'24 MO DL Williams Nwaneri (Mizzou commit)

#2,276
#2,276
therickbol said:
Yes that is just one angle that can get the statute struck down. The worst part is that they very likely know it will eventually happen. But they know that process will take some time. So temporarily they can get a quick edge.
Click to expand...

But there could be some serious damages in those lawsuits.
 
#2,277
#2,277
therickbol said:
Yes that is just one angle that can get the statute struck down. The worst part is that they very likely know it will eventually happen. But they know that process will take some time. So temporarily they can get a quick edge.
Click to expand...
They must have learned that fun trick by watching Washington DC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voluble2
#2,278
#2,278
Nothing would stop the player from signing the Financial Aid agreement in Aug, collect NIL $ thru Dec then sign with another school on signing date in Dec.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WillisWG
#2,279
#2,279
wmcovol said:
Nothing would stop the player from signing the Financial Aid agreement in Aug, collect NIL $ thru Dec then sign with another school on signing date in Dec.
Click to expand...

Nah the NIL contracts can have language that states money is contingent upon attending state school.
 
#2,280
#2,280
MarcoVol said:
Nah the NIL contracts can have language that states money is contingent upon attending state school.
Click to expand...

But money laid is money paid. This early money is before the signing date. The original NIL would be replaced with a new NIL with the school who signed the player after the season is over. Mizzou isn’t home free yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volpac Sackyou and WillisWG
#2,282
#2,282
wmcovol said:
You’re not listening. The Mizzou law clearly restricts a Missouri resident athlete who choses a university outside of Missouri to earn NIL money while playing their senior HS season but the law allows a HS teammate who signs with a Missouri university to remain eligible & able to earn NIL money. That is the part that is not gonna fly when it hits a federal court.
Click to expand...
The other state would also have to have a law that let them receive money early, too. Because right now no one else can get money Sep 1, and they have to wait until they SIGN to get paid, at the earliest. some states still require enrollment. Therefore it doesnt matter if missouri wont let them play after they get NIL, because they will already be done playing if they are going elsewhere that has different laws.

So as I keep saying there is no conflict and other states can pass their own laws.

No federal court is going to tell the State of Missouri how it can run a voluntary program inside it's own state, or the requirements to participate in said voluntary program. the rules only apply to Missouri kids going to a Missouri school, just like any other eligibility rules/laws in place.

That will not be the part that gets struck down.

The kid could always take the other NIL money and not play in missouri their senior year. It's not like NILs are banned except for Missouri. They just have their own eligibility laws and cant write laws to apply missouri laws to other states.
 
#2,283
#2,283
LouderVol said:
The other state would also have to have a law that let them receive money early, too. Because right now no one else can get money Sep 1, and they have to wait until they SIGN to get paid, at the earliest. some states still require enrollment. Therefore it doesnt matter if missouri wont let them play after they get NIL, because they will already be done playing if they are going elsewhere that has different laws.

So as I keep saying there is no conflict and other states can pass their own laws.

No federal court is going to tell the State of Missouri how it can run a voluntary program inside it's own state, or the requirements to participate in said voluntary program. the rules only apply to Missouri kids going to a Missouri school, just like any other eligibility rules/laws in place.

That will not be the part that gets struck down.

The kid could always take the other NIL money and not play in missouri their senior year. It's not like NILs are banned except for Missouri. They just have their own eligibility laws and cant write laws to apply missouri laws to other states.
Click to expand...
You can keep saying it but it's not true. The fact that 'other states can pass their own laws that say the same thing' is not at all part of the criteria for constitutional statutes pertaining to interstate commerce. If the law impacts a person's business, or potential business, activities that crosses state lines then the federal courts have always interpreted the commerce clause VERY broadly. The only case that would need to be made is to find one scenario where a person's business activity is being impacted by a state law. That's the precedent. Will a test case be brought? Who knows. How much time and money would need to be spent running the case up the courts? Quite a bit. My guess is someone will be willing to do that at some point.
 
#2,284
#2,284
wmcovol said:
But money laid is money paid. This early money is before the signing date. The original NIL would be replaced with a new NIL with the school who signed the player after the season is over. Mizzou isn’t home free yet.
Click to expand...

Mizzou NIL can be tied to him attending the school per their state law. So if he starts receiving payments after Sept 1st then signs with another school it's a 99% chance he would have to repay those funds.

Someone mentioned earlier that he is planning to be a summer enrollee so it would make sense for him to take the 9 month early payment option with Mizzou.
 
#2,285
#2,285
JT3 said:
Mizzou NIL can be tied to him attending the school per their state law. So if he starts receiving payments after Sept 1st then signs with another school it's a 99% chance he would have to repay those funds.

Someone mentioned earlier that he is planning to be a summer enrollee so it would make sense for him to take the 9 month early payment option with Mizzou.
Click to expand...

NIL is supposed to NOT be tied to your signing with a school. The payments end when a collective stops providing name, imagine likeness opportunities (autographs, public appearences, etc) to an athlete. I read where Nico got several hundred thousand dollars early and it was at risk if he didnt sign with Tennessee as Spyre couldnt come back to collect.
 
