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

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Which is why I am saying the 2025 Fairness in Sports Act is the only way to get around creative use of commerce acts for reasons not intended by our courts.

Congress can tie federal funds to compliance with a duly enacted law with no ambiguity in it. There must be a practical way for pro worthy to get their money within the NCAA structure, but not force intermixing them within all divisions. Some divisions can require or allow it’s athletes to be employees, some get scholarships and NIL, some scholarships only, and some no scholarships. A school can elect to play against teams in other divisions, but can’t be required to.

You get employee status, your scholly and healthcare and housing all become deductibles and taxable income. Wanna be a pro, be a pro. Pick that division. Bet the IRS can use other existing laws to make that happen if you leave “amateur “ competition.

TV and other income producers will be tied to divisions. Big boy league basketball will get their deal in playoffs, but watch March Madness from their living rooms.

This total separation would allow pro leagues to align with schools and also fund that new division, maybe even turn them into farm teams. Academics optional??? Don’t know.

Properly written schools could have some sports in the pro division, and others in amateur divisions. NIL for amateurs as conceptualized might even work at that level.

Bet the percentage of proworthy athletes across all sports and divisions is less than 1%. Accommodate them and let the rest go back to business as usual, maybe with an NIL twist.

"Reasons not intended by the courts"???
The courts didn't do it. The reasons were intended by Congress in 1887 and 1890.

The courts couldn't do anything about it until plaintiffs filed their cases. Then the NCAA lost every one.

There is no "properly written" that lets schools do two mutually exclusive sports models when one is discrimination.

Why do you want illegal exploitation of 99% of college athletes? That's appalling.

And, if athletic scholarships be one taxable income, so do academic scholarships. Way to go. You just told every college how to tax academic scholarship recipients out of the market. Your need to be a control freak stopped you from thinking if the obvious implications.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

They stand to lose billions so not too surprising if they fight it for as long as they can

That's exactly right. Desperation to keep some if the money when they can no longer keep it all.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

If you think the current system will last more than 5 years you are insane

If you argue against the facts that prove the current model is thriving, you're the insane one.

 

[rdk4121]

Why do you think anyone, including you, should be able to limit what other people can make, and why?

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.

 

[Carp]

I really don't understand people that think NIL and the portal are ruining the game. Teams were blatantly cheating before this era, only some teams were way better at it than others.

In the NIL/Portal era, there is vastly more parity in college football than ever before. We're already seeing the UGA, Bama, and Clemson dynasties starting to fall apart. Texas went 5-7 just 4 short years ago and now they've been to back to back CFP semi-finals. Arizona St went 3-9 a year ago, and this year they were 1 play away from playing Ohio State in the Semi-Final. And Tennessee is probably the poster child for how the NIL and portal can transform a poor roster into national title contenders seemingly overnight. We had 35 players transfer out after 2020, including several of our top recruits that signed that December. And since then we've had more success than at any point in the last 15-20 years.

Sure, it sucks seeing some of your favorite players leave for more money elsewhere. It sucks that we constantly have to recruit our own players. But we wouldn't have the success we've had with Heup without the portal and NIL.

 

[Carp]

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.

But these aren't salaries. These are essentially endorsement deals. And no other pro league in existence (in the US anyways) restricts their athlete's ability to make money off endorsement deals.

 

[The Original Fade]

If you argue against the facts that prove the current model is thriving, you're the insane one.

Most fans do not like the system. That’s a fact. That will be bad for the sport if things don’t change soon. We’ll see who is right

 

[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.

Every NIL deal is legitimate unless the collective doesn't pay what is agreed. That's the text oom definition of "fair market value".

The pro leagues pay their athletes lots of money. They also have a long list of things that the NCAA doesn't.

Employment status.
Unionized labor.
The right to strike.
134 teams, compared to the NFL's 32.
Forced trades.
A draft instead of recruiting.

If you don't like things now, you're going to HATE it if you get what you want, and the other things that come with it that you didn't consider.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Most fans do not like the system. That’s a fact. That will be bad for the sport if things don’t change soon. We’ll see who is right

Again, the facts say that I'm right, by any and all objective measures.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

This misses the whole reason that there is money enough to go around - TV eyeballs. And the only reason anyone watches these games is NOT for the football. They are watching their TEAM, often their alma mater or one where their kid went, etc. The further you make it Pro farm teams, the more viewers you lose.

