NIL Money - Preventing Locker Room Issues

[VOLINVONORE]

I came up with the same idea some time ago and was called a "communist". Be careful my friend.

I think there should be a way to give each player some NIL money, but I have to admit all players are not equal and should not receive the same amount. The better players in all professional sports do not receive the same salary and the Pros have a much larger pool of money from which to pay players and they do not have the NCAA sniffing around all the time. In college, the way to get more NIL is to work harder and get better at your skills. Not only will you get more NIL money, you will increase your chances of getting an opportunities at the next level.]

 

[Honest Abe]

Mine sure as heck did. As a project manager my success depended directly on the members of the project team. Doesn't mean I shared my salary with them.

The big difference is your co-workers were probably still getting paid their worth for contributing to the company. Some players that directly contribute to all the money generated from the football team do not receive anything (most likely).

 

[Honest Abe]

Why is NIL unfair to those not receiving money? The system is based upon what a 3rd party perceives as the player’s value to them or their customers. When these men start working outside the football field, the same criteria will be used. Those who provide more value will be hired and paid more than those who do not. Simply earning a degree does not guarantee employment just as NIL money is not given simply for being on the team.

Paying of players has existed for a long time and has always favored the skilled positions and other highly rated players. NIL is just more visible than the previous system. If a player wants NIL money, then the player has to do something to stand out from the competition…..more sacks, more TDs, more rushing yds, etc.

If NIL will only benefit the specific player and not the entire team through a tax or percent, there’s only one other solution IMO. On top of NIL existing, each school should be required to pay each scholarship player a weekly stipend, depending on the profit generated from the athletics department by sport. If a small school generates a very low amount of revenue, they wouldn’t be required. A limit would need to be set for when a school is required. The biggest issue players have is seeing all the money generated from their sport and not getting a slice. So obviously if women’s soccer doesn’t generate hardly any money, unfortunately they wouldn’t get the stipend. It would need to have a cap on the amount so it doesn’t turn into a bidding war between other schools. Someone on here stated $100. Honestly that might be perfect. For someone really struggling that would be huge.

 

[GulfCoasterVol]

I agree. I think folks have no problem with players getting something so they don't have to pawn things to survive, but how do you implement a program that pays players and things stay above table and doesn't create problems. Seems like what we have now is not working...some players getting paid and others not getting anything----only invites problems

We just went through a major compensation policy re-vamp at work. Some people got substantial increases, some people got smaller increases, some people got no increase based completely on job descriptions, (just phase 1 with no performance evaluation considered). Some people are happy, some people are ho-hum, some people are pissed. The research is clear..... As long as there will be compensation given to groups of people for tasks there will always be "perceived inequity". People who perceive they are not being compensated as well as their neighbor for the tasks they are both assigned will adjust their output to make up for the lack of what they perceive there compensation should be.

 

[Zues1]

I'll be glad when we are no longer hearing about what Banks did, may do or may not do.

 

[Honest Abe]

There truly should to be a way to get these athletes at least a small stipend. Just $100 a week would be life changing to many kids and their families.

However, lawyers would turn it all into a sh*t storm. Where do you draw the line? Swimmers? Volleyball? Any scholarship athlete? Then what is the value of a scholarship? What about struggling HBC institutions?

A bit mind-blowing to find a fair approach.

I think you put the max stipend at $100 so bigger schools don’t advertise bigger stipends and turn it into a bidding war. Eligibility for each sport at a school receiving the stipend should be directly tied to how much their sport generates in revenue. If your sport generates millions and you don’t see a penny, a stipend would be understanding. If your sport barely makes anything, you aren’t really getting screwed as an athlete. Also only schools that generate a certain amount of revenue from each sport should be required to pay the stipend. What’s half a million in stipend money when your conference generates 3/4 of a billion dollars in a year lol Honestly the stipend amount could be set by each conference.
SEC generates $777.8 million in revenue in 2020-21, distributes an average of $54.6 million per school

