How to Regulate NIL

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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.

Your litany of logical fallacies is laughable.
Your bogus claims are what is obvious here.

We aren't talking about "IN GENERAL".
We're talking - very specifically - about NIL.
Duh.

You just admitted that your comments are off topic. That's your problem, not mine.

Overtime? I didn't mention it. I did like the overtime win against Florida in 1998, though.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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.

The NCAA is a private entity. 591(c)(3) to be exact. Many of their member schools are not.

That seems to have been an issue in the Northwestern athletes losing their lawsuit about employer status. All of the other BIG schools at the time were public universities.

Making them employees would have put them in the position of being prod and competing against (nominally) amateurs.

That dynamic has changed now that USC is joining the BIG. They're private as well.

 

[BanditVol]

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.

I was referring to the businesses doing the NIL.

But whatever you call it, state legislatures have already passed laws regulating NIL.

 

[MemphisVol77]

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.

In like 4-6 different threads it seems, he just doesn't get it. I'm impressed with your patience.

With the laws as they exist now, short of athletes giving away(absurd) their NIL rights in a CBA, the NCAA can not set any limits.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

In like 4-6 different threads it seems, he just doesn't get it. I'm impressed with your patience.

With the laws as they exist now, short of athletes giving away(absurd) their NIL rights in a CBA, the NCAA can not set any limits.

We live in an era where repeating a false idea enough seems to give it power. I'm unsure if that's Guntersville's plan or not, but it's not workable.

Not only would the collectives inundate schools and the NCAA with short term contracts to make record keeping impossible, he's suggesting players should report NIL they might sign by a certain date or something.

Nico might structure it so he doesn't even have an NIL during football season or even during school. Is the NCAA going to restrict eligibility for Nico at a school for legal, moral business behavior he did on his own time, away from school, when not even technically with the team nor enrolled in any classes?

The control issues people have with NIL payments when anyone with a passing knowledge of college football knows players have been paid under the table without restrictions for years is just hypocrisy.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I was referring to the businesses doing the NIL.

But whatever you call it, state legislatures have already passed laws regulating NIL.

Prove it. Cite the laws.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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.

Just how big of a control freak are you?
Anyone forum member can post here, on any thread, whenever and however they wish.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I'm sorry, I mistook:


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.

I don't understand why folks think limiting NIL dollars per team is more restrictive than limiting scholarships at 85? Or limiting official paid visits for each school. Or limiting PWOs to attain 105 in total. Or that you can only sign your inital scholly NLI in windows around the two signing days. Maybe you don't wait for actual deals at all and require athletes to DECLARE their own cap limit for the upcoming season for the schools to accept or pass on by date certain. Start over for next season. NOTHING to restrict the athlete from getting or setting their own value, but everything to set rules of engagement for each MEMBER school like every otherM participation rule already in place.

Not to keen on trying to go to the employee model. Guess you could go to a pay per play model. Can't assume that all players are going to be full time I don't guess. If they go the junior pro model I guess they could adopt the 43 man roster too. That would spread the wealth of talent a bunch. Do we end up with different organizations for the sports. If you blow up the mother ship then all the different sports will need their own organizations like the NFL NBA WNBA MLB, PGA, etc. Do you really try to create one set of rules for D1 D2 and D3? Maybe you just have to carve out a new division for the paid levels and leave the rest alone.

You clean up the signing deals by establishing a non counting limit each player can earn at HYPOTHETICALLY 20K or pick a more rational number.

 

[BanditVol]

Just how big of a control freak are you?
Anyone forum member can post here, on any thread, whenever and however they wish.

Lol! Not trying to control ANYTHING, just poining out that you seem stuck in first gear constantly and its exhausting to those of us in fifth gear.

 

[BanditVol]

Prove it. Cite the laws.

Boom!

Missouri Enacts Progressive Name, Image, and Likeness Law - Seigfreid Bingham

By: Tate Thompson and Curry Sexton In the absence of uniform laws from Congress or a more robust policy from the NCAA, states continue to look for ways to help their institutions compete in the name, image, and likeness (NIL) “arms race.” One way is for states to implement progressive NIL laws...

www.sb-kc.com

Took two seconds.

