Started By
Message
Why this portal season is different
Posted on 1/10/26 at 10:28 am
Posted on 1/10/26 at 10:28 am
The House settlement changed the game. July 1st started legal Rev Share with student athletes. So the number for SEC schools to spend on student athletes is around 24 Million spread across all athletics. Most schools are using the 75% (FB)/15% (MBB)/ 5% (WBB)/ 5% (everything else) split with some schools moving a few percentage points here and there.
So every school has Roughly $18 Million for football without the athletes doing anything else.
Now NIL has to be approved through the 3rd party screening called NIL go. These NIL will only approve market value for the player. So stroking a big check just to do it won’t be approved.
The reason this changes things is now everyone in the P4 conferences can keep their good players. If they really want someone they can up the ante to keep them. Previously it was the Wild Wild West. If you wanted to overpay someone 2 million dollars you just got a booster to write a check. That isn’t “allowed” anymore. It has to be able to get through NILGo which isn’t a sure thing at all. It is still pretty wild but not nearly as many big time elite players in the portal. You see this in the QB market.
Could school’s just blatantly cheat and see if the NCAA has enforcement power? I’m sure someone will try. But this isn’t like it has been the last few years. Definitely different.
So every school has Roughly $18 Million for football without the athletes doing anything else.
Now NIL has to be approved through the 3rd party screening called NIL go. These NIL will only approve market value for the player. So stroking a big check just to do it won’t be approved.
The reason this changes things is now everyone in the P4 conferences can keep their good players. If they really want someone they can up the ante to keep them. Previously it was the Wild Wild West. If you wanted to overpay someone 2 million dollars you just got a booster to write a check. That isn’t “allowed” anymore. It has to be able to get through NILGo which isn’t a sure thing at all. It is still pretty wild but not nearly as many big time elite players in the portal. You see this in the QB market.
Could school’s just blatantly cheat and see if the NCAA has enforcement power? I’m sure someone will try. But this isn’t like it has been the last few years. Definitely different.
7
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:28 am to 03 West CoChamps
This is why there is a QB shortage in the portal.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:30 am to 03 West CoChamps
So the timing is perfect for teams with new coaches and no qb to fall on their face?
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:35 am to 03 West CoChamps
Until someone sues and wins. The NCAA has already lost multiple times trying to stop kids from making money. The courts will overturn that BS with the quickness. They’ve already said you can’t limit how much a kid can make. With no union or CBA, the first time they deny a player they’ll sue and win.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:37 am to LSUtigerNVegas9
quote:
Until someone sues and wins. The NCAA has already lost multiple times trying to stop kids from making money. The courts will overturn that BS with the quickness. They’ve already said you can’t limit how much a kid can make. With no union or CBA, the first time they deny a player they’ll sue and win.
Maybe, but the situation now is different. No longer would the lawsuit be challenging largely arbitrary NCAA rules. The lawsuit would be challenging the legality of the House Settlement, which is an entirely different legal beast to try to challenge.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:41 am to 03 West CoChamps
This is why kiffin left.
The dynamic will swing back to larger programs
The dynamic will swing back to larger programs
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:42 am to 03 West CoChamps
quote:
So stroking a big check just to do it won’t be approved
Expect this to be challenged with the quickness.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:44 am to Victor R Franko
quote:
Expect this to be challenged with the quickness.
It has been in place 6 months and no challenge yet.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:45 am to 03 West CoChamps
Well for lsu yea there's a shortage
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:54 am to OleVaught14
Well, the way the Supreme Court has stated their intentions, short of a CBA and Union, they’ll rule in favor of the player. They don’t like the NCAA restrictions on what a player can make. Take random athlete A. He just sues and says I didn’t agree to the House settlement. That was made without my approval. I didn’t have a union rep or representative making my feelings known. Now, I’m being given the opportunity to make x amount of money and the NCAA is restricting it. Remember, the NFL has a monopoly and it’s allowed because pretty much all players are in the union and sign off on all CBA matters. The NFL has actually lost in court to the USFL for being a monopoly.
This is from Google
Legal Challenges: The settlement faces ongoing scrutiny and potential challenges, with some arguing it doesn't fully resolve fairness issues.
It WILL be challenged and the players will win. Just like before.
This is from Google
Legal Challenges: The settlement faces ongoing scrutiny and potential challenges, with some arguing it doesn't fully resolve fairness issues.
