Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:32 pm to TigerFan244
quote:
Here are some ideas:
1. Any player getting NIL money past a certain amount does not get tax payer funded scholarships. That's BS. Why am I subsidizing your college education when you are making millions?
2. Players getting NIL can be traded mid season - just like in the pros.
3. Teams need to have an NIL "salary cap." Don't know what that number is but there needs to be a cap. For those who say it's anti free market. . .NFL has salary caps to protect the teams and owners. We need NIL caps to protect schools and boosters
4. The ORIGINAL intent of NIL was to allow players to make $$ from their name, image and likeness. Let's stick to it. NIL money can only be paid by entities/companies who are actually using/benefitting from the player's NIL. Not by boosters or collectives who just pony up $$ and pay the student for attending their school.
5. No NIL for freshmen. Or very strict limits for freshmen and incoming recruits. Similar to an NFL rookie contract. . .you get the minimum amount and have to prove yourself first before you can get more.
I'm sure there are some smart legal minds out there. . . what say you?
That is definitely not a free country if you have to make rules!
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:33 pm to Drydock
quote:
None of it works until the students have representation and agree to restrictions. I suspect sooner or later the NFLPU will agree to represent these kids and some sort of negotiation will take place.
Can not form a union until they are legally classified as employees.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:34 pm to TideWarrior
It will happen.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:35 pm to Drydock
quote:
It will happen.
Yes it will and the game we love will no longer be CFB.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:35 pm to TigerFan244
I don’t know about caps on NIl but I would like to see boosters of a university limited in who or how much they can provide. For instance Bryce’s Dr Oepper, Heisman commercials, energy drinks and all the other are fine but I don’t like seeing a Bama booster providing his money. If you’re going to let boosters of the universities provide money there has to be an equitable cap for all schools involved. There are many universities even in the sec that can not pay as much as other sec universities. It definitely provides an unfair advantage.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:37 pm to meansonny
quote:
But they can fire me. And I can quit and go to a competitor. Noncompetes cannot prevent someone from making a living. Courts won't uphold that.
Thats not what I’m saying. I’m saying they should be structured like coaching contracts and if they want to transfer to another school to play football, they have to pay a buyout. If a school wants to cut a player, they also have to pay a buyout/severance.
quote:
The market is going to realize that true freshman are not a great investment
I agree.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:38 pm to labamafan
Recruit owns his Name, Image, and License.
He can market that to Morgan and Morgan Law Firm just like he can DR Pepper.
Are you going to tell the world's largest law firm that they can't hire a player for a billboard because a lawyer is a UGA law grad?
He can market that to Morgan and Morgan Law Firm just like he can DR Pepper.
Are you going to tell the world's largest law firm that they can't hire a player for a billboard because a lawyer is a UGA law grad?
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:40 pm to TigerFan244
Since NIL started with pretty much no limitations there is no regulating it now.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:40 pm to TizzyT4theUofA
quote:
Thats not what I’m saying. I’m saying they should be structured like coaching contracts and if they want to transfer to another school to play football, they have to pay a buyout. If a school wants to cut a player, they also have to pay a buyout/severance.
Lol
First off... buyouts are negotiable. The most attractive contracts for the recruits won't have them.
Second off... schools pay those buyouts all the time. I fail to see what you are accomplishing other than red tape.
Just require a redshirt with undergrad transfers and be done with it.
There is no need for a union or HR department to get involved.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:41 pm to TigerFan244
You going to run into major legal issues if you try to tie anything NIL related to the athlete’s scholarship. I think any rule like that gets slapped down by the courts
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:41 pm to TigerFan244
quote:
NIL was not set up to make schools "bid" on recruits. If an athlete earns a scholarship to a school and performs so well that people, companies, organizations are willing to pay him/her for his NIL - great. The issue is that NIL is very quickly morphing into a bidding system for college athletes. Schools are begging their alumni and boosters for more funds to set up "collectives" - which are not paying athletes for their NIL, they are inducing them to attend their school. Period.
What’s wrong with kids making what they are worth? Like I said, the marker will work itself out. Boosters are not going to want to continue spending tons of money on players without a return on their investments.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:46 pm to meansonny
quote:
First off... buyouts are negotiable. The most attractive contracts for the recruits won't have them.
