Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/15/22 at 11:53 am to UGADawg1988
quote:
Is everybody sure that a federal court will agree that players cannot sign NIL deals before enrolling at a school?
I'm not sure exactly about that. But I do know that NIL deals for college players are supposed to start and end within the players college career.
So a player can't sign a 10 year contract for example, and I'm guessing they'll not be able to continue contracts that were signed before arriving to school(although I see no reason why they couldn't be redone).
I think where people get confused is when it comes to boosters, especially with recruits. While the supreme court ruling would mean you can't limit how much the kids can make, how many deals they take etc, it does not mean that the NCAA can't restrict boosters on what they offer. A kid won't get in trouble, but the booster and school can.
Of course what's really going to matter is enforcement.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 12:05 pm to 3down10
quote:
I think where people get confused is when it comes to boosters, especially with recruits. While the supreme court ruling would mean you can't limit how much the kids can make, how many deals they take etc, it does not mean that the NCAA can't restrict boosters on what they offer. A kid won't get in trouble, but the booster and school can.
I get what you are saying and I hope that this restriction stands in the long run. I'm just not very sure that a federal court will care if a booster offers an NIL deal before or after a player enrolls. We'll find out soon enough though, within a couple of years.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 12:17 pm to 3down10
quote:
But I do know that NIL deals for college players are supposed to start and end within the players college career.
Not according to the NCAA.
From official NCAA Q&A guidance on new NIL policies:
quote:
. What is the impact of the interim NIL policy on prospective student-athletes?
Prospective student-athletes may engage in the same types of NIL opportunities available to current stu-
dent-athletes under the interim NIL policy without impacting their NCAA eligibility. NIL opportunities may not
be used as a recruiting inducement or as a substitute for pay-for-play. Individuals are encouraged to consider
state laws, if applicable, and the rules of any relevant amateur governing bodies.
Boosters can give prospective recruits anything they can otherwise give currently enrolled student athletes, as long as the deal isn't strictured in such a way as to be dependant upon the recruit's eventual enrollment in the school.
As long as thr booster is ok with throwing money at the recruit, and not getting it back if they decide to sign with another school, it's all good.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 12:48 pm to Krampus
quote:
Not according to the NCAA.
From official NCAA Q&A guidance on new NIL policies:
quote:
. What is the impact of the interim NIL policy on prospective student-athletes?
Prospective student-athletes may engage in the same types of NIL opportunities available to current stu-
dent-athletes under the interim NIL policy without impacting their NCAA eligibility. NIL opportunities may not
be used as a recruiting inducement or as a substitute for pay-for-play. Individuals are encouraged to consider
state laws, if applicable, and the rules of any relevant amateur governing bodies.
Boosters can give prospective recruits anything they can otherwise give currently enrolled student athletes, as long as the deal isn't strictured in such a way as to be dependant upon the recruit's eventual enrollment in the school.
As long as thr booster is ok with throwing money at the recruit, and not getting it back if they decide to sign with another school, it's all good.
I'm not really sure why you think your response disputes what I said. Engaging in the same types of NIL opportunities does not at all say that contracts can continue.
As I said previously, I saw no reason why a contract could not end as they went to college, and then another new contract added at that time. Aka "Engaging in the same types of NIL opportunities".
But going even further, why did you ignore the sentence after the one you put in bold letters? That is where boosters come in.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 12:51 pm to 3down10
quote:
...it does not mean that the NCAA can't restrict boosters on what they offer.
But allowing the NCAA to restrict normally (in the rest of society) free trade and commerce in such a manner would go against any precept of the NCAA's existance. Legalized market 'tampering' like that could also set dangerous precedent. Imagine a corporation, or group of corporations, being able to use that legal precedent to set the limit on which companies could offer potential and extant employers, software engineers for example. They then know they can just offer the maximum right at the start and not have to worry about their talent trying to improve their own lives by taking the relatively same job at another company but with higher pay (something I've done). They don't even have to give raises.
I don't know if such power will ever be ceded to the NCAA again.
This post was edited on 6/15/22 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 6/15/22 at 1:02 pm to ouflak
quote:
But allowing the NCAA to restrict normally (in the rest of society) free trade and commerce in such a manner would go against any precept of the NCAA's existance. Legalized market 'tampering' like that could also set dangerous precedent. Imagine a corporation, or group of corporations, being able to use that legal precedent to set the limit on which potential and extant employees, software engineers for example, could earn. They then know they can just offer the maximum right at the start and not have to worry about their talent trying to improve their own lives by taking the relatively same job at another company but with higher pay (something I've done). They don't even have to give raises.