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

If NIL will only benefit the specific player and not the entire team through a tax or percent, there’s only one other solution IMO. On top of NIL existing, each school should be required to pay each scholarship player a weekly stipend, depending on the profit generated from the athletics department by sport. If a small school generates a very low amount of revenue, they wouldn’t be required. A limit would need to be set for when a school is required. The biggest issue players have is seeing all the money generated from their sport and not getting a slice. So obviously if women’s soccer doesn’t generate hardly any money, unfortunately they wouldn’t get the stipend. It would need to have a cap on the amount so it doesn’t turn into a bidding war between other schools. Someone on here stated $100. Honestly that might be perfect. For someone really struggling that would be huge.

You just don't understand, I see. If the school pays a stipend to an athlete, they are an EMPLOYEE of the school working for that stipend.

As employees, they'll unionize and negotiate for higher wages. Also, if the school's football athletes are employees, so are every other school athlete (tennis, track, golf, etc) and also eligible for a stipend.

Just stop. You don't want to make athletes employees of the school. Think it through. You are just going to turn it into a pro league from there.

 

[Honest Abe]

We just went through a major compensation policy re-vamp at work. Some people got substantial increases, some people got smaller increases, some people got no increase based completely on job descriptions, (just phase 1 with no performance evaluation considered). Some people are happy, some people are ho-hum, some people are pissed. The research is clear..... As long as there will be compensation given to groups of people for tasks there will always be "perceived inequity". People who perceive they are not being compensated as well as their neighbor for the tasks they are both assigned will adjust their output to make up for the lack of what they perceive their compensation should be.

State of Tennessee by any chance? The issue with that plan is it now pays someone who’s barely gotten by and underperformed the same as someone who’s been an over achiever for 10 years. It doesn’t take into account someone’s past performance. For Phase 1 at least.
Anyways, a stipend would help with some of the problem for people not making anything. Unfortunately, there will always be issues though when you are just as valuable to your team as someone else, but they are making thousands of dollars and you aren’t. Whether they deserve it or not for their likeness and popularity.

 

[NCFisher]

You are looking at the business model at a much wider point of view, which throws in a ton of variables. You are talking about what makes the business successful as a whole. I'm saying as an employee, the amount they get paid does not directly correlate to another employee's effort. The overall good of the company is a different story. But in NIL/Football, a star player's brand/success can be impacted by a teammates effort.

Everything has flaws. Nothing is 100% perfect.
You may claim NIL is about marketability but it's just pay to play disguised as a business 90% of the time, at least for the big money.

No one goes to games to watch lineman & kickers, or blocking TEs/FBs. The only reason they're on the field at all is due to the skill players; the skill guys are the game that put fans in the stands and sell merchandise. Just as a company doesn't exist without good sales personnel; they're the skill positions. Bottom line is everyone is paid what they're worth and there should be no expectation of 'sharing'.

It's unquestionably a business transaction. I don't care that it's also pay to play; that's the point. If the schools don't like it, they can declare players employees and pay them directly, but good luck competing with the NIL market.

Except that it upsets the certainty of the cartel system that schools and the NCAA enjoyed for so long, and that fans became accustomed to, why does that bother you so much? That's really what fans are griping about; their apple cart is upset. The new system of NIL and portal will continue to change college sports and wreck the old, wrongful cartel system where players were denied freedom of mobility and commerce that schools, coaches, networks, NCAA, and fans themselves enjoyed - good!

 

[Honest Abe]

You just don't understand, I see. If the school pays a stipend to an athlete, they are an EMPLOYEE of the school working for that stipend.

As employees, they'll unionize and negotiate for higher wages. Also, if the school's football athletes are employees, so are every other school athlete (tennis, track, golf, etc) and also eligible for a stipend.

Just stop. You don't want to make athletes employees of the school. Think it through. You are just going to turn it into a pro league from there.