#2,286
#2,286
wmcovol said:
NIL is supposed to NOT be tied to your signing with a school. The payments end when a collective stops providing name, imagine likeness opportunities (autographs, public appearences, etc) to an athlete. I read where Nico got several hundred thousand dollars early and it was at risk if he didnt sign with Tennessee as Spyre couldnt come back to collect.
Click to expand...

It’s not *supposed* to be but the state of Missouri passed a law saying it could be.
 
#2,287
#2,287
therickbol said:
You can keep saying it but it's not true. The fact that 'other states can pass their own laws that say the same thing' is not at all part of the criteria for constitutional statutes pertaining to interstate commerce. If the law impacts a person's business, or potential business, activities that crosses state lines then the federal courts have always interpreted the commerce clause VERY broadly. The only case that would need to be made is to find one scenario where a person's business activity is being impacted by a state law. That's the precedent. Will a test case be brought? Who knows. How much time and money would need to be spent running the case up the courts? Quite a bit. My guess is someone will be willing to do that at some point.
Click to expand...
people do business in states all the time that have different standards/laws for out-of-state businesses than they do for instate businesses. I know my firm has several completely separate entities in order to comply with several different state laws. it is quiet common for many industries to partner with a local business in order to be able to work in certain states.

and again high school football is not commerce. Missouri can set the terms for that all they want, and yes they can be geographically based to determine eligibility. and I would imagine there are any number of eligibility requirements that touch various commerce issues, like for instance instate NIL deals before this law were not allowed before signing in Dec. Before this law a high school kid that signed an NIL deal wasn't allowed to play after in that sport. that effects commerce, and interstate commerce, and it stood up. because high school football is a voluntary program and not commerce.

the NIL deals themselves are not banned or restricted, instate or out of state, commerce isn't restricted. only the resulting eligibility for playing a sport is in question, and that is not a commerce issue. unless we are going to throw out probably a 100 years of precedence across dozens of states.
 
#2,290
#2,290
BigBadVol said:
So, a poster on twitter for Missouri states that WN didn’t sign due to NIL. I stated to the poster sure he did. Somehow, WN saw our exchange and tweeted to me, “Like you guys didn’t get that qb by throwing him a bag.” Now, we know for certain by accident lol.
Click to expand...
Well that and we are abt to be pumping QBs in the league. And both kids were gonna get paid no matter what
 
#2,291
#2,291
wmcovol said:
NIL is supposed to NOT be tied to your signing with a school. The payments end when a collective stops providing name, imagine likeness opportunities (autographs, public appearences, etc) to an athlete. I read where Nico got several hundred thousand dollars early and it was at risk if he didnt sign with Tennessee as Spyre couldnt come back to collect.
Click to expand...

Agreed but their state law allows it which should be very interesting if the NCAA does anything if he were to choose another school. Like a said before it's basically pay-to-play.
 
#2,292
#2,292
JT3 said:
Agreed but their state law allows it which should be very interesting if the NCAA does anything if he were to choose another school. Like a said before it's basically pay-to-play.
Click to expand...

I think the Missouri would have a difficult time standing up in court vs the NCAA. The law itself is discriminatory in that it requires athletes to limit their college choice to instate schools in order to receive NIL money. SCOTUS clearly said “no restrictions”
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and JT3
#2,293
#2,293
wmcovol said:
I think the Missouri would have a difficult time standing up in court vs the NCAA. The law itself is discriminatory in that it requires athletes to limit their college choice to instate schools in order to receive NIL money. SCOTUS clearly said “no restrictions”
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree and hope this blows up in their face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, hooter vol, bigl3327 and 1 other person
#2,294
#2,294
BigBadVol said:
So, a poster on twitter for Missouri states that WN didn’t sign due to NIL. I stated to the poster sure he did. Somehow, WN saw our exchange and tweeted to me, “Like you guys didn’t get that qb by throwing him a bag.” Now, we know for certain by accident lol.
Click to expand...
We threw him a bag, a chance to play for a winning program and a chance to be developed by an offensive genius. What did he get again other than a lot of cash? Maybe he can buy some salve for that ass after we put a big Orange boot print on it. Hell might even be able to get a medicated ointment nil out of it.
 
#2,296
#2,296
BigBadVol said:
So, a poster on twitter for Missouri states that WN didn’t sign due to NIL. I stated to the poster sure he did. Somehow, WN saw our exchange and tweeted to me, “Like you guys didn’t get that qb by throwing him a bag.” Now, we know for certain by accident lol.
Click to expand...

He's right. WN went to Mizzou to peak at 8-4, play in front of 55k, and because Drink is so likeable. It has nothing to do with NIL
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, vol_in_ga and BigBadVol
#2,298
#2,298
BigBadVol said:
So, a poster on twitter for Missouri states that WN didn’t sign due to NIL. I stated to the poster sure he did. Somehow, WN saw our exchange and tweeted to me, “Like you guys didn’t get that qb by throwing him a bag.” Now, we know for certain by accident lol.
Click to expand...
You should have tweeted back “The difference is he went to a place he can get paid AND WIN. But if you’re willing to lose for a nominal payday, maybe you didn’t belong here anyways”
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top