re: Honest discussion about NIL. Would love to hear thoughts.

The problem is, so long as kids can freely choose where they go, there's always going to be boosters to give money/incentives.

If you have a cap, the kid will then get whatever's alloted based on the cap, but then will also get the sacks full of cash under the table. With no caps, there's no incentive for dark money.

You can't have a cap unless you have a method in which kids are assigned schools. Otherwise, it's unfair to restrict school A from putting forward their best offer, when school B can match and also has a bagman or cheap acreage in rural Georgia.

If players can't choose but are assigned through a draft or algorithm method, then caps make sense because there's no incentive to give anyone extra bc it's not going to influence where they go.

Why should the schools push back? This is not costing them anything. It's all being propped up by fans. Performance clauses is one of the few rules the NCAA has in place. Should those rules go away? Maybe. It would prevent players for latching on the sitting on the bench. Perhaps a bonus model is more appropriate.

The onus is on the conferences to police this as the NCAA is worthless at this point.