I don't know if such power will ever be ceded to the NCAA again.
Restricting boosters from making NIL deals doesn't limit how much a player can earn. They are still free to sign as many other legitimate deals as they want.
This post was edited on 6/15/22 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 6/15/22 at 1:33 pm to 3down10
quote:
But going even further, why did you ignore the sentence after the one you put in bold letters? That is where boosters come in.
I didn't. In fact about 2/3 of my post addressed it directly:
quote:
Boosters can give prospective recruits anything they can otherwise give currently enrolled student athletes, as long as the deal isn't strictured in such a way as to be dependant upon the recruit's eventual enrollment in the school.
As long as thr booster is ok with throwing money at the recruit, and not getting it back if they decide to sign with another school, it's all good.
If the booster makes the deal in such a way as to make it dependent on the recruits enrollment with a particular school, that's a violation.
If the booster promises more deals if the recruit signs with a particular school, that's a violation.
As long as the booster makes a deal with the recruit that does not depend in any way on the recruit eventually signing with the booster's school, or promising any future deals dependant upon signing woth said school, there is no violation.
If the recruits assumes there will be future deals if they enroll in a particular school, that's on them. No violation.
Boosters can wine and dine recruits all they want as long as they don't make anything officially dependant on the recruit eventually signing on the dotted line.
This post was edited on 6/15/22 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 6/15/22 at 1:59 pm to Krampus
quote:Super stud high school athletes (i.e. Arch Manning) may be missing out on tons of $$ to throw around during their HS days.
Boosters can wine and dine recruits all they want as long as they don't make anything officially dependant on the recruit eventually signing on the dotted line.
What's preventing a kid like that from accepting and NIL contract that expires the day he graduates high school and then negotiating an NIL contract that commences on the date he enrolls at his chosen college?
Posted on 6/15/22 at 2:07 pm to Krampus
quote:
Boosters can wine and dine recruits all they want
No, this is illegal and always has been. Boosters are not permitted to have contact with recruits in any form.
The only exception is in the case of them being family/friends before recruitment, and in those cases nothing can be added during that time, only a continue of what was going on before. AKA, just because Booster Bob was an acquaintance of a recruit prior, Booster Bob isn't allowed to suddenly start giving him a bunch of money.
Beyond that you can get specific exceptions for say a booster taking a recruit out to dinner, but it has to be reported, given reasons why and approved prior to.
This post was edited on 6/15/22 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:04 pm to RT1941
quote:
What's preventing a kid like that from accepting and NIL contract that expires the day he graduates high school and then negotiating an NIL contract that commences on the date he enrolls at his chosen college?
Possibly state law and/or highschool eligibility regs.
Otherwise, nothing. But the risk is that the enrollee college athlete contract cannot be dependant in any way on the recruit contract, or vice versa. In fact, the college enrollee contract cannot exist, or even be promised until the kid signs.
If the recruit has a valid NIL deal as a recruit. And it expires. And the kid decides to enroll somewhere else when signing day rolls around. That's the recruit's prerogative. The recruit has the power to enter and fulfill NIL deals or not at their own discretion. The boosters can't use them to push recruits to sign with their desired college.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:23 pm to 3down10
quote:
No, this is illegal and always has been. Boosters are not permitted to have contact with recruits in any form
This is wrong. And specifically goes against NIL guidance issued by the NCAA.
SOME contact between boosters and prospective student athletes is illegal.
SOME is perfectly legal.
If the contact is of a recruiting nature, it is illegal. To be of a recruiting nature, the deal would have to be structured in such a way as to require or encourage the students to sign with a particular school. As long as that is not part of the deal, the high school athlete is as free to engage in the same sorts of NIL deals as a college athlete, even with boosters. As far as the NCAA is concerned anyway.
If the contact is unrelated to college recruiting, and confined to the booster's desire to give a high school athlete an NIL deal based upon the athlete's high school accomploshments and likelihood of future celebrity, regardless of where the PSA ultimately enrolls for college, it is specifically allowed by NCAA NIL policy, as I referenced in the NCAA's official NIL Q&A reference guide above. A high school athlete can enter any of the same sort of deals as college athletes, so long as they do not constitute an inducement to sign with a particular school.
The key upon which the analysis turns is NOT whether or not the NIL benefactor is a booster. But rather whether the deal offered constitutes an inducement to sign with a particular school. That's the question that will determine whether a recruiting violation occurred or not.
