloney. Even the Supreme Court that you are so proud of ruling 9-0, said in that ruling that Congress could change the law and do what it wanted.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I have discussed this with you before, and you are incapable of hearing or understanding, but for the benefit of others so that they will not be confused by you.

Participation in NCAA football is voluntary. In all walks of life, you can voluntarily join an organization, employment or what have you, and become subject to their rules. The NCAA previously had rules against NIL. The reason those rules are no longer enforceable is because it has been ruled that the NCAA as formerly organized was a monopoly, in violation of the Antitrust laws. The 9-0 decision by the Supreme Court was simply affirming that the NCAA as organized violated Antitrust. Antitrust is a law passed by Congress. Congress is free to change its own laws. If Congress granted the NCAA (or some replacement government body an antitrust exemption, for example, let's say the exemption was granted based on 50% revenue sharing with student athletes). If 50% of the revenue was paid to student athletes, then at that point the NCAA would be in the safe harbor and would no longer be violating Antitrust. In essence, Congress would have said "we don't care that you are a monopoly, provided that you follow these rules, i.e. revenue sharing, etc.". If the NCAA complies, it can then turn around make rules based on voluntary participation, i.e. if you want to play college athletics, you have to agree to these rules, those rules can include regulation of transfers and NIL. A 13th Amendment challenge is baloney. Even the Supreme Court that you are so proud of ruling 9-0, said in that ruling that Congress could change the law and do what it wanted.

As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court hinted that nothing short of Congressional action would allow the NCAA to retain control over the schools.

May God have mercy on us all. Congress is the only ones who can "fix" this so the NCAA (or whatever follows after the NCAA goes belly up) can have any governing power.

Congress can fix this. Congress. I'm sure most of us have as much faith in them to work out a good solution as we do in a room full of daycare kids working it out.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court hinted that nothing short of Congressional action would allow the NCAA to retain control over the schools.

May God have mercy on us all. Congress is the only ones who can "fix" this so the NCAA (or whatever follows after the NCAA goes belly up) can have any governing power.

Congress can fix this. Congress. I'm sure most of us have as much faith in them to work out a good solution as we do in a room full of daycare kids working it out.

I agree with you completely. It's definitely the most desperate of situations to need Congress to save you, but that's the position the sport is in.

 

[Delmar]

So, are you and your buddies Communists? You know, the group that hates the free market and that wants to control other people?

If not, isn't schizo - or at least wildly hypocritical - to love the free market for oneself but advocate that college athletes can't take full advantage of it?

Spare me with that Communist bull . If that’s the best you got, you’re going to hit the Ignore list quick. I just said there are a lot of folks that don’t like the free-for-all with no regulations on the portal and I believe that’s a fair criticism given the craziness we are seeing. (Tampering, 5 transfers in 3 years etc,)

Colleges athletes have every right to take advantage of a free market and I believe they should share in the money. Not sure how I can make that any clearer but evidently some folks have a reading comprehension problem. But if there are no rules, that will eventually lead to problems. Some will pay to support it and some won’t. As noted, we shall see how it works out in the long run. I don’t believe it’s going to go as swimmingly as you think.

 

[Visidog]

There are a couple interesting issues. One is that the schools cannot currently work together to impose rules that cap what the schools pay to athletes. Doing so would violate antitrust laws, and Congress could presumably pass an exemption to fix the issue as to that sliver of funds. The second issue is that most NIL money passes outside the school’s control or oversight. Perhaps the schools work with Congress to craft an antitrust exemption lets them impose eligibility rules that forbid taking outside NIL money. No idea if that could work, but I have to think that a total bar would be required.

Once we get to this point, we are really talking about a professional league, albeit one that has more restrictive endorsement rules than any professional league in America.

 

[pimo1]

Spare me with that Communist bull . If that’s the best you got, you’re going to hit the Ignore list quick. I just said there are a lot of folks that don’t like the free-for-all with no regulations on the portal and I believe that’s a fair criticism given the craziness we are seeing. (Tampering, 5 transfers in 3 years etc,)

Colleges athletes have every right to take advantage of a free market and I believe they should share in the money. Not sure how I can make that any clearer but evidently some folks have a reading comprehension problem. But if there are no rules, that will eventually lead to problems. Some will pay to support it and some won’t. As noted, we shall see how it works out in the long run. I don’t believe it’s going to go as swimmingly as you think.

This is what happens when people want no regulations. All hell breaks loose. Regulations can be, and usually are onerous and annoying... but they almost have to be. We live in the USA the most litigious country on the planet and its not close. If you leave a loophole open it will be found and exploited to the point of becoming the norm. It is a very wild thing.. because we as humans are just like that. Give us a wall and we will find a way around it. Tell us we can't and we will. No one wants balance we love extremes.