Buddy, some schools already pay stipends to college athletes.. It may just need to be raised based off different factors and the amount of revenue generated per school.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Buddy, some schools already pay stipends to college athletes.. It may just need to be raised based off different factors and the amount of revenue generated per school.

Please read Time Magazine's take on the Alston decision. College athletes as employees is NOT a good idea for the sport. Look at other pro sports and think about collective bargaining then imagine what that does to a school like Tennessee Tech which doesn't make a lot of revenue.

Think it through. You're asking college athletics to become pro athletics. It's not going to go well for most non-revenue producing sports.

The NCAA Should Be Scared of Justice Kavanaugh’s Concurrence

 

[NCFisher]

You just don't understand, I see. If the school pays a stipend to an athlete, they are an EMPLOYEE of the school working for that stipend.

Schools, some or all, do pay stipends to students as part of scholarship packages.

State of Tennessee by any chance? The issue with that plan is it now pays someone who’s barely gotten by and underperformed the same as someone who’s been an over achiever for 10 years. It doesn’t take into account someone’s past performance. For Phase 1 at least.
Anyways, a stipend would help with some of the problem for people not making anything. Unfortunately, there will always be issues though when you are just as valuable to your team as someone else, but they are making thousands of dollars and you aren’t. Whether they deserve it or not for their likeness and popularity.

It isn't a matter of just deserts but who and what are marketable. I saw it reported that more than 50 TN players had NIL deals.

As a matter of income, you're worth what someone is willing to pay you at the time you need, or want, income. I knew this at 12 y.o., so college is pretty late to be learning this life lesson.
Schools and NCAA cannot put this court decreed genie back into the bottle, nor should they try. There is literally nothing they can do about NIL and portal transfer, fans and media should accept this fact and move on. Yakking about locker room issues is useless air; this is how thing are.

 

[NCFisher]

How are all the NIL deals calculated??????????

Thanks for any information.

A business decides they'd like a star QB, RB, WR or (less frequently) an OT endorsing their company. They make an offer, directly or through an agent, to the player who can accept or decline.
Just like everyone, except student athletes, have always been able to do.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Schools, some or all, do pay stipends to students as part of scholarship packages.

I believe stipends are included in a lot of scholarships, not just athletes. Private scholarships are also different than a school sponsored scholarship. It's what the school might pay that's a problem.

The idea of providing a SPECIFIC stipend for an athlete that's not offered to another scholarship student is the problem. If it were possible for universities to "stipend" substantial revenue to athletes, we'd not be having this discussion and they'd already be doing it. They haven't because having the athletes paid to play for the school is employment.

I believe the next court case the NCAA loses will consider athletes employees and I believe it will mark the end of the NCAA and college athletics as I've known it my entire life.

It's awful. It'll hurt a lot of athletes and stunt their educational opportunities. Unless Congress provides an anti-trust exemption for college athletics, it doesn't look good.

 

[NCFisher]

I believe stipends are included in a lot of scholarships, not just athletes. Private scholarships are also different than a school sponsored scholarship. It's what the school might pay that's a problem.

The idea of providing a SPECIFIC stipend for an athlete that's not offered to another scholarship student is the problem. If it were possible for universities to "stipend" substantial revenue to athletes, we'd not be having this discussion and they'd already be doing it. They haven't because having the athletes paid to play for the school is employment.

I believe the next court case the NCAA loses will consider athletes employees and I believe it will mark the end of the NCAA and college athletics as I've known it my entire life.

It's awful. It'll hurt a lot of athletes and stunt their educational opportunities. Unless Congress provides an anti-trust exemption for college athletics, it doesn't look good.

That's why I stated scholarship, not student athlete, packages.
I think we're way past the talking point of athletic stipend, when skill position athletes can literally be driving NIL-bought Porsches to practice their freshman year.

