Volfansince1980
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2018
- Messages
- 1,519
- Likes
- 4,973
The argument would be over the meaning of "punish". I would argue it isn't "punishing" a player by requiring proof of value of their NIL to an organization.While this is from a 6 month old article about the State of California law, the States appear to be the biggest elephant in the room in regards to NIL being reeled in.
The NCAA Declares Independence from NIL Restrictions | Newsletters | Legal News: Sports | Foley & Lardner LLP
We can argue NIL all we want. Or we can just realize this kid committed to UT sight unseen and then the home team pushed hard and he chose to play where his family can take a short ride to see him play next fall before heading to the NFL. We’d all do the same thing. Case closed.
For who though? College football has had this dynamic for years. I can't think of a single "Cinderella Story" in college football since maybe Ga Tech winning a national title in 1990. There are about 10 schools that have a shot a national title every year and the list barely changes.It widens the gap?
It's not hard to figure out. "NIL" has become the fan excuse for everything.We can argue NIL all we want. Or we can just realize this kid committed to UT sight unseen and then the home team pushed hard and he chose to play where his family can take a short ride to see him play next fall before heading to the NFL. We’d all do the same thing. Case closed.
It's not hard to figure out. "NIL" has become the fan excuse for everything.
Oh, I'm sure it may have entered into decision. I just laugh when every time we miss out on anybody we start getting the "NIL is ruining everything" posts.A. Money has always been the fan excuse, decades before NIL even existed.
B. I hate that so that many people (even Swain) have forgotten that Texas was pushing for Neyor from day 1. Neyor committed to us knowing Texas was ready and willing to sign him. So as much as people want to chalk to up to him just wanting to stay home, it appears other factors were at play. I think NIL was a big part of it, and so did Hubbs as of yesterday evening. It’s not just a throw away excuse, in this case.
That’s what I was wondering about, the benefit to the business paying the NIL money. A lot of these business owners and companies are already big donors so anything they do for NIL would be on top of donations to the university. That’s where things will get interesting as I think it’ll eventually cut into donations to the schools unless businesses and owners are able to recover a good chunk of their money through whatever agreements they have with the players.IMO a good start would be to have a limited period for players to enter the portal and sign an LOI with a new team.
I also think the NCAA would be within bounds of the ruling by requiring NIL deals to demonstrate some actual value to the business or group paying the money.
"Small Market" teams in the NBA, NFL, and NHL have a hard time keeping star players due to lack of money. It's coming to College Athletics...............
For the teams that have the most donor money to spend. Even with what you are saying being true. The recruiting money was a lot closer due to teams having to lurk in the shadows to pay a recruit, conference bowl splits, TV revenue, etc. Now it’s going to become the ‘Hunger Games’. The team that has the highest backing is going to have a competitive advantage more so than in the past.For who though? College football has had this dynamic for years. I can't think of a single "Cinderella Story" in college football since maybe Ga Tech winning a national title in 1990. There are about 10 schools that have a shot a national title every year and the list barely changes.
I do think players sometimes want to be in large markets to maximize endorsement opportunities..at least they used to.