Everyone wanted it and we got the portal and NIL and now its here and folks want a redo. Maybe instead of trying to fix everything with litigation folks sit down and come up with a well thought out plan. The problem is a court case gets won and then people scramble with their response. They are not going in with something ahead of time. No one is thinking about the fallout and repercussions because it's just lawyers trying to win a case. Next time there is some big scandal out there in the news also follow the case it's crazy how different what happens in the courtroom differs from whats fed to us through the news. People think these cases are won on right and wrong...they are not its almost always on technicalities or some weird precedent from 1830.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

This is what happens when people want no regulations. All hell breaks loose. Regulations can be, and usually are onerous and annoying... but they almost have to be. We live in the USA the most litigious country on the planet and its not close. If you leave a loophole open it will be found and exploited to the point of becoming the norm. It is a very wild thing.. because we as humans are just like that. Give us a wall and we will find a way around it. Tell us we can't and we will. No one wants balance we love extremes.

Everyone wanted it and we got the portal and NIL and now its here and folks want a redo. Maybe instead of trying to fix everything with litigation folks sit down and come up with a well thought out plan. The problem is a court case gets won and then people scramble with their response. They are not going in with something ahead of time. No one is thinking about the fallout and repercussions because it's just lawyers trying to win a case. Next time there is some big scandal out there in the news also follow the case it's crazy how different what happens in the courtroom differs from whats fed to us through the news. People think these cases are won on right and wrong...they are not its almost always on technicalities or some weird precedent from 1830.

After Alston v NCAA when the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 with Justices Gorsuch and Kavenaugh essentially saying "The NCAA business model of the 'student-athlete' is illegal" and no other Justices disagreed, the NCAA knew it was cooked.

That's why they fought NIL to the death. They knew they'd never be able to control it and every attempt to rein it in has been met with a lawsuit, most of which BTW Tennessee has supported.

Had they somehow settled Alston before, they'd still be just as ripe to be sued continuously because it's apparently legally obvious that the "student-athlete" business model is actually illegal. I'm not an attorney but a 9-0 Supreme Court decision tells me it must be obvious.

The notion I keep seeing of "if the NCAA had tried to settle, we wouldn't be here...." is pretty ridiculous when the Supreme Court ruled the entire business model is illegal. There's no ..... "let's allow it to be a little illegal" which is like "let's allow Enron to do a little fraud" or "let's allow a pyramid scheme as long as it isn't too big." C'mon. The next lawsuit is always a loser when your business model is illegal.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Spare me with that Communist bull . If that’s the best you got, you’re going to hit the Ignore list quick. I just said there are a lot of folks that don’t like the free-for-all with no regulations on the portal and I believe that’s a fair criticism given the craziness we are seeing. (Tampering, 5 transfers in 3 years etc,)

Colleges athletes have every right to take advantage of a free market and I believe they should share in the money. Not sure how I can make that any clearer but evidently some folks have a reading comprehension problem. But if there are no rules, that will eventually lead to problems. Some will pay to support it and some won’t. As noted, we shall see how it works out in the long run. I don’t believe it’s going to go as swimmingly as you think.

You sound like that classic Southern saying about the hit dog barking.
I could give a RA about you and the ignore button.

There isn't any craziness except from the control freaks that want to exploit college athletes for their own entertainment and that can't it won't adapt. There are rules. The problem is that the ones you want violate all kinds of laws. It's going swimmingly by every objective measure. More games.More viewership. Bigger TV contracts (except for the ACC stupid GOR). More parity. More profitability. Facts..

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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.

The NCAA already does that, for on field competition. They need to stay in that lane.

They've already shown that they screw up everything else they touch.

Otherwise, let's do the American thing and let the free market decide.

 

[SockeyeVol]

I have discussed this with you before, and you are incapable of hearing or understanding, but for the benefit of others so that they will not be confused by you.

Participation in NCAA football is voluntary. In all walks of life, you can voluntarily join an organization, employment or what have you, and become subject to their rules. The NCAA previously had rules against NIL. The reason those rules are no longer enforceable is because it has been ruled that the NCAA as formerly organized was a monopoly, in violation of the Antitrust laws. The 9-0 decision by the Supreme Court was simply affirming that the NCAA as organized violated Antitrust. Antitrust is a law passed by Congress. Congress is free to change its own laws. If Congress granted the NCAA (or some replacement government body an antitrust exemption, for example, let's say the exemption was granted based on 50% revenue sharing with student athletes). If 50% of the revenue was paid to student athletes, then at that point the NCAA would be in the safe harbor and would no longer be violating Antitrust. In essence, Congress would have said "we don't care that you are a monopoly, provided that you follow these rules, i.e. revenue sharing, etc.". If the NCAA complies, it can then turn around make rules based on voluntary participation, i.e. if you want to play college athletics, you have to agree to these rules, those rules can include regulation of transfers and NIL. A 13th Amendment challenge is baloney. Even the Supreme Court that you are so proud of ruling 9-0, said in that ruling that Congress could change the law and do what it wanted.

