Disagree. The richest teams can fill every hole in the roster from teams without as much money. The playoff teams going forward, imo, will be from the same 20 teams year after year. Georgia may lose 15 players to the NFL every year, but they'll restock with top players from other teams who can't point up the cash. Same story for OSU, USC, TX, OK, etc.
Another heartwarming NIL saga . . . from Maryland coach Mike Locksley
- Thread starter Tskware
- Start date
Everything. If a school or business can't peddle NIL as an inducement to attend a specific school, then there is no problem.
Something about this story doesn't smell right. Either the coach is exaggerating or the kid was just throwing out some crazy number hoping he could be his way into some money.
Nil is definitely way out of control though. No doubt about that.
Nil is definitely way out of control though. No doubt about that.
I thought the subject at hand was runaway NIL demands and expectations.
Last edited:
I don't understand the fourth word you typed, but I will guess at your question. The thread is about how do we get control of the NIL process so it doesn't ruin college sports. The only to get control is to decouple from playing sports at a school. The NIL demands and expectations would stop if NIL is separated from the school. In other words, if the NIL you get can't be negotiated, or discussed, by anyone at your school, and NIL contracts can't be offered to play sports a certain school, then the market will correct those expectations. For example, the kid in the story. What good would it do him to ask his coach for more money if it were illegal for his coach or anyone at school to be involved in that process. If he goes to a company and says pay me X amount of NIL or I'll transfer, he has two things to consider. First, the company will say it is illegal for me to pay NIL as inducement to attend this school. Second, any school he transfers to will not be allowed to discuss NIL with him. So the decision to transfer has some risk because you won't find out much about your NIL opportunities until you actually attend the school. It completely changes how NIL woks and makes it much harder and much riskier to use it as pay for play.
Not saying I disagree but at least it would be made up advertising. And not just completely made up. 9 million for a single commercial at least they did a commercial. Right now it’s 9mil to just to just show up.
Well...maybe their depth takes a hit but....UGA and Bama have no issues buying your starters to fill their starting spots (i.e. Vandy left tackle, Mizzou WR, Tenn MLB, etc..).
So, this NIL thing goes back and forth to help the big boys as much as it hurts them IMO.
It’s going to be tough blaming this one on spell check.
Admit it: you re an alien and reverted to your native/non-earthly language!
Funny, coaches have been demanding more money for decades but it's a problem now because players want their share. Let the free market reign, players should get what they can, just like everyone else in college athletics
Could the University Presidents start a new voluntary association with a new charter that clearly states what is allowed? Since it’s a voluntary organization they could make their own rules.
Negotiate new tv contracts.
I bet 95-99% of the Presidents and Athletic Directors would love to get away from the runaway nil and join.
Can’t imagine how much in donations to schools have been diverted to nil.
Negotiate new tv contracts.
I bet 95-99% of the Presidents and Athletic Directors would love to get away from the runaway nil and join.
Can’t imagine how much in donations to schools have been diverted to nil.
fixed it for yaYep. But its the ncaa's fault. They wanted to keep this farce of amateurism going while making billions.
They sell this and don't even expect to share money.
I think you are proposing exactly what we had: a voluntary, self-governing collegiate organization that plainly stated the rules.
The problem: no matter how “voluntary,” how “organized,” and how clearly stated were the rules, the SCOTUS ruled that not allowing athletes to own and profit from their own names, images and likenesses was a violation of anti-trust law.
Don't put their names on the uni's and make all of them wear a mask to play in... NO name, no image and no likeness... Problem solved... lol
Something should have been done by the NCAA many years ago for the protection of all sanity in this farce of sports... I hope the chemistry dept kid's strike and say I want my money and all the department's do the same and all that money would have to be divided among all the students so the sports dept had less money for this to end, lol...
I just want the cheater's to be put out of business so the schools who try to run an above board program can just go on and enjoy all that money... Pay the presidents $500,000. and the coaches $50,000 and the teacher's $250,000...
GBB
Something should have been done by the NCAA many years ago for the protection of all sanity in this farce of sports... I hope the chemistry dept kid's strike and say I want my money and all the department's do the same and all that money would have to be divided among all the students so the sports dept had less money for this to end, lol...
I just want the cheater's to be put out of business so the schools who try to run an above board program can just go on and enjoy all that money... Pay the presidents $500,000. and the coaches $50,000 and the teacher's $250,000...
GBB
Specifically excluding collegiate athletics from the Sherman Anti-Trust Act??
Then the SCOTUS would lean on Equal Protection to re-legislate . . . .
