How to Regulate NIL

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Every business in America is regulated and subject to law.

Otherwise when Home Depot, for instance, sells you a broke refrigerator you would have no right to return it.

So when you say they "have every righ..."....yes. Up to and as allowed by law and regulations.

The law (The Sherman Antitrust Act) says that a third party (schools or the NCAA) regulating or trying to limit NIL is illegal.

That's especially true since the NCAA is trying to do it to the people who are responsible for making the NCAA millions of dollars.

And, as has already been pointed out, the NCAA President has admitted that athletes are inky a fraction of the students who transfer to other schools, and that there is no limit on non-athlete transfers.

 

[BanditVol]

There is difference between selling a product and the restrictions there by law and buying someone’s name, image and likeness, so that example doesn’t hold water here…

Any business is regulated. Period, dot. Otherwise there is chaos.

 

[JRich]

Nah…

 

[GoodTimeVol]

Any business is regulated. Period, dot. Otherwise there is chaos.

You realize you are construing “people/players” as a “business” that needs restrictions? Collectives have restrictions like any business does in this country, but you are saying the government needs to treat players as a “business” and restrict how much they make? Sorry I just don’t understand your argument…Do you want the government to set everyone’s salaries?

 

[BanditVol]

You realize you are construing “people/players” as a “business” that needs restrictions? Collectives have restrictions like any business does in this country, but you are saying the government needs to treat players as a “business” and restrict how much they make? Sorry I just don’t understand your argument…Do you want the government to set everyone’s salaries?

No, I am construing the payment of NIL to players as a business, by an entity such as Squyre.

Is that clear?

And for the record, salaries are regulated. For instance...there is a minimum wage. There is a law that workers cannot be made to work more than 40 hours without overtime. There are laws against child labor. Etc.

Do you "still not understand [my] argument', or do I need to keep explaining?

I'll also add as an aside that NIL...rather infamously...is NOT a salary! I mean, this has been discussed endlessly. Its a fee in payment for services.

Did you hear about the scandal at Florida where an athlete was promised money and did not get it, then left. Which left the gators with a lot of egg on their collective faces (which I greatly enjoyed!).

So what do YOU think happens to the player, if there aren't some basic laws saying "hey you can't break a contract". Or laws against fraud, laws against perjury, etc.

Or do you just trust the natural goodness of people?

OMG.

 

[BanditVol]

No, I am construing the payment of NIL to players as a business, by an entity such as Squyre.

Is that clear?

And for the record, salaries are regulated. For instance...there is a minimum wage. There is a law that workers cannot be made to work more than 40 hours without overtime. There are laws against child labor. Etc.

Do you "still not understand [my] argument', or do I need to keep explaining?

I'll also add as an aside that NIL...rather infamously...is NOT a salary! I mean, this has been discussed endlessly. Its a fee in payment for services.

Did you hear about the scandal at Florida where an athlete was promised money and did not get it, then left. Which left the gators with a lot of egg on their collective faces (which I greatly enjoyed!).

So what do YOU think happens to the player, if there aren't some basic laws saying "hey you can't break a contract". Or laws against fraud, laws against perjury, etc.

Or do you just trust the natural goodness of people?

OMG.

Oh and PS...I mean that Squyre is a BUSINESS. B-U-S-I-N-E-S-S. Its when a corporate or S-corp or LLC forms an entity to try and make a profit. Notice I am litereally spelling this out for you because above I called SQURYE an "entity" and based on how this conversation is going so far, that likely confused you.

 

[GoodTimeVol]

No, I am construing the payment of NIL to players as a business, by an entity such as Squyre.

Is that clear?

And for the record, salaries are regulated. For instance...there is a minimum wage. There is a law that workers cannot be made to work more than 40 hours without overtime. There are laws against child labor. Etc.

Do you "still not understand [my] argument', or do I need to keep explaining?

I'll also add as an aside that NIL...rather infamously...is NOT a salary! I mean, this has been discussed endlessly. Its a fee in payment for services.

Did you hear about the scandal at Florida where an athlete was promised money and did not get it, then left. Which left the gators with a lot of egg on their collective faces (which I greatly enjoyed!).

So what do YOU think happens to the player, if there aren't some basic laws saying "hey you can't break a contract". Or laws against fraud, laws against perjury, etc.

Or do you just trust the natural goodness of people?

OMG.