Thank you for such an informative post.

 

[Delmar]

You sound like that classic Southern saying about the hit dog barking.
I could give a RA about you and the ignore button.

There isn't any craziness except from the control freaks that want to exploit college athletes for their own entertainment and that can't it won't adapt. There are rules. The problem is that the ones you want violate all kinds of laws. It's going swimmingly by every objective measure. More games.More viewership. Bigger TV contracts (except for the ACC stupid GOR). More parity. More profitability. Facts..

Swimmingly for now but the new system hasn’t been in place very long. We all know what the courts have said. However there are plenty of folks smarter than you who say that it’s unsustainable over the long haul. Might take a couple of years but as I said, we shall see.

We really only disagree on the transfer portal and the lack of oversight of that mess. And I’d wager the vast majority of fans and alumni agree that it’s a mess. I’ve said time and again that NIL and player compensation is good and deserved but you haven’t heard that. You obviously aren’t interested in anybody’s opinion but yours. If folks disagree, well they obviously aren’t American which is a ludicrous thing to say. So I’m not going to bother explaining that anymore. My last word with you on the subject.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

We really only disagree on the transfer portal and the lack of oversight of that mess. And I’d wager the vast majority of fans and alumni agree that it’s a mess.

I'll agree the multiple transfers issue is a complete mess but multiple states..... Colorado, Ohio, Illinois, Minnesota, NY, Tennessee and others and the US Dept of Justice joined the lawsuit which led to multiple transfers without penalty.

It's obvious to me that A LOT of schools, who I assume influenced their Attorney Generals to join the lawsuit, are not on the side of the fans and alumni when it comes to multiple transfers without penalty.

Perhaps we should agree with the UT admins that multiple transfers, despite the re-recruiting of players and NIL inflation, is good for us?

It's uncomfortable, but UT is on the "wrong" side of loosening NIL to the point where it's pretty open pay-for-play AND multiple transfers without penalty.

Or are we as fans on the "wrong" side for what is good for the school?

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Swimmingly for now but the new system hasn’t been in place very long. We all know what the courts have said. However there are plenty of folks smarter than you who say that it’s unsustainable over the long haul. Might take a couple of years but as I said, we shall see.

We really only disagree on the transfer portal and the lack of oversight of that mess. And I’d wager the vast majority of fans and alumni agree that it’s a mess. I’ve said time and again that NIL and player compensation is good and deserved but you haven’t heard that. You obviously aren’t interested in anybody’s opinion but yours. If folks disagree, well they obviously aren’t American which is a ludicrous thing to say. So I’m not going to bother explaining that anymore. My last word with you on the subject.

Swimmingly for now but the new system hasn’t been in place very long. We all know what the courts have said. However there are plenty of folks smarter than you who say that it’s unsustainable over the long haul. Might take a couple of years but as I said, we shall see.

We really only disagree on the transfer portal and the lack of oversight of that mess. And I’d wager the vast majority of fans and alumni agree that it’s a mess. I’ve said time and again that NIL and player compensation is good and deserved but you haven’t heard that. You obviously aren’t interested in anybody’s opinion but yours. If folks disagree, well they obviously aren’t American which is a ludicrous thing to say. So I’m not going to bother explaining that anymore. My last word with you on the subject.

...says a guy who thinks he's smarter than everyone else, and who is on the wrong side of every court decision about transfers.

Given that limiting transfers is against the law, then anyone against it is, by definition, arguing against one of the foundations of the USA, that of the rules of law. By definition, that's un-American.

You did that to yourself. I simply pointed it out.

I'll asso point out that you're using a false generalization trying to gain credibility for your arguments. You don't have that. It's also an Appeal to Popularity. That's two logical falka I'd in one of your statements. People who want to have credibility and/or to try to look smart don't use logical fallacies.

 

[Delmar]

I'll agree the multiple transfers issue is a complete mess but multiple states..... Colorado, Ohio, Illinois, Minnesota, NY, Tennessee and others and the US Dept of Justice joined the lawsuit which led to multiple transfers without penalty.

It's obvious to me that A LOT of schools, who I assume influenced their Attorney Generals to join the lawsuit, are not on the side of the fans and alumni when it comes to multiple transfers without penalty.

Perhaps we should agree with the UT admins that multiple transfers, despite the re-recruiting of players and NIL inflation, is good for us?

It's uncomfortable, but UT is on the "wrong" side of loosening NIL to the point where it's pretty open pay-for-play AND multiple transfers without penalty.

Or are we as fans on the "wrong" side for what is good for the school?