And whereas people used to be very invested in players, I think the future will see even more love for the front of the jersey, not the back.

No doubt there is enough to go around, but a very un level distribution among even the top 40-50 teams. So teams with millions of investment in the squad vs say Coastal Carolina is a problem. The rich were already the Rich, that is getting worse. Of course the other alternative is to follow the pro leagues and have those wanting some of that money enter a draft. They get their money which is what the courts required. Did not see a stipulation of maintaining the open recruiting format. Even the pros don’t get to shop their services until they attain a free agent status at the end of a contractual period.

Open the floodgates in a new division to keep the competitive balance. Draft or no draft.

 

[rdk4121]

Every NIL deal is legitimate unless the collective doesn't pay what is agreed. That's the text oom definition of "fair market value".

The pro leagues pay their athletes lots of money. They also have a long list of things that the NCAA doesn't.

Employment status.
Unionized labor.
The right to strike.
134 teams, compared to the NFL's 32.
Forced trades.
A draft instead of recruiting.

If you don't like things now, you're going to HATE it if you get what you want, and the other things that come with it that you didn't consider.

I literally mentioned a collective bargaining agreement, which is needed. Trades and drafts don't have to be a part of that. College students would be getting paid quite well for what is essentially a minor league team, at least 150k per player for the bigger teams. Not a lot of minor league teams paying more than that.

And no, NIL deals that require you to attend a school are not legitimate. They hide behind autographs or a public appearance, but they are gaming a system that everyone is just willing to ignore for the time being.

 

[rdk4121]

But these aren't salaries. These are essentially endorsement deals. And no other pro league in existence (in the US anyways) restricts their athlete's ability to make money off endorsement deals.

But we know they're not actually endorsements. Pretty much anything through a collective is most likely not an endorsement. If a player gets an endorsement from Nike, Gatorade, Weigels, etc, that's certainly not an issue. It's the boosters that are just paying people to come play for their school which is the problem. Think Ruiz, the Miami booster. His "NIL" deals were just payments to players with little to no performance of the contract required from the player. An actual endorsement requires some performance like a commercial, or social post, or something like that. We can pretend that these NIL deals I'm talking about are that, but they're not.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

But we know they're not actually endorsements. Pretty much anything through a collective is most likely not an endorsement. If a player gets an endorsement from Nike, Gatorade, Weigels, etc, that's certainly not an issue. It's the boosters that are just paying people to come play for their school which is the problem. Think Ruiz, the Miami booster. His "NIL" deals were just payments to players with little to no performance of the contract required from the player. An actual endorsement requires some performance like a commercial, or social post, or something like that. We can pretend that these NIL deals I'm talking about are that, but they're not.

Respectfully, prove it.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I literally mentioned a collective bargaining agreement, which is needed. Trades and drafts don't have to be a part of that. College students would be getting paid quite well for what is essentially a minor league team, at least 150k per player for the bigger teams. Not a lot of minor league teams paying more than that.

And no, NIL deals that require you to attend a school are not legitimate. They hide behind autographs or a public appearance, but they are gaming a system that everyone is just willing to ignore for the time being.

Collective bargaining has absolutely nothing to do with NIL. However, there's no way to get an ATE that follows the pro model without using all of that model.

NIL is legitimate, period. Fair market valur is whatever the market decides. If someone gets a 2 million NIL deal and then endorses a local convenience store chain, or sells 5 t shirts, or whatever, that's still fair market value as long as the endorsement sponsor feels he's getting FMV. FMV isn't always in direct profits. That's the big flaw in the House case settlement NIL clause. The NCAA is trying to say that FMV is measured silent in money. That's simply joy the case.

Anything that tries to measure multivariate intangibles in a univariate cash amount is bogus. It doesn't pascal basic smell test if either economics or statistics.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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

The NIL era isn't ending.

 

[ntxVOL]

Legally speaking, they aren't dependent on that now either. While I haven't personally seen someone's NIL contract, it is my understanding that there cannot be any language requiring an athlete to play sports for a specific school. It's all built on an understanding that the player commits and plays for a certain school. There can be nothing to stop collectives from signing any client they want to whatever amount they want to sign them for. And any attempt to prevent that would be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Again, Jimmy Haslam could hire every single UT athlete to a 100k sponsorship deal right now if he wanted to and no one could say anything about it. Because you can't restrict a person's ability to make money off their name, image, or likeness.