Interesting that you have prattled on endlessly about how either NIL should not be regulated, or cannot, whatever, accused people of being communist, etc, and were completely unaware of this.

I think you are finished on this topic.

Now...I KNOW you won't acknowdedge that, but everyone else can see it.

(sticking a fork in OrangeMan's ass)....

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I don't understand why folks think limiting NIL dollars per team is more restrictive than limiting scholarships at 85? Or limiting official paid visits for each school. Or limiting PWOs to attain 105 in total. Or that you can only sign your inital scholly NLI in windows around the two signing days. Maybe you don't wait for actual deals at all and require athletes to DECLARE their own cap limit for the upcoming season for the schools to accept or pass on by date certain. Start over for next season. NOTHING to restrict the athlete from getting or setting their own value, but everything to set rules of engagement for each MEMBER school like every otherM participation rule already in place.

Not to keen on trying to go to the employee model. Guess you could go to a pay per play model. Can't assume that all players are going to be full time I don't guess. If they go the junior pro model I guess they could adopt the 43 man roster too. That would spread the wealth of talent a bunch. Do we end up with different organizations for the sports. If you blow up the mother ship then all the different sports will need their own organizations like the NFL NBA WNBA MLB, PGA, etc. Do you really try to create one set of rules for D1 D2 and D3? Maybe you just have to carve out a new division for the paid levels and leave the rest alone.

You clean up the signing deals by establishing a non counting limit each player can earn at HYPOTHETICALLY 20K or pick a more rational number.

I don't know why the NCAA can rule that rosters, schools, and visits can be limited for the schools EXCEPT THE OBVIOUS, those are things the schools CAN actually limit.

Ruling schools have to limit something they cannot themselves limit is ridiculous.

I've REPEATEDLY asked you: What would you have the NCAA do when a player signs an NIL that puts them over the cap during the season?

Not play the player or another player because they exercised their right to an NIL? You're sued. A player in good standing on the team being punished for practicing free enterprise is the most un-American BS you could possibly suggest.

So what's your solution when a player signs an NIL in the middle of the season that puts the team over the cap?

Repeatedly, you've got nothing. The plan fails because the schools cannot control the legal, moral business interests of their players nor should they.

Why? Why do you think the NCAA should attempt to control NIL in the first place? Did it bother you for years when players were paid under the table or did you enjoy the Vols fielding talent by the usual "hush hush" means?

Why be a hypocrite now?

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Boom!

Missouri Enacts Progressive Name, Image, and Likeness Law - Seigfreid Bingham

By: Tate Thompson and Curry Sexton In the absence of uniform laws from Congress or a more robust policy from the NCAA, states continue to look for ways to help their institutions compete in the name, image, and likeness (NIL) “arms race.” One way is for states to implement progressive NIL laws...

www.sb-kc.com

Took two seconds.

Interesting that you have prattled on endlessly about how either NIL should not be regulated, or cannot, whatever, accused people of being communist, etc, and were completely unaware of this.

I think you are finished on this topic.

Now...I KNOW you won't acknowdedge that, but everyone else can see it.

(sticking a fork in OrangeMan's ass)....

You are FOS. The law you cited doesn't regulate NIL. It prohibits 3rd party interference with it

Your latest post is laughably inaccurate.
You can't decide if I was pro or anti NIL regulation. That's epically confused of you.

I didn't accuse anyone of being communist or anything like it. That claim is pure on your part, and anyone can see that.

Your ignorance of the rules of proof is appalling. You made the claim. That puts the onus if proof on you. Then you cited a reference that didn't actually support your claim. In fact, it refutes ur, because it stops interference in NIL by outsiders.

I said all along that the NCAA can't regulate NIL. They can't. You're citing a state law doesn't address that at all.

You are a legend in your own mind, but nowhere else.

