With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval?

[Tin Man]

With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval?

College sports will likely go through more changes in the next five years than in the last decades. NCAA could have been at the forefront of the new world of college sports but they may be left behind

I’m disappointed that the article didn’t dedicate more word count to tOSU’s dominant synchro swim team. No sport claims as many championships.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I don't work for the clearing house so I'm not limiting any of their money believe it or not.

Because people try to take advantage of kids that literally don't know any better. Every pro league on the the US has salary caps and contacts. They don't typically allow a random "booster" (or the owner essentially for a pro league) come in and say I'll give you 3 million to come play for their team. That's forbidden in every pro league. Legitimate NIL deals would certainly not be limited. NIL was supposed to allow players to make money off of brand deals, not be used as a recruiting tools. Salary caps and contracts is how you make the sport more fair. There's always going to be teams that are going to be better than others, but it should be about who recruits and develops players, not who has the biggest checkbook.

The current NCAA salary cap is zero dollars.
NIL is t salary. It can't be capped. Patrick Mahomes' State Farm NIL isn't subject to the NFL salary cap.

Apples, meet oranges.

 

[Carp]

So how is that supposed to work? Who decides which decision is correct?

I'm not sure it actually conflicts, it just eliminates collectives, athletes can still negotiate NIL deals.

Collectives have a right to run their businesses the way they see fit. They cannot be eliminated, because they are a business that is wholly separate from the university and the NCAA. Maybe the NCAA will be allowed to rule that schools cannot have official "partnerships" with these collectives moving forward. I'm sure that will be fought in court too. But all that does is force the coaches to go back to pretending they don't know anything about it, while the collective works for the school in the background.

If people want to donate to the Spyre collective with the assumption that the collective will offer NIL deals to UTK athletes, the NCAA can't say ****, because it's already been established that the NCAA can't obstruct an athlete's right to make money on his name, image, or likeness.

 

[Carp]

Ah, now we're getting somewhere, I 100% agree what the collectives are doing is legal.

But from a competition standpoint, the NCAA should be able to define "legit" in regards to athlete eligibility. A collective can certainly pay an athlete well above his/her market value. That doesn't mean the NCAA can't step in and say, that's going to make you ineligible to participate. Especially when that money is coming from a specific school's boosters.

Yes it does mean that. Because it violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Supreme Court already ruled on that back in 2021 which is why we now have NIL deals.

 

[Carp]

People keep saying that athletes can still seek NIL deals on their own or through agents..... you do realize that a collective IS effectively a sports agency right? They facilitate NIL deals with the player and businesses. Typically these deals are with local businesses, but not always (see Jalin Hyatt with World of Hyatt).

 

[ntxVOL]

Yes it does mean that. Because it violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Supreme Court already ruled on that back in 2021 which is why we now have NIL deals.

They can and it does not violate Antitrust law. The collectives are essentially a booster, boosters can't pay players to play for a specific school. Collectives can't pay players to play for a specific school. Spyre isn't paying anyone to play for any other school than UT, hence they are a booster.

Spyre can certainly facilitate deals for athletes and that's fine. But it has to stop there, this paying players from a general fund collected from boosters is pay for play. Everyone knows it and the NCAA can absolutely police that.

 

[JRich]

"The new athlete-revenue sharing world, at least at the highest levels, will be built on transactional recruiting relationships within a system that permits universities to use direct school funds in a more regulated structure featuring a compensation cap and new enforcement arm."

Source? Just skimmed after that because it becomes an opinion piece.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

They can and it does not violate Antitrust law. The collectives are essentially a booster, boosters can't pay players to play for a specific school. Collectives can't pay players to play for a specific school. Spyre isn't paying anyone to play for any other school than UT, hence they are a booster.

Spyre can certainly facilitate deals for athletes and that's fine. But it has to stop there, this paying players from a general fund collected from boosters is pay for play. Everyone knows it and the NCAA can absolutely police that.

Who says that boosters or collectives can't pay players to attend a specific school?

The NCAA does. The same NCAA that has lost every case related to NIL, athlete transfers, and junior college counting against NCAA eligibility time.

That's why they are not even making a pretense if enforcing their tampering rule.
They aren't ready to get their azzes handed to them in federal court again.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I don't work for the clearing house so I'm not limiting any of their money believe it or not.

Because people try to take advantage of kids that literally don't know any better. Every pro league on the the US has salary caps and contacts. They don't typically allow a random "booster" (or the owner essentially for a pro league) come in and say I'll give you 3 million to come play for their team. That's forbidden in every pro league. Legitimate NIL deals would certainly not be limited. NIL was supposed to allow players to make money off of brand deals, not be used as a recruiting tools. Salary caps and contracts is how you make the sport more fair. There's always going to be teams that are going to be better than others, but it should be about who recruits and develops players, not who has the biggest checkbook.

So now giving you adults more money is now somehow magically "taking advantage of them"???

That's Bizzarro World backwards from reality, in terms of either salary cap or NIL.

 

[Carp]

They can and it does not violate Antitrust law. The collectives are essentially a booster, boosters can't pay players to play for a specific school. Collectives can't pay players to play for a specific school. Spyre isn't paying anyone to play for any other school than UT, hence they are a booster.

