Pretty good summary of what NIL is operating in,

quote:

---

Laws in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Missouri and a bill in Texas (it awaits the governor’s signature) feature language to permit a school’s non-profit fundraising arm to provide NIL deals, and prohibits the NCAA or any other enforcement arm (i.e., the SEC) from penalizing a school in the state for following the law.

Soon in Texas, Texas A&M donors will earn priority points through the school’s fundraising arm for donations that eventually funnel to athletes.

Meanwhile, on the Florida Gulf Coast, where the SEC’s most powerful officials gather this week in Destin for their annual league meetings, none of the above is permitted. If the University of Florida carried out those actions, it would be in violation of NCAA rule and its own state law — the same can be said for a handful of other SEC schools in Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee.

“What NIL has become is universities going out through their foundations and collectives and raising dollars to give to athletes. They’re just paying them to come play and there is no limit on that,” says Mississippi State president Mark Keenum, the longest-serving president in the league

The collective model is a roundabout way for schools and their boosters to get money into athletes’ hands without handing the cash directly to them. The collective provides organizational oversight, finds NIL endeavors for athletes, creates a system of pay distribution and, most importantly, acts as a legal buffer.

One SEC athletic director describes the situation in blunt terms: “Let’s be honest, we are all money laundering.”

A school having the ability to operate NIL through its fundraising arm is a significant advantage. It affords universities more control and oversight over NIL payments and gives them a staff of veteran fundraisers to mine an established base of high-level donors who, in Texas A&M’s case, will receive priority points for contributions.

At LSU, the Tiger Athletic Foundation, like the 12th Man, is legally separate from the university. Officials in Baton Rouge are seriously exploring the same model as Texas A&M, but like other schools, they are waiting for any action from the governing body of college sports.

Michael Leroy, an Illinois law professor who has published extensive work on labor policy, believes the Texas A&M situation could eventually be used in the NCAA’s court battle in the Johnson case—a fight over whether athletes are employees.

Many experts already believe college athletes meet many of the indicators used to determine employment. For starters, Leroy says, athletes are in a “controlled environment” for “work,” such as playing games and attending practices. Someone also benefits financially from the work, such as coaches, administrators, etc.

“It has all the appearances of an in-house payroll system,” he says. “This reflects how short-sighted schools are. Everybody is trying to out-compete the next guy and they don’t have a strategy for tackling the big picture. In the course of doing this, they harm their long-term interest in protecting the amateurism model.”

Arthur Bryant, an attorney specializing in Title IX violations, believes schools are violating the federal statute that prohibits gender-based discrimination. Male athletes are receiving more NIL cash than female athletes, he contends.

---

quote:

---

I am anxiously awaiting the eruptions in locker rooms where one player get a million and another only get $50k

---

quote:

---

I’m just happy lsu is showing how to do NIL the ethical way

---

quote:

---

At LSU, officials in Baton Rouge are seriously exploring the same model as Texas A&M

---

quote:

---

I believe we've already seen it happen.

Remember that Texas A&M class that essentially started all of this?

Probably due to the scenario you're describing, they went 5–7, and (at least at one point) they lost a total of 24 scholarship players to the transfer portal within two months.

---

quote:

---

I knew some of that was going on

---