 

[MemphisVol77]

I don't understand why folks think limiting NIL dollars per team

The teams don't pay NIL so it doesn't come out of the their overhead.

is more restrictive than

So you admit it's restrictive? Either way, it isn't a question of which is more restrictive.

limiting scholarships at 85? Or limiting official paid visits for each school. Or limiting PWOs to attain 105 in total.

Because SCOTUS hasn't said it's illegal.

 

[GAVol]

I was referring to the businesses doing the NIL.

But whatever you call it, state legislatures have already passed laws regulating NIL.

I’m not sure they really regulate it. They’ve just passed laws to make it legal and give cover to the collectives. Georgia just amended theirs to include high school athletes.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I’m not sure they really regulate it. They’ve just passed laws to make it legal and give cover to the collectives. Georgia just amended theirs to include high school athletes.

I'm not certain the NCAA should be able to limit NIL beyond "morality and embarrassment" (no strip clubs, liquor, etc) and overt "pay for performance" (specific school play, extra $$$ for sacks, TDs, etc.)

If collectives are willing to risk a multi-year deal or a real non quid pro quo deal with an unsigned athlete, it's their risk.

If the NCAA feels like "that's just too much money" they need to let the market work it out because money regulation attempts just send the money to the old school methods. At least with collectives, the market is in the open.

While it's not a positive for college athletics in the long run, it's much more fair and honest than the players not being compensated at market value OR teams breaking NCAA rules against booster payments routinely.

Since college is a place of education, the old method taught players either "it's okay to break the rules" or "if you have enough power over workers, you don't have to pay them a fair amount." That's not a message college should be sending to young people.

 

[BanditVol]

I’m not sure they really regulate it. They’ve just passed laws to make it legal and give cover to the collectives. Georgia just amended theirs to include high school athletes.

Sure...that's just language though. I use law and regulations pretty interchangeably.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I'm not certain the NCAA should be able to limit NIL beyond "morality and embarrassment" (no strip clubs, liquor, etc) and overt "pay for performance" (specific school play, extra $$$ for sacks, TDs, etc.)

If collectives are willing to risk a multi-year deal or a real non quid pro quo deal with an unsigned athlete, it's their risk.

If the NCAA feels like "that's just too much money" they need to let the market work it out because money regulation attempts just send the money to the old school methods. At least with collectives, the market is in the open.

While it's not a positive for college athletics in the long run, it's much more fair and honest than the players not being compensated at market value OR teams breaking NCAA rules against booster payments routinely.

Since college is a place of education, the old method taught players either "it's okay to break the rules" or "if you have enough power over workers, you don't have to pay them a fair amount." That's not a message college should be sending to young people.

Given the PRO decision handed down today, the NCAA and it's members can't interfere in NIL, period.

 

[BanditVol]

You are FOS. The law you cited doesn't regulate NIL. It prohibits 3rd party interference with it

Your latest post is laughably inaccurate.
You can't decide if I was pro or anti NIL regulation. That's epically confused of you.

I didn't accuse anyone of being communist or anything like it. That claim is pure on your part, and anyone can see that.

Your ignorance of the rules of proof is appalling. You made the claim. That puts the onus if proof on you. Then you cited a reference that didn't actually support your claim. In fact, it refutes ur, because it stops interference in NIL by outsiders.

I said all along that the NCAA can't regulate NIL. They can't. You're citing a state law doesn't address that at all.

You are a legend in your own mind, but nowhere else.

You are definitely anti regulation, to the point that you accuse people you don't know, who have not expressed an opinion on it one way or another, of being pro-regulation, or saying the NCAA can regulate NIL, or saying there is a conflict between academics and athletics, and probably a whole bunch of other s--t I have forgotten. And if you are not, who GAS? You are so far out in left field with reading comprehension that frankly I don't give a rat's ass what your view is. Hell, I never did! All I know is you started attacking me, accusing me of holding beliefs I had not discussed nor were they remotely what my views are.

As for the law....read carefully. Prohibiting third party interference...get this....IS a regulation!!