Second off... schools pay those buyouts all the time. I fail to see what you are accomplishing other than red tape.
I am aware of that but there is a difference in one buy out and 15 to 20. Some athletic departments are already struggling to make money. Boosters are not an endless supplies of money. It will be a compounding effect with paying players, coaches, facilities, other sports, etc.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:46 pm to meansonny
quote:
There is no need for a union or HR department to get involved
I agree.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 6:52 pm to TizzyT4theUofA
If they reinstated the requirement to sit out a full year after transferring, that would go a long way to stabilizing the chaos. NIL and open transfer rules are a bad combination.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 7:03 pm to TigerFan244
The simple fix (which isn't so simple) is to enforce the existing rules.
Right now, NIL deals are not supposed to be dependent on attending a specific university. That's already on the books. But the reality of the situation is they're being used to "buy" players by making them dependent upon attending a certain college when that was never the intent and is in fact not allowed by the rules.
So make all NIL deals to be signed in a period from mid-October up to the day before early signing day. And since they're not allowed to be school dependent... the players get them regardless of where they attend. So you can pay a recruit a million dollars... but he'll get it even if he goes to your rival.
NIL was intended to let players profit off their name, image and likeness... not to be a way to buy players.
Right now, NIL deals are not supposed to be dependent on attending a specific university. That's already on the books. But the reality of the situation is they're being used to "buy" players by making them dependent upon attending a certain college when that was never the intent and is in fact not allowed by the rules.
So make all NIL deals to be signed in a period from mid-October up to the day before early signing day. And since they're not allowed to be school dependent... the players get them regardless of where they attend. So you can pay a recruit a million dollars... but he'll get it even if he goes to your rival.
NIL was intended to let players profit off their name, image and likeness... not to be a way to buy players.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 7:05 pm to TigerFan244
Okay some of your points are pretty crazy,
Yeah, nope. National Football League contracts are just a tad different that student enrollment agreements, which by the way only apply to a single institution.
While your concerns are valid, you're confusing the contractual parties as well as contracts themselves.
As it pertains to your first point, think of if this way. If you went to Vegas next weekend and won $50k at the craps table, should your employer be able to subtract that from their contribution to your health insurance and social security? That would be asinine, because your agreement with your employer has nothing to do with money you might or might not make on the side.
Same difference.
quote:
2. Players getting NIL can be traded mid season - just like in the pros.
Yeah, nope. National Football League contracts are just a tad different that student enrollment agreements, which by the way only apply to a single institution.
While your concerns are valid, you're confusing the contractual parties as well as contracts themselves.
As it pertains to your first point, think of if this way. If you went to Vegas next weekend and won $50k at the craps table, should your employer be able to subtract that from their contribution to your health insurance and social security? That would be asinine, because your agreement with your employer has nothing to do with money you might or might not make on the side.
Same difference.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 7:19 pm to labamafan
quote:
There are many universities even in the sec that can not pay as much as other sec universities. It definitely provides an unfair advantage.
NIL has nothing to do with schools. The supreme court ruling prohibits schools (the NCAA) from punishing an athlete from receiving money for his name image or likeness.
quote:
but I would like to see boosters of a university limited in who or how much they can provide
This is an oversimplification, but basically the NCAA would be in violation of the supreme court ruling if they tried to limit NIL in this manner.
Bottom line, until someone challenges the nuances of the USSC ruling in court, it has effectively cut the balls off the NCAA and its member conferences from interfering with an athletes right to recieve NIL compensation.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 7:28 pm to TizzyT4theUofA
quote:
Some athletic departments are already struggling to make money. Boosters are not an endless supplies of money. It will be a compounding effect with paying players, coaches, facilities, other sports, etc.
Lol
Quit spending money that the athletic departments don't have.
Posted on 12/14/22 at 7:29 pm to TizzyT4theUofA
quote:
quote:
There is no need for a union or HR department to get involved
I agree.
When you have employee contracts with buyouts, you have HR and an opportunities for unionizing.
You haven't thought this through.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News