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

quote:

---

Hysterical that you post these words with a straight face.

---

You're either stupid or trolling. Either way, you should ask for a refund on your education.

quote:

---

Income is revenue. You’re absolutely mental.

---

When you say shite like this, you only highlight you don't know shite about running a business, economics or basically much of anything outside filling out a W-2, if that.

Revenue is the money generated BEFORE expenses. If you just want to talk about the revenue my company generates, it's in the millions. Does that mean the company actually makes millions? I fricking wish. The truth is, we have expenses that take up like 60% of that revenue. And that's not even counting employee salaries and other expenses that come out of the other 40%. That 60% is just what we pay other companies for what they generated.

I would rightfully be laughed out of the office if I came in talking about I want a % of revenue. But I do get a % of profits. Not to mention, I would have very little trouble at all increasing our revenue without increasing our profits. But that's kind of stupid.

So how the frick are you going to come at me with this shite when you don't even understand the very fricking basics of running a business?

quote:

---

And you literally want to force the student athletes hands on what they can and cannot do.

---

False, nobody forces them to go to college or become a player. It's 100% optional and they have taken those spots for nearly 100 years now because it's a great opportunity.

When they go out hunting kids and bringing them back in chains, then you can say they have no options.

What's next, you going to claim people who have to pay for a scholarship have no options as well? fricking stupid.

quote:

---

Link me saying anything remotely close to whatever the frick drivel you’re typing.

---

1 page back.

quote:

---

I’m not taking anything at all out of context. It was ruled that athletes cannot be prevented from profiting off of their own name, image, or likeness. You’re just throwing an absolute bitch fit people’s ability to profit off of their hard work is making a thing you like to watch on TV less fun for you. And then you have the audacity to call anyone entitled.

---

quote:

---

Wouldn't it have been better to have there been a cap that applies to all schools and all sports of a certain amount, and everyone gets the same? That would make the incentive to chase the most money go away, and kids could go to the schools they want and not just choose based upon pay.

---

Would any of you like to have a salary cap at your current job?

quote:

---

I would rightfully be laughed out of the office if I came in talking about I want a % of revenue

---

Perhaps you would but it's standard in sports leagues.

There are also other industries (sales, certain medical businesses, insurance, property management, collections, among others) where % of revenue is not an uncommon split with the professional generating said revenue.

Just because you have life experience limited to a particular industry doesn't mean all industries follow that comp model.

quote:

---

Right... under a revenue sharing construct the university could make up funding shortfalls for the other sports or not - school's choice. Not football's problem if the water polo team needs a new pool.

---

It's not your place to say how they spend the football money either.

But at least you admit you want to screw over 99% of athletes.

quote:

---

Government has just said that the schools can't stop players from taking NIL money... which in a free society makes sense as it's anti-competitive.

Everything else is moot. Schools have a choice at this point to go full pro league with collective bargaining or run with the current status quo. In a full "pro league" there would still be NIL mind you. It's not like pros can't get sponsorships, it just has less of an impact.

---

Nobody has ever stopped them from getting NIL money. Not a single time in the history of college football has the NCAA or any school prevented a player from getting NIL money.

NOT A SINGLE frickING TIME. Because it's a free country, and they can enter into such agreements at any point if they want.

What was being prevented was getting NIL money and then being eligible to play college football.

What the government did was say schools no longer have the right to decide who is eligible to play and who is not.

The idea that people/organizations can't form together and abide by it's own set of rules to create a product/service is the opposite of capitalism and is anti-competitive.

The NCAA is not a government organization, it is completely voluntary. Schools can just leave it tomorrow if they want. Players do not have to participate either. All voluntary. You bring government into it because you have things you want to force and make things no longer voluntary.

quote:

---

Perhaps you would but it's standard in sports leagues.

There are also other industries (sales, certain medical businesses, insurance, property management, collections, among others) where % of revenue is not an uncommon split with the professional generating said revenue.

Just because you have life experience limited to a particular industry doesn't mean all industries follow that comp model.

---

False, they only get a % of the revenue they generated, and then they are responsible for their own expenses etc. Which is where the 60% I mentioned above comes from in my business.

So if you want to say that 60% gets a % of the revenue they generated, sure. But they actually generated 100% and I kept 40% for myself and gave them 60%.

That's not the same thing as one of them coming and saying they want a % of all the revenue. That would be ridiculous and never happen.

quote:

---

False, they only get a % of the revenue they generated, and then they are responsible for their own expenses etc.

---

This is incorrect. I've worked in finance/private equity my entire career so have seen comp structures of many industries and businesses large and small. One such structure includes a base salary and a revenue goal - over that goal an increasing % of generated revenue directly goes to the revenue generator.

Don't take my word for it look up the NBA and NFL revenue splits.

quote:

---

form together and abide by it's own set of rules to create a product/service

---

This is definitionally collusion under antitrust law and was directly addressed in the legal decisions. The judge's example was restaurants colluding to pay chefs less because it "makes the food taste better" - great argument.

You're effectively arguing for price fixing by saying it makes "college football taste better".

Collusion in Antitrust Law: Horizontal collusion exists where competitors at the same market level agree to fix or control the prices they will charge for their respective goods or services. For instance, two parties may collude by limiting or restricting supply, sharing insider information, or dividing the market.

If it creates more consumer protections then "collusion" can be allowable - for example industry standards. Whether that be around cleanliness of certain facilities, certification of technicians, or standardizating USB plugs. However, even this type of "collusion" can be challenged if it limits consumer choice, competition, etc.

quote:

---

But at least you admit you want to screw over 99% of athletes.

---

It is not PankReb or ALhunter that is advocating screwing over any athletes, you are the one that insists on perpetuating a system that screwed over college football players for decades. It is beyond the pale of logic that you insist that nobody kept NIL money from the college football players. Only after all the artificial constructs of the NCAA and the athletic departments were legally removed did million dollar offers suddenly become publicly available to players. That pent up demand was there because the financial monster that was college football had that money flowing to coaches and admins, now it can more freely flow to the football players that the MARKET has judged are valuable.

My thoughts are certain blue bloods have been paying players for years while others tried to play by the rules and would get their hand slapped everytime they bought a player a sandwich or got them an actual job but they made $2 an hr. More than the ncaa found acceptable.

Now that paying players is legal the ones that benefited the most by doing it all these years are the ones most upset that its legal.

it was already pay to play before nil. players were already getting paid and lots of blue chippers went to the highest bidder. if you put in a salary cap that is significantly lower than the money some schools have to spend on players, they will start paying players under the table again. any new rules regarding player compensation actually need to be enforced across the board fairly

Technically "a school" should have $0 NIL dollars to work with, players arent employees. (Yet)

Collectives are just for boosters to pay players and have it be somewhat above board, but players are still free to pursue other opportunities to make money on their name. The way it is now (may always be) there won't be parity among programs, it's impossible. Sure all you need is one billionaire that is also a rabid fan of your football program, but unless they're also crazy about non-revenue and women's sports...it's going to be haves vs have nots when it comes to all sports. Schools located in an urban area (such as Austin) with several fortune 500 companies and numerous other smaller businesses will always have a leg up on schools located in a relatively small college town. It ain't fair, but you know what they say about life..