OMFG...quit embarrassing yourself. You are wearing out that clutch trying to shift out of first gear!

Seriously. I mean, my jaw is literally dropping at stupid s--t you post.

Don't believe me? I learned of the Missouri law listening to Finebaum's show months ago. He introduced the topic as "Missouri has already started to regulate NIL, maybe the Federal government should do it so that its uniform". He had Chris Lowe as a guest, and both he and Chris refereed to Missouri as "regulating NIL".

Maybe you should call Finebaum and tell him and Chris Lowe they are FOS. I'd love to hear that conversation. Let me pop some popcorn....

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

You are definitely anti regulation, to the point that you accuse people you don't know, who have not expressed an opinion on it one way or another, of being pro-regulation, or saying the NCAA can regulate NIL, or saying there is a conflict between academics and athletics, and probably a whole bunch of other s--t I have forgotten. And if you are not, who GAS? You are so far out in left field with reading comprehension that frankly I don't give a rat's ass what your view is. Hell, I never did! All I know is you started attacking me, accusing me of holding beliefs I had not discussed nor were they remotely what my views are.

As for the law....read carefully. Prohibiting third party interference...get this....IS a regulation!!

OMFG...quit embarrassing yourself. You are wearing out that clutch trying to shift out of first gear!

Seriously. I mean, my jaw is literally dropping at stupid s--t you post.

Don't believe me? I learned of the Missouri law listening to Finebaum's show months ago. He introduced the topic as "Missouri has already started to regulate NIL, maybe the Federal government should do it so that its uniform". He had Chris Lowe as a guest, and both he and Chris refereed to Missouri as "regulating NIL".

Maybe you should call Finebaum and tell him and Chris Lowe they are FOS. I'd love to hear that conversation. Let me pop some popcorn....

Your are claiming a false equivalence.
You are claiming that regulating something (limiting it) and preventing a 3rd party from interfering with it are the same thing. They are not. They are mutually exclusive. I'd ask if you "got discernment" but it's pretty clear that you don't.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Your are claiming a false equivalence.
You are claiming that regulating something (limiting it) and preventing a 3rd party from interfering with it are the same thing. They are not. They are mutually exclusive. I'd ask if you "got discernment" but it's pretty clear that you don't.

Yep, the NCAA should get the final message when the case for which this ruling today is part of is finalized.

Nobody can prohibit the creation of deals by entities projecting and monetizing value of name, image, and likeness. Not when and not how much.

They will have to get back to having the membership define the rules that govern how to protect competitive balance with the addition of unfettered NIL. Insure that every athlete is welcomed into the greater organization but attaining fairness by regulating the amount of resources each member can acquire. God created the talent not the NCAA and they voted to limit the schools to 85 to force a distribution and now collectives not the NCAA are adding in NIL money, and they will define limits on that too for the same reasons and supported by the same logic.

Bring it on. No need NOW to fight the size of each deal, that just further limits the school taking them in. Use your allocation wisely, just like scholarships, official visits, and on field staff members. The only proven tool they have mastered. All are measurable.

Bet this is the reflexive reaction and with the teams standing in line to get NIL worthy talent when leaders fill up, just like with schollies, not much for the SCOTUS to protect. Poor boy might have to go to Auburn instead of BAMA. OH THE HUMANITY.

No way to actually define and therefore prohibit some salted in pay for play, but does disincentivize UNPURE NIL deals.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Yep, the NCAA should get the final message when the case for which this ruling today is part of is finalized.

Nobody can prohibit the creation of deals by entities projecting and monetizing value of name, image, and likeness. Not when and not how much.

They will have to get back to having the membership define the rules that govern how to protect competitive balance with the addition of unfettered NIL. Insure that every athlete is welcomed into the greater organization but attaining fairness by regulating the amount of resources each member can acquire. God created the talent not the NCAA and they voted to limit the schools to 85 to force a distribution and now collectives not the NCAA are adding in NIL money, and they will define limits on that too for the same reasons and supported by the same logic.

