Started By
Message
re: NIL is getting out of hand
Posted on 12/21/22 at 1:54 pm to kywildcatfanone
Posted on 12/21/22 at 1:54 pm to kywildcatfanone
Exactly. No long term contracts and no rookie contracts. Some of these kids are getting better contracts than NFL rookies. We about to have a lot of Jemarcus Russell’s running around.
1
Posted on 12/21/22 at 1:57 pm to ManBearSharkReb
Don't worry, Dabo's got this shite figured out:
quote:
@AnnaH247
Dabo: "We built this program on NIL. Probably different than what you're thinking though... we built it on God's Name, Image, and Likeness."
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:02 pm to baldona
quote:
Bunch of ignorant responses in this thread. The schools aren’t paying these kids and are not supposed to be involved.
This is not a ‘salary’ or a pay, it’s basically endorsements. How are you going to cap an endorsement? Many many pro athletes get paid just to wear and be a representative of a brand. That’s what NIL is.
The biggest issue, and people won’t like this, is we have too many damn teams in D1 sports. The nfl is 32 teams, D1 football is what 130? If we had 50 D1 teams things would be a lot more similar.
If you can’t compete financially, frankly you shouldn’t be jn D1.
Agreed
NIL is here. The Supreme Court says so. So outside of a constitutional amendment, you may as well get used to it.
I do think the 1 year redshirt rule should be in place for all undergrad transfers.
That would put the "student" back in student athlete as best as possible.
This post was edited on 12/21/22 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:04 pm to meansonny
quote:
The Supreme Court says so.
That's not what I heard.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:06 pm to deeprig9
quote:
That's not what I heard.
Players do not own their own Name, Image, and Likeness?
Do tell.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:10 pm to silverstreak
quote:
I have no problem with kids getting paid but wow...
quote:
Pitt Head Coach Pat Narduzzi says on @937theFan that he's heard 2 schools offered UNC QB Drake Maye $5 million to transfer. Wont's say who. But he knows who. Wow. Says it's gotten out of control and it's only going to get worse. Quote: "It's a sad, sad deal."
National Labor Board just last week directed its LA district Office to pursue unfair labor practices against both USC, UCLA and the PAC12 along with the NCAA. They, I am sure, using the Alston 9-0 SCOTUS decision against the NCAA, are going to argue the entire NCAA model is anti-competitive and anti-trust. So while NIL was what the case was about, it left a base for further expansion labor rights for Athletes.
At some point, I think once the 12 team playoff starts, a set amount of Money should be taken from the Playoff revenues and use to give every player a base salary. That could be negotiated between the players and the all the major conferences. NIL would be something a player markets themselves and as a player performs better after 1 or 2 years in college, there base pay goes up. Sort of like we have a minimum salary for all NFL players, and the better you perform, the higher your pay.
Some form of what the NFL has. Regulate the Portal (Free agency), base salary for all players that sign with a team out of HS, and salary differentials in year 2, 3, etc are tied to performance. In the NFL, the top 5 QB's get X, the next 5 get Y, etc.
I do believe this is the way it has to go to have some sanity.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:31 pm to JKChesterton
Labor board says college students are labor?
Color me shocked.
That is about the 11th time a labor board has done this.
-nothingberger.
Color me shocked.
That is about the 11th time a labor board has done this.
-nothingberger.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:35 pm to WonderWartHawg
quote:
Kind of like he did at the border? (Wrong board, I know.)
No,actually the opposite.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:37 pm to NaturalStateReb
quote:
What is that difference, exactly?
You answered the question
quote:
employee
Players are not employees.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:43 pm to WonderWartHawg
quote:
If they are going to get paid that much, do away with the scholarship part. They can afford to pay their own damn way!
That will not do anything.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:49 pm to JKChesterton
quote:
National Labor Board just last week directed its LA district Office to pursue unfair labor practices against both USC, UCLA and the PAC12 along with the NCAA.
They have tried multiple times to push this agenda with the left and unions praying for it as unions continue to decline. Not like it is the first time and why they are picking California courts.
quote:
Alston 9-0 SCOTUS
It had nothing to do with NIL and SCOTUS has yet to rule on NIL.
quote:
First, the decision is narrowly focused on “education-related benefits.” In that context, colleges and universities can now provide more extensive benefits than current NCAA regulations allow. Education-related benefits are fairly closely tied to what any college student might need and appreciate: reimbursements for computers and other equipment, free tutoring, paid internships, cash awards for academic achievement and the like. (Note the inherent ambiguity, however, in that definition: Who is to say whether an athlete should have an inexpensive computer or an expensive computer? A video monitor or a video system that allows high-quality streaming of lectures and can serve as a gaming device and home entertainment system? A $5,000 internship or a $50,000 internship?) The decision does not directly address the larger issue of pay-for-play or other big-picture issues with college athletes.
quote:
Shortly after the Court’s decision, the NCAA voted of its own accord to allow a student athlete to receive compensation in exchange for use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). The Alston ruling did not compel the NCAA’s NIL decision because the ruling left the NCAA’s rules limiting compensation unrelated to education undisturbed. Even after this series of changes, the NCAA still restricts the compensation that schools can provide directly to their athletes unrelated to education
quote:
So while NIL was what the case was about,
Again this case was not about NIL.
This post was edited on 12/21/22 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:49 pm to ScoggDog
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/23/23 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 12/21/22 at 2:55 pm to silverstreak
quote:
Pitt Head Coach Pat Narduzzi says on @937theFan that he's heard 2 schools offered UNC QB Drake Maye $5 million to transfer.
quote:
Wont's say who.