Nobody said NIL is a salary? I merely pointed out you can’t regulate what ppl make for a living you know because as American citizens we have the “right to earn”. So what exactly are you arguing for then? To put more regulation on businesses or players? And if so what regulation do collectives need under the scope of private businesses that already have regulations set up which you point out in prior posts?

 

[BanditVol]

You realize you are construing “people/players” as a “business” that needs restrictions? Collectives have restrictions like any business does in this country, but you are saying the government needs to treat players as a “business” and restrict how much they make? Sorry I just don’t understand your argument…Do you want the government to set everyone’s salaries?

Oh and sorry for the third post, but you have given me so much to work with!

I never said a business "needs" regulations (not "restriction" as you say, but regulations and laws). I am saying they ARE regulated. Period, dot. This is already the way it works.

Now, do I think that's good or bad? I believe in the minimum number of laws and regulations to ensure fair business practices (i.e. people...or players in this case....don't get ripped off...and that players also do what they are supposed to do per the contract).

You seem to be reading reality as my opinion, and are way off base.

Businesses ARE regulated (whether you know it or not?? I mean..you SHOULD), and Squyre is absolutely a business (as is anyone paying the players for NIL).

 

[GoodTimeVol]

Oh and sorry for the third post, but you have given me so much to work with!

I never said a business "needs" regulations (not "restriction" as you say, but regulations and laws). I am saying they ARE regulated. Period, dot. This is already the way it works.

Now, do I think that's good or bad? I believe in the minimum number of laws and regulations to ensure fair business practices (i.e. people...or players in this case....don't get ripped off...and that players also do what they are supposed to do per the contract).

You seem to be reading reality as my opinion, and are way off base.

Businesses ARE regulated (whether you know it or not?? I mean..you SHOULD), and Squyre is absolutely a business (as is anyone paying the players for NIL).

Those laws you point out are already in place…trust me collectives can’t fraud ppl out of money or contracts without repercussions

 

[BanditVol]

Those laws you point out are already in place…trust me collectives can’t fraud ppl out of money or contracts without repercussions

Yes! They are!

You asked what laws had to do with NIL...at all. SMH

 

[GoodTimeVol]

Yes! They are!

You asked what laws had to do with NIL...at all. SMH

“NIL” isn’t a business entity so your wording confused me

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

No, I am construing the payment of NIL to players as a business, by an entity such as Squyre.

Is that clear?

And for the record, salaries are regulated. For instance...there is a minimum wage. There is a law that workers cannot be made to work more than 40 hours without overtime. There are laws against child labor. Etc.

Do you "still not understand [my] argument', or do I need to keep explaining?

I'll also add as an aside that NIL...rather infamously...is NOT a salary! I mean, this has been discussed endlessly. Its a fee in payment for services.

Did you hear about the scandal at Florida where an athlete was promised money and did not get it, then left. Which left the gators with a lot of egg on their collective faces (which I greatly enjoyed!).

So what do YOU think happens to the player, if there aren't some basic laws saying "hey you can't break a contract". Or laws against fraud, laws against perjury, etc.

Or do you just trust the natural goodness of people?

OMG.

You are conflating a minimum wage with a cap on regulating the maximum of NIL money? That's a false equivalence.

Wages are in return for employment. NIL is in return for endorsements. Your argument is apples to oranges.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Any business is regulated. Period, dot. Otherwise there is chaos.

The NCAA has zero right to regulate any NIL collective or how much money a collective or individual can pay an athlete in return for endorsements.

 

[BanditVol]

“NIL” isn’t a business entity so your wording confused me

No, but its composed of businesses, obviously. That's like saying the oil industry is not regulated.

 

[BanditVol]

You are conflating a minimum wage with a cap on regulating the maximum of NIL money? That's a false equivalence.

Wages are in return for employment. NIL is in return for endorsements. Your argument is apples to oranges.

So jumping in the middle of a thread that you aren't even part of, and just as clueless as your previous posts.

I mean, I'm really struggling here, having to explain EVERYTHING to you.

I was just listing examples of laws and regulations that affect businesses in general, to show that they already exist (a point I should not have had to make, but such is the IQ level of sports message boards).

You are correct. Pat yourself on the back. Minimum wage is NOT, in fact, related to NIL. It IS, however, related to businesses in general.

Let me know if you don't understand that and need more explaining. I'm thinking its 50-50 that you do.

Let me continue, before you also bring them up, that the child labor laws also do not apply. Again, they are just an example.