Bring it on. No need NOW to fight the size of each deal, that just further limits the school taking them in. Use your allocation wisely, just like scholarships, official visits, and on field staff members. The only proven tool they have mastered. All are measurable.

Bet this is the reflexive reaction and with the teams standing in line to get NIL worthy talent when leaders fill up, just like with schollies, not much for the SCOTUS to protect. Poor boy might have to go to Auburn instead of BAMA. OH THE HUMANITY.

No way to actually define and therefore prohibit some salted in pay for play, but does disincentivize UNPURE NIL deals.

There is no such thing as an unpure NIL deal.

 

[MemphisVol77]

There is no such thing as an unpure NIL deal.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Three words: collective bargaining agreement. This is where we are heading, IMHO. This will take care of compensation, transfer portal issues and many problems beyond NIL. NIL is a separate issue and there will never be any cap on what a player can earn from NIL.

A collective bargaining agreement with whom? Recruits they haven't signed or enrolled yet? Athletes that don't get paid by the schools?

 

[Voltopia]

A collective bargaining agreement with whom? Recruits they haven't signed or enrolled yet? Athletes that don't get paid by the schools?

lol, now you're just being intentionally obtuse for the sake of argument. The subject of collective bargaining has come up plenty of times, from both athletic directors and government officials.

Here's two examples, just to move past the feigned incredulity.

Notre Dame AD Calls For Collective Bargaining Rights

Legislation Proposed To Strengthen College Athlete Bargaining Rights

The fig leaf of "oh they don't get paid by the schools" will stick for about as long as everyone's willing to wink at each other, which is to say - not long. No one's fooled by it. Everyone understands what is happening. A mechanism built to subvert employment rights and keep athletes from being compensated directly from the money the schools earn isn't going to survive for long. The courts in particular are not going to just chuckle and wink and go along with it; Kavanaugh's anti-NCAA diatribe tipped the Supreme Court's hand in particular.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

lol, now you're just being intentionally obtuse for the sake of argument. The subject of collective bargaining has come up plenty of times, from both athletic directors and government officials.

Here's two examples, just to move past the feigned incredulity.

Notre Dame AD Calls For Collective Bargaining Rights

Legislation Proposed To Strengthen College Athlete Bargaining Rights

The fig leaf of "oh they don't get paid by the schools" will stick for about as long as everyone's willing to wink at each other, which is to say - not long. No one's fooled by it. Everyone understands what is happening. A mechanism built to subvert employment rights and keep athletes from being compensated directly from the money the schools earn isn't going to survive for long. The courts in particular are not going to just chuckle and wink and go along with it; Kavanaugh's anti-NCAA diatribe tipped the Supreme Court's hand in particular.

Obtuse? I didn't make any statements. I asked questions. The question mark punctuation was a dead giveaway for those with the ability to discern.

Your post is full of non sequiturs.
I never said anything like what you think you responded to.

My point is that without the athletes being employees and paid by the schools, how are they going to unionize and/or collectively bargain? That question goes unanswered by you. The fact that some people think it can be done isn't making it happen. It's not even a road map to get there.

There are exactly 4 athletic groups that have anti trust exemptions...MLB, the NBA, the NFL, and the NHL. All of the players in those leagues are paid by their teams, unionized, have collective bargaining agreements...and can make every penny they can squeeze out if the market in NIL.

"Everyone understands what is happening". That's a textbook false generalization. Few if any understand what may be happening, because no one knows what it will ultimately look like.

"Feigned incredulity". There was none from me, feigned or otherwise. Again, I asked questions.

I'm one of the biggest supporters of the athletes being a me to profit from NIL. I agree with Justice Kavanaugh that the NCAA's entire model is illegal.

I don't care if college sports become professional or not, as long as the rules are simple, fair, equitable, and applied consistently. Oh, and that they aren't silly trivia like not being able to decorate a hotel room in a team's colors and logo or give someone a free cheese burger while onn an official visit.

The bottom line is that I'm fine with paying the athletes. I just want the NCAA out of it. Period.