I think NIL is here to stay.
SCOTUS has never issued a ruling with respect to NIL. They declined to hear the O’Bannon case, and the Alston case was not related to NIL.
Justice Gorsuch in the Alston opinion reminded the NCAA that the court’s injunction was limited to NCAA rules placing limits on education related benefits. The injunction did not prohibit the NCAA from continuing to ban payments to student athletes from third parties like boosters, shoe companies, etc. In other words, SCOTUS said in the Alston opinion that the NCAA could continue to prohibit NIL.
State legislation is what currently limits the NCAA’s ability to prohibit NIL.
Everybody says this but what could they do? No matter what it was always eventually going to end up like it is now, where any restriction at all lands the NCAA in court.
In 1984, the head of the NCAA proposed allowing NIL and creating a semiprofessional open division. If the schools had agreed to go that route, then it seems unlikely to me that a student athlete like Ed O’Bannon would feel compelled to file a lawsuit against the NCAA because the student athletes would have been treated more fairly at the time.
The fact that the athletes would have been treated more fairly also impacts how the courts think about the level of harm created by the rules.
The NCAA could’ve gotten ahead of this 40 years ago if the schools wanted to.
The answer is obvious and staring everyone in the face. It's always been the same answer no one wanted to hear. It's the same answer we give to McDonald's or any other vendor of goods or services.
You either want the product or you don't. You either are OK with no ethics, or you're not. You either want to do business with people, or machines, or you don't at all.
If college football is to be saved, YOU will save it. Turn it off. Stay home. But let the NCAA know why. Tell them that they either enforce and establish rules on and off the field, or you won't buy their product. Whether it is jerseys or t-shirts, tickets or licensed products, live TV or streaming. Put it in writing and send it to them. ADs, Presidents, committee members and sponsors.
I have no problem with players actually getting money for name, image, and likeness. Autograph sessions, meet and greets, commercial endorsements are fine. Even websites where the players sell autographed merch. Always should have been allowed. It was bullsht not to allow it.
In fact, if Paul Miller wanted to hire a guy not to show up to "work" at their establishment, and pay the taxes and insurance on his compensation there, I really don't care, as long as everyone knows about it.
It shouldn't be used to recruit the kid, though. Period. The market for NIL should drive itself, rather than be an extortion or racketeering based business.
In FACT-
-ESPN and all of the other sports entertainment providers should be paying for access, paying players for interviews, and paying for NIL on their sites.
-There SHOULD be a players union/guild and an established, equal base of compensation for interviews BASED on position and avg market
value.
-There should be insurance of players paid by the universities, sponsors, or the players NIL sponsors. ALL employers are required to pay UI. If a kid breaks his leg in practice and can never play again, he needs to receive some settlement towards lost wages and such.
-There should be spending and salary caps for all involved just as there should be a level playing field on gameday where no one gets a different call because of some perceived difference/bias by officials.
-There should be stiff revenue, roster, forfeiture, and post-season penalties for violations of the relevant rules, and they should be enforced equitably in each situation WITH A WRITTEN STANDARD for the infractions, rather than a completely CAPRICIOUS and RANDOM outcome for every circumstance.
-Investigations and penalties should be reviewed WITHOUT REGARD for WHICH program is being investigated. The committee shouldn't even know the name of the school they are investigating until after they assign punishment.
The problem as always is that no one wants to demand it. The NCAA wants that capriciousness because their revenue depends on it. A lot of programs and coaches don't want rules because they can play in the gray areas. A lot of fans dont want them because they dont want a level playing field. They want an advantage everywhere they can get it. They just want to sit in front of their TV, on their computer, or in their seats at the stadium, and complain about it when others get those advantages.
It's the same problem and solution as everywhere else in life. To what level of ethical behavior will you ascribe and live? There are plenty on here and elsewhere that would cheat at something or cheat someone if they knew they wouldn't get caught or punished for it, and that's the bottom line. We have UT fans here by the dozen that prove it consistently.
You either want the product or you don't. You either are OK with no ethics, or you're not. You either want to do business with people, or machines, or you don't at all.
If college football is to be saved, YOU will save it. Turn it off. Stay home. But let the NCAA know why. Tell them that they either enforce and establish rules on and off the field, or you won't buy their product. Whether it is jerseys or t-shirts, tickets or licensed products, live TV or streaming. Put it in writing and send it to them. ADs, Presidents, committee members and sponsors.
I have no problem with players actually getting money for name, image, and likeness. Autograph sessions, meet and greets, commercial endorsements are fine. Even websites where the players sell autographed merch. Always should have been allowed. It was bullsht not to allow it.