The NCAA is going to attempt to make those type of deals against the rules. It is part of a lawsuit settlement and the member schools have voted and agreed to it. That's the deal, if it gets struck down, the players will lose their revenue share. Hard to say how this turns out but that's where this is headed for now.

 

[Carp]

But we know they're not actually endorsements. Pretty much anything through a collective is most likely not an endorsement. If a player gets an endorsement from Nike, Gatorade, Weigels, etc, that's certainly not an issue. It's the boosters that are just paying people to come play for their school which is the problem. Think Ruiz, the Miami booster. His "NIL" deals were just payments to players with little to no performance of the contract required from the player. An actual endorsement requires some performance like a commercial, or social post, or something like that. We can pretend that these NIL deals I'm talking about are that, but they're not.

What they actually are and aren't is pretty irrelevant. What matters is that it is completely 100% legal and protected by legal precedent.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

The NCAA is going to attempt to make those type of deals against the rules. It is part of a lawsuit settlement and the member schools have voted and agreed to it. That's the deal, if it gets struck down, the players will lose their revenue share. Hard to say how this turns out but that's where this is headed for now.

It's going to be challenged by other athletes, and it conflicts with the injunction in the Tennessee vs NCAA case.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

The NCAA is going to attempt to make those type of deals against the rules. It is part of a lawsuit settlement and the member schools have voted and agreed to it. That's the deal, if it gets struck down, the players will lose their revenue share. Hard to say how this turns out but that's where this is headed for now.

If the NIL clause gets struck down, the rest of the settlement likely stands, including revenue sharing. If the revenue sharing gets struck down, the case goes back to trial. If that happens, the NCAA is likely to lose the case, and be in the hook for many more times the damages than the #2 billion for which they're already in the hook.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Most fans do not like the system. That’s a fact. That will be bad for the sport if things don’t change soon. We’ll see who is right

Not even. You aren't most fans. You can't even tell me who those "most fans" are. Again, you're arguing a false generalization.

 

[ntxVOL]

It's going to be challenged by other athletes, and it conflicts with the injunction in the Tennessee vs NCAA case.

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.

 

[ntxVOL]

If the NIL clause gets struck down, the rest of the settlement likely stands, including revenue sharing. If the revenue sharing gets struck down, the case goes back to trial. If that happens, the NCAA is likely to lose the case, and be in the hook for many more times the damages than the #2 billion for which they're already in the hook.

I don't know why the NCAA members would agree to revenue sharing without eliminating the illegitimate pay for play NIL deals.

The agreement doesn't limit an athlete's ability to seek out legitimate NIL money. But i know you seem to think what the collectives are doing is legit. I'm not going to argue that with you again, I'll just go ahead and agree to disagree on that point.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

I don't know why the NCAA members would agree to revenue sharing without eliminating the illegitimate pay for play NIL deals.

The agreement doesn't limit an athlete's ability to seek out legitimate NIL money. But i know you seem to think what the collectives are doing is legit. I'm not going to argue that with you again, I'll just go ahead and agree to disagree on that point.

There is no such thing as an illegitimate NIL deal.

The NCAA has no choice but to agree if the NIL clause is ruled out of the revenue sharing deal in the House case. They will be in the hook for far more than $2 billion of the case goes back to trial and they lose...which is likely.

Under federal law, what the collectives are doing is 100% legal. That equals "legit".

The NCAA rules are not the law, and they don't get to decide what is legit. Neither do you.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

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.

It doesn't eliminate collectives at all.
A settlement can't set legal precedent.
A federal judges decisions can do exactly that. As soon as Judge Corker rules, the precedent is set. He said in the injunction that Tennessee is likely to win in the merits of the case.

The states of Virginia have been joined by New York, Florida, and D.C. in that case. Multiple state attorneys general aren't going to file against the NCAA unless they are VERY sure that they will win. If they win, that will override the NIL clause in the settlement in the House case.

The injunction protects athletes NIL rights and the collectives,' rights to make those deals.

 

[ntxVOL]

There is no such thing as an illegitimate NIL deal.

The NCAA has no choice but to agree if the NIL clause is ruled out of the revenue sharing deal in the House case. They will be in the hook for far more than $2 billion of the case goes back to trial and they lose...which is likely.

Under federal law, what the collectives are doing is 100% legal. That equals "legit".

The NCAA rules are not the law, and they don't get to decide what is legit. Neither do you.

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.