Additionally, overtime ALSO does not apply. Again...its an example because the point I was making (completely lost on you) is that IN GENERAL, businesses are regulated by laws and regulations. The poster I was actually responding to (to be clear...that was not you, just making sure you understand that).

Now...do you understand?

Not sure I want to keep having explain all this obvious stuff to you. Frankly its exhausting.

 

[BanditVol]

The NCAA has zero right to regulate any NIL collective or how much money a collective or individual can pay an athlete in return for endorsements.

LMAO

OMG

Where did I say the NCAA was going to regulate it?

My point is that businesses in general are regulated by LAW.

Let me explain that to you. There is this thing call a LAW, that is passed by the Federal, State or Local government. There are laws governing businesses. That includes NILs. In fact, believe it or not!!! State legislatures have ALREADY passed some laws to regulate NIL!!! Did you know that? I really think you did not.

Do you need anymore explaining?

SMH.....

 

[Volfan1000]

With all thats going on with the Lawsuit and the wild wild west of the NIL world. I would love to hear some of your takes on how to set rules and regulations on this matter. Here is my opinion, it may be a bad one so dont judge me to harshly.

1.) i think the collective needs to have a salary cap. I feel like doing this wouldnt limit a potential athlete on how much he can make and wouldnt violate the sherman act. You Limit on how much the collective can offer athletes over a given period.

2.) Something has to be done with the transfer portal. I feel like Tampering is out of control and if an athlete isnt getting what he wants he just ups and leaves. I think we go back to 2006 transfer rules. Either you have to have graduated or require a 1 time transfer waiver. By doing this, you also put another kink in the salary cap of the collective. Because now they would be stuck paying the player who doesnt produce.

3.) We should go back to 1 signing day. Not 2. You make it in December and have a very long recruiting dead period for the holidays. These coaches are not getting enough time with their players or their families as it is. Then you add the current state of NIL and Transfer portal and coaches are just jumping to the NFL at the first chance they get.

I doubt if a salary cap would work with NIL.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

It is illegal to regulate NIL under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

It is illegal to limit the amount of money a player can generate for his Name, Image, and Likeness as a free American. The membership of the NCAA can vote to limit the amount it's member institutions can have on roster, just like scholarships. This is the obvious next step after they lose their attempts to interfere with the player's ability and/or timing to establish their value. Bet the vote will be like 390 to 4. Super Haves vs the Have Some's and Have Not's.

There will be near limitless locations to play once the unimpeded NIL income amounts has been established by players and collectives totally outside the control of the NCAA and it's members. Real NIL value is not at risk, any hidden pay for play at a particular school is. No longer a question IF they can play, but where. Schools will have to make decisions on NIL dollars just like they do Counters and PWO slots and may have to pass on some players that will surely have OTHER institutions ready, willing and able to accept players cap hits with income that cost them nothing. Collectives will be at risk, not the student and not the schools as it should be and the portal with possibly NEW next day play options for any player electing to play elsewhere in order to earn their NIL money where a school can't or won't accept the change in NIL during current period. Player and school will have business decisions when NIL values change. Players might be processed to open cap space, just like they are to regain counters. All part of the brave new world. Player still has his money and the opportunity to play at an NCAA school. That is what the law requires. Same mobility as in the workplace that the law also covers.

 

[Voltopia]

It is illegal to limit the amount of money a player can generate for his Name, Image, and Likeness as a free American. The membership of the NCAA can vote to limit the amount it's member institutions can have on roster, just like scholarships. This is the obvious next step after they lose their attempts to interfere with the player's ability and/or timing to establish their value. Bet the vote will be like 390 to 4. Super Haves vs the Have Some's and Have Not's.

There will be near limitless locations to play once the unimpeded NIL income amounts has been established by players and collectives totally outside the control of the NCAA and it's members. Real NIL value is not at risk, any hidden pay for play at a particular school is. No longer a question IF they can play, but where. Schools will have to make decisions on NIL dollars just like they do Counters and PWO slots and may have to pass on some players that will surely have OTHER institutions ready, willing and able to accept players cap hits with income that cost them nothing. Collectives will be at risk, not the student and not the schools as it should be and the portal with possibly NEW next day play options for any player electing to play elsewhere in order to earn their NIL money where a school can't or won't accept the change in NIL during current period. Player and school will have business decisions when NIL values change. Players might be processed to open cap space, just like they are to regain counters. All part of the brave new world. Player still has his money and the opportunity to play at an NCAA school. That is what the law requires. Same mobility as in the workplace that the law also covers.