In fact, if Paul Miller wanted to hire a guy not to show up to "work" at their establishment, and pay the taxes and insurance on his compensation there, I really don't care, as long as everyone knows about it.
It shouldn't be used to recruit the kid, though. Period. The market for NIL should drive itself, rather than be an extortion or racketeering based business.
In FACT-
-ESPN and all of the other sports entertainment providers should be paying for access, paying players for interviews, and paying for NIL on their sites.
-There SHOULD be a players union/guild and an established, equal base of compensation for interviews BASED on position and avg market
value.
-There should be insurance of players paid by the universities, sponsors, or the players NIL sponsors. ALL employers are required to pay UI. If a kid breaks his leg in practice and can never play again, he needs to receive some settlement towards lost wages and such.
-There should be spending and salary caps for all involved just as there should be a level playing field on gameday where no one gets a different call because of some perceived difference/bias by officials.
-There should be stiff revenue, roster, forfeiture, and post-season penalties for violations of the relevant rules, and they should be enforced equitably in each situation WITH A WRITTEN STANDARD for the infractions, rather than a completely CAPRICIOUS and RANDOM outcome for every circumstance.
-Investigations and penalties should be reviewed WITHOUT REGARD for WHICH program is being investigated. The committee shouldn't even know the name of the school they are investigating until after they assign punishment.
The problem as always is that no one wants to demand it. The NCAA wants that capriciousness because their revenue depends on it. A lot of programs and coaches don't want rules because they can play in the gray areas. A lot of fans dont want them because they dont want a level playing field. They want an advantage everywhere they can get it. They just want to sit in front of their TV, on their computer, or in their seats at the stadium, and complain about it when others get those advantages.
It's the same problem and solution as everywhere else in life. To what level of ethical behavior will you ascribe and live? There are plenty on here and elsewhere that would cheat at something or cheat someone if they knew they wouldn't get caught or punished for it, and that's the bottom line. We have UT fans here by the dozen that prove it consistently.
If the NCAA, sports at large, and the courts will not enforce TRUE NIL rules, then they shouldn't be able to punish players for ACTUALLY TAKING MONEY to control outcomes. If inducing a player to go to UCLA is true NIL, there is no grounds to say that Draft Kings or a drug cartel/mafia paying a player isn't also NIL. You either enforce the rule/law or you effectively have no rules/laws.
While we're in the subject, MAKE A $%H@!*! RULE that coaches can't be interviewed or contacted while under contract with another institution. Make it a rule that they can only change jobs once every 4 years, and if they leave during their contract period, the new institution has to pay their remaining years as a buyout, while the coach pays a penalty for each year left on their contract. Violations of these rules lead to show cause and minimum year suspensions for each violation, as well as permanent bans for multiple offenses.
Cap their base compensation. Cap their incentives and make the incentives standardized just like admissions and eligibility standards. Whichever coach wins the title gets $X. Allow the coach to spend a certain amount of that money on the team and in their presence. Require them to report all of it.
Also, make rules that ALL correspondence, communication, evidence, and investigations within the NCAA and its vendors be recorded or documented, and stored for 10 years, and available to all member institutions without restriction.
That should change some things for the betterment of college athletics
Cap their base compensation. Cap their incentives and make the incentives standardized just like admissions and eligibility standards. Whichever coach wins the title gets $X. Allow the coach to spend a certain amount of that money on the team and in their presence. Require them to report all of it.
Also, make rules that ALL correspondence, communication, evidence, and investigations within the NCAA and its vendors be recorded or documented, and stored for 10 years, and available to all member institutions without restriction.
That should change some things for the betterment of college athletics
The idea of players being able to make money off of their name isn't a bad idea and they should be able to. The problem was the NCAA fought it instead of coming up with a plan and when it suddenly was put on them they were caught with their pants down. There needs to be caps in place just like the NBA, NFL,MLB, etc. There also needs to be something in place that if a kids agrees to a NIL deal he is committed to that school for so long just like a pro player would be. Pro players can't sign a contract and then switch teams at the end of the season if they want and these college players shouldn't be able to either.
You’re suggesting that the NCAA adopt a lot of rules that are illegal.
Take your suggestion of a cap on coaches pay as an example. The NCAA attempted to do that in 1991. The schools passed a rule capping the salary for some assistant basketball coaches. The coaches promptly sued the NCAA, alleging the salary cap violated antitrust law. The coaches won and the NCAA was forced to remove the rule and pay damages to the coaches.
