re: NIL Bill released

honestly I dont hate any of these rules, but i don’t know how i feel about US Co fred’s making them.

idk if the limitations in NIL will hold up in the SCOTUS but I havent thought to hard about it either.

the NCAA should change their transfer rule but it’s crazy they’re spending time making a law about it.

Anyone who thinks Federal intervention is a good idea, needs to be reminded of Title IX

How did that work out for college athletics?

quote:

---

It sucked for men's sports. Pretty good deal for women.

---

Exactly.

Hurt the cash cow sports that allow colleges to fund money losing women’s teams.

quote:

---

Hurt the cash cow sports that allow colleges to fund money losing women’s teams.

---

I don't think it hurt the big sports as much as it did the smaller sports.

quote:

---

The NCAA tried to regulate all of this without government involvement, and did so (with mixed effectiveness) until a few years ago. Anyone with half a brain (and the NCAA at least has that, even if it doesn't seem so at times) knew that NIL would immediately become massive, unregulated pay-for-play, which is why the NCAA prohibited it for so long.

But then government (in the form of the U.S. Supreme Court and various state legislatures, controlled by both parties) screwed it up by striking down the NCAA's regulatory system. This created the new Wild West landscape that virtually everyone involved sees is out-of-whack, with the intersection of NIL and liberalized transfer rules creating de facto free agency--in a league with no "salary cap." Now the only way to rein it in and create some sort of order and competitive balance in college sports is through federal legislation. So government intervention becomes the only solution to a problem that government intervention created in the first place. It's not the first time that has happened...

---

The NCAA kicked the can too far down the road and slow-played or outright refused to compromise with student-athletes for even an ounce of monetary compensation resulting in government intervention.

The NCAA created this shite and lost all control, oversight or investigative powers. Serves them right in some regards for being obstinate and unwilling to evolve & relax some rules in favor of their student-athletes.

Now it's a wide-open system with zero governance that I don't think the NCAA can ever reign in again.

I think this is the wrong approach.

I honestly don't think there is anything wrong with NIL for players on a team. I think the issues are with using NIL to recruit.

"We'll give you 5 million in NIL if you come to our school" is the problem, not "You led us to a national championship, here's a 5 million dollar NIL deal."

The approach this bill seems to take toward solving that is to make the player stay at the school.

I don't think that's the right answer. The right answer is to make it so the player gets the money offered even if they go to another school.

If a collective makes a 5 million dollar NIL promise to a player the player should be able to sign the contract and take that money even if they then go to another school. That's how NIL was supposed to work. No NIL deal was supposed to be allowed to be dependent upon attending a particular college. But the contracts are made in ways (with personal appearances and such) so that they can't be filled without being a student at a particular school.

If you don't know you're going to get that recruit you give millions too... booster organizations aren't going to do that anymore. That's the solution in my mind. How to accomplish it... I don't know.

quote:

---

The NCAA tried to regulate all of this without government involvement, and did so (with mixed effectiveness) until a few years ago. Anyone with half a brain (and the NCAA at least has that, even if it doesn't seem so at times) knew that NIL would immediately become massive, unregulated pay-for-play, which is why the NCAA prohibited it for so long.

But then government (in the form of the U.S. Supreme Court and various state legislatures, controlled by both parties) screwed it up by striking down the NCAA's regulatory system. This created the new Wild West landscape that virtually everyone involved sees is out-of-whack, with the intersection of NIL and liberalized transfer rules creating de facto free agency--in a league with no "salary cap." Now the only way to rein it in and create some sort of order and competitive balance in college sports is through federal legislation. So government intervention becomes the only solution to a problem that government intervention created in the first place. It's not the first time that has happened...

---

Good post.

I'm lazy and didn't click the links. I was hoping for better cliffs (which I don't think I got).

Legislation cannot do anything regarding NIL. Hell... the NFL can't regulate player NIL. It isn't happening for college football now that the toothpaste has been squeezed.

Legislation can do things to collectives. But it won't work. Collectives are designed to create competitive advantages for the football teams (or recruiting athletes). If Legislation attempts to kill collectives, they just reorganize as LLCs for marketing firms (which is essentially what they are) or law firms (i.e. consultants for the athletes).
There is no net benefit even attempting to legislate collectives because they will reorganize closer to NIL and be legal and protected.

The best argument for federal legislation is to control and offset state legislation. State lawmakers are attempting to make it illegal for the NCAA to enforce rules against the schools in the state. Honestly. Of course federal legislation could serve a purpose and put countrywide standards that state legislatures and lawyers would be required to adhere to despite what state statutes command.

quote:

---

As long as a coach can leave whenever they want, I will not be in opposition to the one time transfer rule. It doesn't make sense for a kid to be stuck at an institution for 3 years because they made a mistake at 17/18 and signed with the wrong program.

Also, you'd have to redo the verbiage of scholarships themselves. Football scholarship have a year to year standing. They'd have to be guaranteed for 3 years at a minimum.

---

Thank you.

I'm assuming he meant the head coach only.