Spyre can certainly facilitate deals for athletes and that's fine. But it has to stop there, this paying players from a general fund collected from boosters is pay for play. Everyone knows it and the NCAA can absolutely police that.

The Collectives are separate entity and essentially a sports agency. Spyre, again, doesn't legally pay anyone to play for Tennessee, as far as I am aware, though I have not seen specific contracts to verify the wording. But the assumption is that they word it in such a way that a player would not be able to leave without breaking his contract.

The general fund paid to players comes with the expectation of using that specific players Name, Image, and Likeness for advertising, jersey sales, autograph signings, etc. It doesn't matter if the money comes from boosters or not. It matter's not how a company generates money as long as it is done legally (which it is). And Spyre can distribute that money to it's clients in any matter they want.

 

[ntxVOL]

The Collectives are separate entity and essentially a sports agency. Spyre, again, doesn't legally pay anyone to play for Tennessee, as far as I am aware.

The general fund paid to players comes with the expectation of using that specific players Name, Image, and Likeness for advertising, jersey sales, autograph signings, etc. It doesn't matter if the money comes from boosters or not. It matter's not how a company generates money as long as it is done legally (which it is). And Spyre can distribute that money to it's clients in any matter they want.

You are saying that the NCAA is now powerless to control a booster pay for play scheme?

Sorry but I'm going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[TheDeeble]

You are saying that the NCAA is now powerless to control a booster pay for play scheme?

Sorry but I'm going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

The NCAA can say boosters aren't allowed to pay players to play for a university. The NCAA cannot say that boosters cannot pay an athlete for his NIL.

Yes the players are being paid for play under the guise of NIL, but there is no current legal way to prevent it in college football.

 

[Carp]

You are saying that the NCAA is now powerless to control a booster pay for play scheme?

Sorry but I'm going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

It. Is. Not. A. Scheme.

NIL's are legitimate businesses that facilitate NIL deals with players and other businesses. How much a collective or the businesses they partner with values a specific athlete is irrelevant. It's not up to the NCAA to determine whether or not Spyre is getting 2 million dollars worth of value from Nico in his NIL deal.

Spyre is a private business that can determine how they use their own money. And they can raise money to fund their business operations any way they want to (assuming it's not illegal).

 

[Carp]

"The new athlete-revenue sharing world, at least at the highest levels, will be built on transactional recruiting relationships within a system that permits universities to use direct school funds in a more regulated structure featuring a compensation cap and new enforcement arm."

Source? Just skimmed after that because it becomes an opinion piece.

That is revenue sharing, which the NCAA is being forced to do. It isn't really related to the discussion of NIL.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

You are saying that the NCAA is now powerless to control a booster pay for play scheme?

Sorry but I'm going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

Here's a little article. You know how you're not hearing anything about the crap FL pulled on Rashada? You know why the NCAA backed off the obvious booster plane ride for Nico from CA to TN?

UT. That's why. We caused the NCAA to essentially shut down their enforcement of any booster or NIL interference.

It's a pretty long read but it lays it out there and why UT is EXTREMELY responsible for the Wild West we see now.

The NCAA went after Tennessee and Nico Iamaleava; it backfired with earthshaking consequences - CBSSports.com The NCAA went after Tennessee and Nico Iamaleava; it backfired with earthshaking consequences

 

[ntxVOL]

It. Is. Not. A. Scheme.

NIL's are legitimate businesses that facilitate NIL deals with players and other businesses. How much a collective or the businesses they partner with values a specific athlete is irrelevant. It's not up to the NCAA to determine whether or not Spyre is getting 2 million dollars worth of value from Nico in his NIL deal.

Spyre is a private business that can determine how they use their own money. And they can raise money to fund their business operations any way they want to (assuming it's not illegal).

That's exactly what they intend to do with this lawsuit settlement. Maybe some other court says no you can't do that. We shall see.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Ah, now we're getting somewhere, I 100% agree what the collectives are doing is legal.

But from a competition standpoint, the NCAA should be able to define "legit" in regards to athlete eligibility. A collective can certainly pay an athlete well above his/her market value. That doesn't mean the NCAA can't step in and say, that's going to make you ineligible to participate. Especially when that money is coming from a specific school's boosters.

Actually, it does, because that would be market interference. The injunction in the Tennessee vs NCAA case prohibits that.

The judge (Corner) hasn't made the final ruling yet, but says that Tennessee is likely to win, based on the merits if the case. The AFs in Virginia, New York, Florida, and D.C. have joined Tennessee in the case. Those are good indicators of how confident they are in the outcome..

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Here's a little article. You know how you're not hearing anything about the crap FL pulled on Rashada? You know why the NCAA backed off the obvious booster plane ride for Nico from CA to TN?

UT. That's why. We caused the NCAA to essentially shut down their enforcement of any booster or NIL interference.

It's a pretty long read but it lays it out there and why UT is EXTREMELY responsible for the Wild West we see now.

The NCAA went after Tennessee and Nico Iamaleava; it backfired with earthshaking consequences - CBSSports.com The NCAA went after Tennessee and Nico Iamaleava; it backfired with earthshaking consequences

Good for UT!