Smells of bullshite. Of course many are gullible enough to simply blindly believe it. Not saying for sure he’s lying. But I’m highly suspicious and will need to see some proof before I believe him.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 3:00 pm to Doak Walker
quote:
and Nick Saban said that 8&4 bought all their players. When challenged he walked it back faster than a 12 legged crab. Don't run your mouth unless you're prepared to back it up.
He didn’t walk it back because it was a lie. He walked it back because the SEC bylaws says that schools and their representatives cannot make disparaging remarks about other member school’s athletics programs.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 4:05 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
Again this case was not about NIL.
The O'Bannon decision was NIL.
You are playing semantics.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 5:20 pm to meansonny
quote:
The O'Bannon decision was NIL.
You are playing semantics.
Actually I am not as the poster I responded to said Alston.
The poster also was referencing SCOTUS
quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied petitions by both O’Bannon and the NCAA to review the case.
O'Bannon was denied a SCOTUS ruling.
The case you are referencing never made it to SCOTUS it also did not resolve NIL.
quote:
The Ninth Circuit essentially rejected more substantial remedies. It instead reasoned that, by allowing colleges to offer student-athletes additional compensation up to the full cost of attendance, the NCAA cures the antitrust harm caused by its otherwise unlawful amateurism rules.[/quote]
No NIL was ever established or ruled upon for current athletes.
[quote]Two of the three Ninth Circuit judges also vacated a more substantial remedy imposed earlier in the litigation by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken. In 2014, Judge Wilken ruled that colleges must reward men’s basketball and football players up to $5,000 per year while they are in school for the use of their names, images and likenesses, with payment made after they graduate.
quote:
To the disappointment of some, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling ensures that a payment system won’t be implanted. As a result, the NCAA’s controversial system of “amateurism” largely remains in place.
The O'Bannon case ended with the Ninth Circuit.
No semantics just an understanding of what got ruled on in the courts. To many running around screaming SCOTUS ruled in favor of NIL and no case have they presided over in the last few decades have they.
This post was edited on 12/21/22 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 12/21/22 at 5:33 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
The O'Bannon case ended with the Ninth Circuit.
True.
But the ninth circuit ruled the ncaa in violation of Sherman antitrust and was explicit in NIL.
The $5k was in reference to EA Sports digital name image and likeness.
Being explicit that NIL was one of two components in violation of antitrust necessitated the rule change. Otherwise, potentially dozens to hundreds of more legal challenges would attack the NCAA.
The O'Bannon decision is deemed confirmed by the Supreme Court in the Alston case. The very first paragraph of the Alston decision "the NCAA issues and enforces these rules, which restrict compensation for student athletes in various ways. These rules depress compensation for at least some student-athletes below what a competitive market would yield." End paragraph.
The ninth circuit ruled the ncaa in violation of the Sherman act specifically for NIL in the O'Bannon case. The Supreme Court just affirmed O'Bannon (and the Sherman antitrust violations) in the Alston decision within the first 2 paragraphs.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 5:43 pm to meansonny
Now you are using semantics.
This is original win for O'Bannon in regards to NIL by Judge Wilkins.
The Ninth threw out the $5000 and ruled:
O'Bannon NIL was shot down and why they appealed it to SCOTUS who denied accepting the case.
The ruling in ALston specifically states that the NCAA can not place a limit on educational benefits, nothing to do with NIL which are non educational benefits.
This is original win for O'Bannon in regards to NIL by Judge Wilkins.
quote:
Two of the three Ninth Circuit judges also vacated a more substantial remedy imposed earlier in the litigation by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken. This is original win for O'Bannon in regards to NIL by Judge Wilkins.
In 2014, Judge Wilken ruled that colleges must reward men’s basketball and football players up to $5,000 per year while they are in school for the use of their names, images and likenesses, with payment madequote:. This idea encountered problems for several reasons, including that it was never clear why $5,000 and not $1,000, $10,000, $100,000 or some other number was the appropriate cap or, for that matter, why any fixed cap was appropriate under antitrust law—an area of law that promotes competition.
after they graduate
quote:
To the disappointment of some, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling ensures that a payment system won’t be implanted. As a result, the NCAA’s controversial system of “amateurism” largely remains in place.
The Ninth threw out the $5000 and ruled:
quote:
On September 30, 2015, the Ninth Circuit decided that the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) amateurism rules for student-athletes are pro-competitive and subject to antitrust scrutiny under the Rule of Reason. In O’Bannon v. NCAA, the Court decided to allow members of the NCAA to give scholarships for the full cost of attendance to student-athletes, but not to allow student-athletes to receive cash compensation for their names, images, or likeness (NILs) as student-athletes to maintain the historical amateur preservation of collegiate sports.
O'Bannon NIL was shot down and why they appealed it to SCOTUS who denied accepting the case.
The ruling in ALston specifically states that the NCAA can not place a limit on educational benefits, nothing to do with NIL which are non educational benefits.
Posted on 12/21/22 at 5:47 pm to TideWarrior
There is a difference between decision and remedy.
Decision opens the door for more lawsuits.
Remedy is a recommendation based on the specific case.
Which do you honestly believe carries more weight?
Decision opens the door for more lawsuits.
Remedy is a recommendation based on the specific case.
Which do you honestly believe carries more weight?
Posted on 12/21/22 at 5:49 pm to TideWarrior
And the O'Bannon Decision was intentionally not seen by the Supreme Court because of other litigation coming down the line.
That is why the very first 2 paragraphs of the Alston decision deal with NIL and the Sherman antitrust affirming exactly the original point (Alston forced NIL on college football as a Supreme Court decision)
Like I said. There is a lot of semantics being played.
That is why the very first 2 paragraphs of the Alston decision deal with NIL and the Sherman antitrust affirming exactly the original point (Alston forced NIL on college football as a Supreme Court decision)
Like I said. There is a lot of semantics being played.
Page 5 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News