This is more or less what I've been saying about the "NIL is an unlimited private transaction and the schools can't stop it" nonsense. Duh, of course they can't stop it, but the schools CAN set terms for eligibility, under the NCAA, at least until someone sues them for whatever excuse they come up with next. The idea that schools must be passive recipients who just let the players do whatever they want, with no control or no ability to dictate any terms, is ludicrous.

And really, the schools have never had the ability to stop NIL. Not in 1980, not today. There was no legal way for schools to prevent NIL transactions from occurring. All they could do was have eligbility requirements to compete in the sport, which they did. But a player was never legally constricted from signing an NIL deal. Of course, the dirty truth there is that their NIL rights are worthless without the college colors and brand they're tied to, so no one would want to do that. They want to leverage the college brand association as part of their NIL, because the college brand tie-ins are the things of value for NIL deals.

Make no mistake. Schools will take control back at some point - either through legislation or through the eventual transformation into private businesses.

 

[GAVol]

No, but it’s composed of businesses, obviously. That's like saying the oil industry is not regulated.

Not quite a “business”. More of a transactional concept really. Yes, the businesses, collectives and people that pay for an athlete’s name, image or likeness are subject to IRS, SEC, state and federal laws but in my mind “NIL” is more of a right than anything else.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

This is more or less what I've been saying about the "NIL is an unlimited private transaction and the schools can't stop it" nonsense. Duh, of course they can't stop it, but the schools CAN set terms for eligibility, under the NCAA, at least until someone sues them for whatever excuse they come up with next. The idea that schools must be passive recipients who just let the players do whatever they want, with no control or no ability to dictate any terms, is ludicrous.

And really, the schools have never had the ability to stop NIL. Not in 1980, not today. There was no legal way for schools to prevent NIL transactions from occurring. All they could do was have eligbility requirements to compete in the sport, which they did. But a player was never legally constricted from signing an NIL deal. Of course, the dirty truth there is that their NIL rights are worthless without the college colors and brand they're tied to, so no one would want to do that. They want to leverage the college brand association as part of their NIL, because the college brand tie-ins are the things of value for NIL deals.

Make no mistake. Schools will take control back at some point - either through legislation or through the eventual transformation into private businesses.

What the NCAA cannot do is have rules which limit the rights of players, even if they're applied to the team.

For instance, the NCAA couldn't set a limit of "no more than 10 black players" or "no more than 10 foreign players" or somesuch. Those kinds of rules invite a lawsuit asking "Why is this restriction a rule?"

Scholly and roster rules? To keep schools from having massive rosters vs schools that cannot afford it. Those benefits can be offered or not offered by the schools.

NIL deals ARE NOT MADE BY THE SCHOOL. The schools can't tell a player when to sign one, how much to sign one for, etc.

The ONLY people limited by your NIL rule are the players and the NIL companies, not the teams themselves who have no way to regulate NIL once their players sign.

The question in court is: why should this be regulated? What benefit is this to the NCAA?

The NCAA lost Alston because their argument was: we can't let schools compensate players with actual educational tools like computers because it might hurt parity in our league.

The SCOTUS told them 9-0. That's not a good enough reason to restrict the rights of players.

What do you think is going to happen with NIL benefits?

 

[Voltopia]

What the NCAA cannot do is have rules which limit the rights of players, even if they're applied to the team.

For instance, the NCAA couldn't set a limit of "no more than 10 black players" or "no more than 10 foreign players" or somesuch. Those kinds of rules invite a lawsuit asking "Why is this restriction a rule?"

Scholly and roster rules? To keep schools from having massive rosters vs schools that cannot afford it. Those benefits can be offered or not offered by the schools.

NIL deals ARE NOT MADE BY THE SCHOOL. The schools can't tell a player when to sign one, how much to sign one for, etc.

The ONLY people limited by your NIL rule are the players and the NIL companies, not the teams themselves who have no way to regulate NIL once their players sign.

The question in court is: why should this be regulated? What benefit is this to the NCAA?

The NCAA lost Alston because their argument was: we can't let schools compensate players with actual educational tools like computers because it might hurt parity in our league.

The SCOTUS told them 9-0. That's not a good enough reason to restrict the rights of players.

What do you think is going to happen with NIL benefits?