It WILL be challenged and the players will win. Just like before.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 9:57 am to 03 West CoChamps
Because the clearing house hasn’t really denied anyone of value. Just wait until they do. Especially, if it’s a billionaire, well connected donor.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:01 am to 03 West CoChamps
It is different because Kiffin still has no top quarterback for his current team.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:08 am to 03 West CoChamps
How can the NCAA say what someone is worth on the open market AND enforce it without a CBA? Especially if it’s an outside company using the players’ NIL for marketing and advertising purposes. Big companies spend millions and millions a year on marketing. The only leg I can see the NCAA having to stand on if it’s a donor that doesn’t own a company. As long as the donor that’s forking over the NIL owns a company and can pay for it, why wouldn’t it stand in court? It’s for marketing purposes. Also, not all marketing goes well and ends in profits. So the NCAA can’t argue that. It happens all the time. A good lawyer would eat that argument up.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:12 am to 03 West CoChamps
quote:
The reason this changes things is now everyone in the P4 conferences can keep their good players. If they really want someone they can up the ante to keep them. Previously it was the Wild Wild West. If you wanted to overpay someone 2 million dollars you just got a booster to write a check. That isn’t “allowed” anymore. It has to be able to get through NILGo which isn’t a sure thing at all. It is still pretty wild but not nearly as many big time elite players in the portal. You see this in the QB market.
Actually, the issue was part of the agreement for NILGo was to create the CSC which would be given the power to govern and enforce NIL third party deals to ensure programs stayed within the Clearinghouse guidelines. Unfortunately, many of the schools have refused to sign. Many state legislations have also told schools not to sign it.
There is no cap for NIL so nothing has changed from the past several years when NIL started. The only difference now is you can pay a player up to fair market value which no one yet knows what that is. Even if for some reason NILGo did not approve some NIL deal there is no entity yet in place with the power to prevent said deal.
This post was edited on 1/11/26 at 10:22 am
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:13 am to LSUtigerNVegas9
So paying under the table in a McDonalds bag is coming back?
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:14 am to LSUtigerNVegas9
quote:
How can the NCAA say what someone is worth on the open market AND enforce it without a CBA? Especially if it’s an outside company using the players’ NIL for marketing and advertising purposes. Big companies spend millions and millions a year on marketing. The only leg I can see the NCAA having to stand on if it’s a donor that doesn’t own a company. As long as the donor that’s forking over the NIL owns a company and can pay for it, why wouldn’t it stand in court? It’s for marketing purposes. Also, not all marketing goes well and ends in profits. So the NCAA can’t argue that. It happens all the time. A good lawyer would eat that argument up.
The NCAA has nothing to do with it now. The clearinghouse system that determines fair market value is overseen via a Deloitte a third party. Though until the market settles it make take years for a real representation of what that value truly is. Still no way to punish a school for creating whatever fair market value they want to determine for a player.
This post was edited on 1/11/26 at 10:23 am
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:17 am to LSUtigerNVegas9
quote:
Well, the way the Supreme Court has stated their intentions, short of a CBA and Union, they’ll rule in favor of the player. They don’t like the NCAA restrictions on what a player can make.
All the Supreme Court this was determine that the NCAA does not have the authority to prevent an athlete from getting paid in college. It did not approve NIL or pay for play just told the NCAA they could not prevent it.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:19 am to 03 West CoChamps
quote:
Could school’s just blatantly cheat and see if the NCAA has enforcement power? I’m sure someone will try. But this isn’t like it has been the last few years. Definitely different.
The House settlement took the NCAA out of the equation. They have no authority or part in what happens with NIL.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:22 am to TideWarrior
quote:
Actually, the issue was part of the agreement for NILGo was to create the CSC which would be given the power to govern and enforce NIL third party deals to ensure programs stayed within the Clearinghouse guidelines. Unfortunately, many of the schools have refused to sign. Many state legislations have also told schools not to sign it.
No that is for something in the future. An agreement across all schools that hasn’t come into play yet.
Posted on 1/11/26 at 10:30 am to 03 West CoChamps
quote:
No that is for something in the future. An agreement across all schools that hasn’t come into play yet.
The CSC is in place the issue though are states like TN has passed a law that will not accept NILGo and CSC and Texas AG is telling schools not to not sign as well.
quote:
Seven universities in Texas have been ordered by the state's attorney general not to sign the College Sports Commission NIL participation agreement.
quote:
College Sports Commission, a new entity geared toward rules enforcement. Power Four schools would be required to sign the contract or risk being expelled from their leagues and having member schools refuse to play games against them. Additionally, it would limit the ability for schools to sue over enforcement decisions, radically transforming the outlook of the new era of college athletics.
quote:
CSC -- administered by the conferences -- would function separately from the NCAA. The separate entity would be in charge of regulating the new revenue sharing salary cap and enforcing the upcoming NIL clearinghouse. With player compensation off its plate, the NCAA would then be freed up to focus on its more traditional roles, including eligibility rules, sports betting and academics
This post was edited on 1/11/26 at 10:33 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News