The NCAA should accept their cartel days are over and not engage fights they're going to lose. That could leave things as is; scholarships being a mutual benefit relationship both sides voluntarily enter, and players can make their own way in the NIL market. The NIL market will determine it's own course much as any market system with periods of expansion and recession. But endorsements work, and NIL is here to stay.

 

[LWSVOL]

Good to see you posting my friend . I hope you are doing well.

still above ground so everything is good. Hope you are well also...

 

[NCFisher]

I think there should be a way to give each player some NIL money, but I have to admit all players are not equal and should not receive the same amount. The better players in all professional sports do not receive the same salary and the Pros have a much larger pool of money from which to pay players and they do not have the NCAA sniffing around all the time. In college, the way to get more NIL is to work harder and get better at your skills. Not only will you get more NIL money, you will increase your chances of getting an opportunities at the next level.]

But there isn't unless individual players with NIL deals decide to give money away themselves. NIL is nothing more or less than a business paying a specific person to endorse their brand.
Everyone needs to understand there is no intermediary who can step in and make that income communal. Just like your own income, that income belongs to the individual player. The justice system has declared schools and the NCAA cannot prevent students from engaging in commerce, just as everyone else does. This is permanent and will never change. Same with the transfer portal; it's unconscionable that schools/NCAA were once able to hold students hostage at an institution.

That should end >99% of the discussion.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

That's why I stated scholarship, not student athlete, packages.
I think we're way past the talking point of athletic stipend, when skill position athletes can literally be driving NIL-bought Porsches to practice their freshman year.

The NCAA should accept their cartel days are over and not engage fights they're going to lose. That could leave things as is; scholarships being a mutual benefit relationship both sides voluntarily enter, and players can make their own way in the NIL market. The NIL market will determine it's own course much as any market system with periods of expansion and recession. But endorsements work, and NIL is here to stay.

NIL is the least of my worries. It's not going away and shouldn't. It won't be capped or limited in any major way by the NCAA or states because they'll lose in court and they know it. Good or bad for the sport isn't the issue. Legally, they'll lose.

Athletes being legally seen as employees is devastating for the NCAA and the athletes as a whole. Again, good or bad for the sport isn't the issue. Legally, if Congress doesn't help out the NCAA, I'm pretty sure the court will declare college athletes as school employees. Turn out the lights on what we know as college athletics at that point.

 

[Volanooga2521]

For those of you that don't like NIL, you can blame the NCAA. They had years to establish some sort of rules that could have been agreed upon. They kept appealing the Rafer Alston case all the way to the Supreme Court instead of some type of collectively-bargained situation. Therefore, the Supreme Court said that no limits on NIL were legal.

 

[NCFisher]

NIL is the least of my worries. It's not going away and shouldn't. It won't be capped or limited in any major way by the NCAA or states because they'll lose in court and they know it. Good or bad for the sport isn't the issue. Legally, they'll lose.

Athletes being legally seen as employees is devastating for the NCAA and the athletes as a whole. Again, good or bad for the sport isn't the issue. Legally, if Congress doesn't help out the NCAA, I'm pretty sure the court will declare college athletes as school employees. Turn out the lights on what we know as college athletics at that point.

Okay, but I'm not seeing the basis; what is the pending case or movement you think is making this inevitable?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Okay, but I'm not seeing the basis; what is the pending case or movement you think is making this inevitable?

NLRB claim to argue USC athletes are employees

 

[SLODAWG]

As long as some players on the team are being paid and others are not receiving money, there will always be tension in the locker room. Banks is a tremendous player but wasn’t getting NIL money.
My solution is to have each NIL deal benefit the entire team. Every time a player gets an NIL deal, a portion of that amount (like a tax) is taken out and put into a pot of money that gets divided between every scholarship player on the team each month via check. It doesn’t sound like much, but I believe it would add up depending on what that percent is used. This allows the individual player with the NIL deal to receive a significant amount of money, while their teammates also benefit. This is not the pros where everyone on the roster is paid. This is college football and players couldn’t receive anything until just recently. Every player on the field is a major contributor to the success of each player around them. It only makes sense that the teammates that helped a player get a NIL deal receive part of their NIL money. Let me know everyone’s thoughts.