I do encourage you to read the rules, and the Q&A document for yourself.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:25 pm to wadewilson
quote:
They have teeth.
Not with anything related to NIL
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:37 pm to CNB
quote:
Not with anything related to NIL
Correct. And that's exactly why the regs are set up the way they are.
NCAA has teeth when it comes to recruiting.
Not when it comes to NIL.
As long as an NIL deal isn't set up to induce an athlete to sign with a particular school, the NCAA has no power to intervene between the athlete and the benefactor.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:53 pm to Krampus
quote:
This is wrong. And specifically goes against NIL guidance issued by the NCAA.
SOME contact between boosters and prospective student athletes is illegal.
SOME is perfectly legal.
If the contact is of a recruiting nature, it is illegal. To be of a recruiting nature, the deal would have to be structured in such a way as to require or encourage the students to sign with a particular school. As long as that is not part of the deal, the high school athlete is as free to engage in the same sorts of NIL deals as a college athlete, even with boosters. As far as the NCAA is concerned anyway.
If the contact is unrelated to college recruiting, and confined to the booster's desire to give a high school athlete an NIL deal based upon the athlete's high school accomploshments and likelihood of future celebrity, regardless of where the PSA ultimately enrolls for college, it is specifically allowed by NCAA NIL policy, as I referenced in the NCAA's official NIL Q&A reference guide above. A high school athlete can enter any of the same sort of deals as college athletes, so long as they do not constitute an inducement to sign with a particular school.
The key upon which the analysis turns is NOT whether or not the NIL benefactor is a booster. But rather whether the deal offered constitutes an inducement to sign with a particular school. That's the question that will determine whether a recruiting violation occurred or not.
I do encourage you to read the rules, and the Q&A document for yourself.
Role of Boosters
quote:
Only institutional staff members are permitted to recruit prospective student-athletes. Generally, NCAA rules prohibit anyone else from contacting (calling, writing or in-person contact) prospects or the prospect’s relatives or guardian for recruiting purposes.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 3:54 pm to 3down10
quote:
for recruiting purposes.
The most important 3 words in your post.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 4:04 pm to Krampus
quote:
The most important 3 words in your post.
It's what the topic is about.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 4:07 pm to 3down10
No, the topic is about NIL. Which may or may not be related to recruting.
Whether it is or not determines which set of rules is at play for boosters.
Whether it is or not determines which set of rules is at play for boosters.
Posted on 6/15/22 at 4:30 pm to 3down10
Actually you are the idiot.
Read, if you can! The brief. The Supreme Court has said the NCAA cannot do what it’s been doing forever, they have basically been breaking the law it’s entire existence. You cannot restrict anyones NIL. Period! They can sell their likeness and promote whatever they want. It’s a free economy.
And Don’t act like Bama as well as everyone else hasn’t been paying under the tables for years. Arguing it just makes you look ignorant.
Fact is Saban prefers that way more than NIL, because it’s private and easier to control potential locker room issues. In which case he is probably correct.
That does not matter what he wants though. It was 9-0. Agents are wanting the NCAA to try to pass any regulation regarding this. They will lose in a massive suit.
Read, if you can! The brief. The Supreme Court has said the NCAA cannot do what it’s been doing forever, they have basically been breaking the law it’s entire existence. You cannot restrict anyones NIL. Period! They can sell their likeness and promote whatever they want. It’s a free economy.
And Don’t act like Bama as well as everyone else hasn’t been paying under the tables for years. Arguing it just makes you look ignorant.
Fact is Saban prefers that way more than NIL, because it’s private and easier to control potential locker room issues. In which case he is probably correct.
That does not matter what he wants though. It was 9-0. Agents are wanting the NCAA to try to pass any regulation regarding this. They will lose in a massive suit.
This post was edited on 6/15/22 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 6/15/22 at 4:38 pm to 3rddownonthe8
Ding! Ding! Ding!
This guy gets it.
NCAA can't do anything about NIL. They can still enforce their recruting rules.
As long as the NIL deals don't run afoul of recruiting rules, the NCAA is totally out of the picture.
A booster would have to be an idiot to put an NIL deal in front of a recruit that's only valid if they sign with the booster's preferred school. That's about the only way the NCAA could step in.
This guy gets it.
NCAA can't do anything about NIL. They can still enforce their recruting rules.
As long as the NIL deals don't run afoul of recruiting rules, the NCAA is totally out of the picture.
A booster would have to be an idiot to put an NIL deal in front of a recruit that's only valid if they sign with the booster's preferred school. That's about the only way the NCAA could step in.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News