I don't understand why you're yelling at me here. All I said wat schools have never been able to physically / legally prevent someone from signing an NIL deal. What they have been able to do is set eligibility requirements for participation in FBS football, which is what they've done in the past, and may try to do in some form as a stopgap for this NIL madness - up until the next time someone sues them over those requirements, at which point the courts will again kick the NCAA to the curb. My point at the end being that, eventually, as the courts continue to strip the NCAA of any ability to set any boundaries on players who participate in college football, the schools will eventually make the transition into private businesses so they can re-assert their authority (unless Congress were to somehow carve out an exception for college athletics, which they don't seem to be interested in doing, so).

But to answer that question at the end, what I think is going to happen with NIL benefits, long term, is that the schools will eventually give up the ghost and treat the players like employees. Because it's the only way they will ever regain control of the situation.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I don't understand why you're yelling at me here. All I said wat schools have never been able to physically / legally prevent someone from signing an NIL deal. What they have been able to do is set eligibility requirements for participation in FBS football, which is what they've done in the past, and may try to do in some form as a stopgap for this NIL madness - up until the next time someone sues them over those requirements, at which point the courts will again kick the NCAA to the curb. My point at the end being that, eventually, as the courts continue to strip the NCAA of any ability to set any boundaries on players who participate in college football, the schools will eventually make the transition into private businesses so they can re-assert their authority (unless Congress were to somehow carve out an exception for college athletics, which they don't seem to be interested in doing, so).

But to answer that question at the end, what I think is going to happen with NIL benefits, long term, is that the schools will eventually give up the ghost and treat the players like employees. Because it's the only way they will ever regain control of the situation.

There's no limiting NIL, not in the short term nor long term, by the NCAA.

They didn't try when they originally lost Alston because they knew it was futile. Even the inept NCAA knew by the time Alston reached the SCOTUS, it was over for their NIL restrictions, but you'd want to believe they COULD have restricted it for the teams then, but didn't?

If the plan to restrict NIL benefits at the team level COULD work legally the NCAA (at the strong request of the schools who are now seeing less donations as they're split between the schools and collectives) would have done it.

They didn't. They can't. None of the shifts in NIL rules have suggested a "school cap" and the NCAA has tweaked NIL rules per the UT/VA lawsuit continually.

There will be no "team NIL cap" because you cannot ask the schools to regulate something they legally cannot regulate. It's absurd.

 

[Voltopia]

There's no limiting NIL, not in the short term nor long term, by the NCAA.

They didn't try when they originally lost Alston because they knew it was futile. Even the inept NCAA knew by the time Alston reached the SCOTUS, it was over for their NIL restrictions, but you'd want to believe they COULD have restricted it for the teams then, but didn't?

If the plan to restrict NIL benefits at the team level COULD work legally the NCAA (at the strong request of the schools who are now seeing less donations as they're split between the schools and collectives) would have done it.

They didn't. They can't. None of the shifts in NIL rules have suggested a "school cap" and the NCAA has tweaked NIL rules per the UT/VA lawsuit continually.

There will be no "team NIL cap" because you cannot ask the schools to regulate something they legally cannot regulate. It's absurd.

I never said there would be a team NIL cap. I've never suggested that as a solution. That's a silly idea. All I said was that the NCAA or the schools may try to use the eligibility tool to enact a degree of control. Which will fail, because the courts hate the schools and the system. And then they'll have to break the glass and pull the lever on making them employees.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I never said there would be a team NIL cap. I've never suggested that as a solution.

I'm sorry, I mistook:

This is more or less what I've been saying about the "NIL is an unlimited private transaction and the schools can't stop it" nonsense. Duh, of course they can't stop it, but the schools CAN set terms for eligibility, under the NCAA, at least until someone sues them for whatever excuse they come up with next. The idea that schools must be passive recipients who just let the players do whatever they want, with no control or no ability to dictate any terms, is ludicrous.

That SEEMS to say the schools and NCAA could set limits on NIL for the teams as a term of eligibility.

I've explained repeatedly to the guy you replied to that the students just delay signing until after the first game, then the school is magically over the cap. You want to do it per game? Collectives could respond with multiple 5 day contracts in place and by game day each week, the school is back under the cap.

"This Monday our player agreed to sign 50 cards at $1000 each but he was done by Friday"..... what NIL?

It's stupid to try. Schools would be flooded in one day NIL contracts, one week NIL contracts, every week NIL contracts that last 2 days, no 3 days, no 1 day.

The schools will not be "taking back control." You're correct. They will eventually openly pay their employees at the market rate.

The teams spent decades paying their labor in the dark. I've no sympathy that the teams now hate the light.