How do you propose to legally take a part of a player's NIL earnings and give it to someone else?

 

[Vol865]

No one goes to games to watch lineman & kickers, or blocking TEs/FBs. The only reason they're on the field at all is due to the skill players; the skill guys are the game that put fans in the stands and sell merchandise. Just as a company doesn't exist without good sales personnel; they're the skill positions. Bottom line is everyone is paid what they're worth and there should be no expectation of 'sharing'.

It's unquestionably a business transaction. I don't care that it's also pay to play; that's the point. If the schools don't like it, they can declare players employees and pay them directly, but good luck competing with the NIL market.

Except that it upsets the certainty of the cartel system that schools and the NCAA enjoyed for so long, and that fans became accustomed to, why does that bother you so much? That's really what fans are griping about; their apple cart is upset. The new system of NIL and portal will continue to change college sports and wreck the old, wrongful cartel system where players were denied freedom of mobility and commerce that schools, coaches, networks, NCAA, and fans themselves enjoyed - good!

They aren't the sole reason people go to watch the game but there are very few players we've had in the last 15-20 years where I've been like "Man I gotta see them play in person". I went to watch the Tennessee Volunteers, not one individual. You seem far more upset than me. I'm just stating my opinion. I have no problem with them getting what they can. I just think some teammates are getting a raw deal even though they're a factor in the star's success. If Hooker got sacked times a game and pressured another 10, or if we can't run the ball, or if the defense doesn't get some stops vs PITT while the offense struggled, etc. He's not as marketable and brings in less money.

 

[Delmar]

Business is essentially sales and operations. If you're in sales, you're dependent upon operations - from field or technical person down to inventory and warehouse personnel - to implement what you sold; otherwise, good luck establishing a reference list of successful projects/jobs. If you're in operations, you depend upon sales to beat the bushes, find opportunities for company products and sell them because those revenues keep your house payment and the kids fed. I can go on, but businesses are teams with dependencies throughout. Just like team sports.

There are no flaws with NIL. A business wants to sell its wares and use a star or potential star QB, RB, or WR to sell their product; they're taking a financial gamble that your player 'brand' will sell more of theirs. The skill positions sell Porsches, the linemen sell BBQ, if that, and some are not marketable. It is a business transaction. and players are sole proprietors.

You want to see a locker room get divided real quick and a team destroyed from within? Let one or more skill players 'share' their income but not share it as proportionately as other skill players, so then you have 'good' team mates and 'bad, selfish' team mates.

Just no. College is old enough to learn a life lesson; this isn't (yet) a Marxist society where you don't even own your own income, and thus yourself. Better find something you can make a career of.

Forty five years in business tells me that there are flaws in any business that is mismanaged or when the rules get stretched. I don’t know much about the NIL nor do I know a solution but this thing has not been controlled well from the start. The more money that gets thrown at the players, the wilder it’s going to get. Write it down.

 

[Delmar]

But there isn't unless individual players with NIL deals decide to give money away themselves. NIL is nothing more or less than a business paying a specific person to endorse their brand.
Everyone needs to understand there is no intermediary who can step in and make that income communal. Just like your own income, that income belongs to the individual player. The justice system has declared schools and the NCAA cannot prevent students from engaging in commerce, just as everyone else does. This is permanent and will never change. Same with the transfer portal; it's unconscionable that schools/NCAA were once able to hold students hostage at an institution.

That should end >99% of the discussion.

Then let’s ban the use of the term “college football” and call it what it is. Professional football. I agree that players should receive their fair share of revenue but this NIL thing is not going to go well for teams when some guys are getting millions and other guys are getting a few thousand. And as the money gets bigger, it will get worse. Jealously is a natural thing. Jeremy Banks says hey.