A mess that unfortunately nobody can do anything about at the moment. Not sure how anybody thought multiple transfers at any time was going to benefit the school. It was interesting what Clark Lea said on Finebaum this afternoon and he is closer to the situation than any of us. The first thing out of his mouth was “Unsustainable”. He said the coaches are trying to figure it out but it’s going to take time. Like I said, we are going to have to wait and see how it works out. Some will love it, some will hate it and will have to hold their nose and deal with it if they want to continue to follow the sport.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

A mess that unfortunately nobody can do anything about at the moment. Not sure how anybody thought multiple transfers at any time was going to benefit the school. It was interesting what Clark Lea said on Finebaum this afternoon and he is closer to the situation than any of us. The first thing out of his mouth was “Unsustainable”. He said the coaches are trying to figure it out but it’s going to take time. Like I said, we are going to have to wait and see how it works out. Some will love it, some will hate it and will have to hold their nose and deal with it if they want to continue to follow the sport.

I agree. I wonder why UT seems to be supportive of lawsuits that make life much harder for Coach Heupel. They must have an intense belief that Spyre can keep up and that the school can roll with whatever revenue sharing or whatever comes up.

Obviously, Danny White isn't shy about the "talent fee" and he does seem to get out ahead of most schools both with Spyre and the fee.

Like most, I'm just in it for the good football. My heart will still swell when the guys run through the T but it's not the same in a lot of ways.

 

[Voltopia]

I agree. I wonder why UT seems to be supportive of lawsuits that make life much harder for Coach Heupel. They must have an intense belief that Spyre can keep up and that the school can roll with whatever revenue sharing or whatever comes up.

Obviously, Danny White isn't shy about the "talent fee" and he does seem to get out ahead of most schools both with Spyre and the fee.

Like most, I'm just in it for the good football. My heart will still swell when the guys run through the T but it's not the same in a lot of ways.

I think they knew - or believed, at least - that it was better to be at the tip of the spear than to follow, especially with the inevitabiltiy of the outcome. Regardless of the position it put you in. Easier to market yourself as a leader, rather than as a follower. And if we know one thing about the current UTAD, they are 1000% on board with whatever makes for good marketing.

As for the rest of the embracing, I suppose that depends on how many of them think of Tennessee as a career destination, rather than a career stop.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I think they knew - or believed, at least - that it was better to be at the tip of the spear than to follow, especially with the inevitabiltiy of the outcome. Regardless of the position it put you in. Easier to market yourself as a leader, rather than as a follower. And if we know one thing about the current UTAD, they are 1000% on board with whatever makes for good marketing.

As for the rest of the embracing, I suppose that depends on how many of them think of Tennessee as a career destination, rather than a career stop.

I certainly don't fault Danny White for his leadership even if I disagree with his actions. He does get UT out of the gate quickly when things change.

I'd not thought about the stop vs destination angle but I nodded as I read it. Good take.

 

[Delmar]

I agree. I wonder why UT seems to be supportive of lawsuits that make life much harder for Coach Heupel. They must have an intense belief that Spyre can keep up and that the school can roll with whatever revenue sharing or whatever comes up.

Obviously, Danny White isn't shy about the "talent fee" and he does seem to get out ahead of most schools both with Spyre and the fee.

Like most, I'm just in it for the good football. My heart will still swell when the guys run through the T but it's not the same in a lot of ways.

I hear you. But long term, I’m wondering if Spyre or the university can keep up with the Phil Knights of the world. Or the endless oil money at Texas or Texas A&M. Don’t think we have alumni with pockets like that.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I hear you. But long term, I’m wondering if Spyre or the university can keep up with the Phil Knights of the world. Or the endless oil money at Texas or Texas A&M. Don’t think we have alumni with pockets like that.

I believe "unsustainable" is true and keeping up for many years won't be necessary.

What direction it all goes, I've really no idea. I knew it was going to be bad after Alston, but the pace of changes has been faster than I ever imagined.

It's an enormous business that's unlikely to fail completely but the "school team" and "student athlete" aspect are probably not coming back.

 

[LegionnaireOfTheMiserable]

Congress can't do anything about NIL without wrecking the Sherman Antitrust Act and Tre Interstate Commerce Act. If they did that, it would ruin American business. It would cause an economic meltdown that would make the Great Depression look like a Sunday picnic at one ilof the 441 roadside river recreation areas.

They have already granted antitrust exemptions to other sports in the past without causing a Great Depression

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

They have already granted antitrust exemptions to other sports in the past without causing a Great Depression

The other sports didn't ask for an ATE to stop their athletes from getting NIL.

If you read carefully, I said specifically that overturning the ICA and the SATA would do that, not an exemption.

Are you ready for a draft instead of recruiting?
Forced trades instead of transfers? Unionization? Strikes? Those things go with an ATE in the pro sports that have them.