It's not illegal if a union agrees to a cap in a collective bargaining situation. Teams have salary caps, so why shouldn't coaching staffs have salary caps?
Not my problem the NCAA had crappy attorneys, either. As an association of member organizations, the coaches were free to find employment elsewhere as assistants or become head coaches themselves. They could even start their own association or league in which to do so. Then they could set their own wages.
I'd be surprised if the "some" coaches who were capped didn't have other criteria that made the cap illegal than merely antitrust.
Likewise, the players had caps on compensation by the NCAA for nearly a century. Never got reversed in court
I think the example the OP cites underlines that recruiting now days has to include a careful evaluation of a player's goals and objectives. Is he focused hard on developing as a player to make it to the League? is he a team players? does he want up front guarantees or is he will to work, and earn NIL payments?
I have sympathy with college coaches these days and they are really earning those big paychecks. There's no easy solution to this problem from within, change can only come from some sort of regulatory structure. Right now it's the wild west.
I have sympathy with college coaches these days and they are really earning those big paychecks. There's no easy solution to this problem from within, change can only come from some sort of regulatory structure. Right now it's the wild west.
Coaches do not have a union, nor can the schools force coaches to join a union so that’s not really a relevant point.
And the NCAA’s loss with respect to the cap on coaches’ pay has nothing to do with the quality of their attorneys. There was no chance in hell that a court would allow that type of rule. It plainly violated antitrust law.
As to your comment that there were issues other than antitrust involved, I’d suggest that you read about the case rather than speculate about it. The NCAA lost solely on antitrust grounds.
Everyone knows that, but not having one doesn't make it not relevant to discussion. If you read the entirety of the posts you'd see it was about capping the staff wages as a whole, and setting standards for incentives.
I disagree. The cap was on "some coaches" to quote you. A blanket cap would not necessarily violate antitrust.
Then they needed better attorneys that would"ve handled things differently. I'd suggest you broaden your mind and thinking. I don't need to read the case to know they lost it. If they had better attorneys it would've never gone to court, and likely never been filed to begin with.
Whether a cap applies to a subset of coaches or to all coaches makes no difference under antitrust law.
It is illegal for different organizations to come to an agreement that caps the salary for any position. That is wage fixing. It is illegal in any industry, and no attorney can get around that.
This is a pretty basic antitrust concept. You can disagree all you want, but the law is clear about this. Different organizations cannot come to an agreement on salaries, full stop.
Until they do. LOL.
Teams and leagues have salary caps. Full stop. Teams in varying leagues have spending caps. Full stop. Read your own post. Full stop. Organizations have caps. Lol
It is illegal until members of the organization all agree to it. A blanket cap means that the member organizations can have their salaries distributed however they want within the cap space. No one is talking about "fixing" salaries EXCEPT YOU.
Teams have salary caps because they are collectively bargained with a union, and therefore exempt from antitrust scrutiny.
Coaches are not part of a union, and therefore their salaries are not exempt from antitrust scrutiny.
Further, by law, head coaches cannot form or join a union because they would be considered part of management at the athletics department. There is no way to get around antitrust restrictions on applying caps to head coach salaries. It is illegal to for schools to come to an agreement to cap head coach salaries in any way, and you cannot use a union to get around that.
That leaves assistant coaches. The only way to get around antitrust law here would be for assistant coaches to willingly decide to form a union out of the goodness of their hearts in order to allow schools to limit their pay and limit their ability to switch jobs. Good luck with that. The likelihood of that happening is probably the same as the likelihood of aliens threatening to blow up the US unless Congress repeals the Sherman Act, so it’s a pretty worthless scenario to consider.
Last edited:
I think eventually and may even take a recession that Businesses will get tired of the year to year drain of money expected from them. This may lead to more reasonable NIL's in the future. I just do not get it, I personally do not buy anything because some athlete has endorsed it. Because a car dealership or someone else uses a athlete in their advertising does not make me go to that place of business. Maybe I am outside the norm.
Amateurism and the whole need to protect it died a long time ago when they started letting professional athletes compete in the Olympics.Yep. But its the ncaa's fault. They wanted to keep this farce of amateurism going while making millions.
They sell this and don't even expect to share money.
I agree. It's beyond stupid at this point. I thought NIL was supposed to provide "walking around money" to student athletes whose abilities to earn extra monies was limited due to scholarship agreements that limited their abilities to earn money while under scholarship. As it stands now, it's completely out of control and is embarrassing that those who we are supposed to "believe" could properly manage NIL system are found to be incompetent, at best.
Similar threads
