NIL Thread

[GMUgemini]

Deleted my last post because maybe I’m overreacting, but I will say I can’t think of a single court decision related to the NCAA over the last 50 years that have made things better rather than more ungovernable.

I will also say the NCAA did bring this on themselves. The universities got too greedy and have kind of torn their own house down.

 

[Patriot8]

It’s interference because now there are no rules placed around collectives or business or individuals from contacting and negotiating with any player outside the boundaries of what coaches can do. So during dead periods when coaches can’t contact players, guess who can? When coaches can’t visit a player or their family, guess who can? When there are limits placed on how many official visits for coaches, guess who also can pay for a player to “unofficially” visit a school or a facility or an office? When coaches have to wait for a player to enter the portal to contact them, guess who doesn’t have to wait? Basically the court says the NCAA cannot create nor enforce any rules as it relates to NIL. It corrupts the process.

It is essentially pay for play, when NIL was not billed as pay for play (in fact the arguments made before NIL came into effect is that players have value outside of their attachment to the universities they play for and that’s all they were looking to capitalize on—and the practical reality is the opposite being true). And I for one don’t think it’s a great idea for people not employed by the university to be negotiating outside of the university structure to basically pay the salaries of these players. I’d much rather the courts just rip the bandaid off, call them employees of the university, and turn them into U23 minor league teams with various different tiers.

Nothing that you’re saying is wrong, but I still can’t figure out if you’re upset that this is all going to start happening now or if you’re upset that it’s legal now. Everything you described has been happening; particularly at bigger schools, even before NIL became a thing. As someone was recently quoted “the only pure thing in college athletics is Vanderbilt, and Vanderbilt sucks.”

 

[GMUgemini]

Nothing that you’re saying is wrong, but I still can’t figure out if you’re upset that this is all going to start happening now or if you’re upset that it’s legal now. Everything you described has been happening; particularly at bigger schools, even before NIL became a thing. As someone was recently quoted “the only pure thing in college athletics is Vanderbilt, and Vanderbilt sucks.”

I think not only that it’s legal but that there are literally no rules to any of it. At least in professional sports there are limits and restrictions on player negotiations and movement. Pretty much any rule that ensures some kind of level playing field is being wiped out by the courts.

I said before that if teams become a collection of mercenaries I’d probably bail on college sports (not that losing me as a donor or a fan will do much damage. I’m not exactly a big time donor or anything), and it certainly looks like that’s what the courts are forcing on us.

 

[jessej]

This new one gets us even closer to free agency.

i thought we were already there
at least at the Power 4 conferences +Big East

free agents with yearly contracts governed by the availability and distribution of NIL funding

 

[bravesfan]

i thought we were already there
at least at the Power 4 conferences +Big East

free agents with yearly contracts governed by the availability and distribution of NIL funding

We are under the table. NCAA was still trying to police it (look at what happened to FSU). They were going after Tennessee next and the AG jumped it.

 

[gmubrian]

I think not only that it’s legal but that there are literally no rules to any of it. At least in professional sports there are limits and restrictions on player negotiations and movement. Pretty much any rule that ensures some kind of level playing field is being wiped out by the courts.

I said before that if teams become a collection of mercenaries I’d probably bail on college sports (not that losing me as a donor or a fan will do much damage. I’m not exactly a big time donor or anything), and it certainly looks like that’s what the courts are forcing on us.

Why should there be restrictions on athlete movement and negotiations. I thought this was all supposed to be for the benefit of the athletes.

Up until now they have been illegally restricted in their movement and ability to capitalize on their value. The courts have righted that wrong. Up until about 4 years ago, athletes were, effectively, indentured servants and had little opportunity to correct a bad fit (say a coach or school lied to them).

People may think kids in the past stayed at schools for four years because they were more loyal. They just had very few options.

It may mean you have trouble memorizing the roster, but, that is no reason to illegally restrict the athletes from doing what is best for them.

 

[GMU79]

Why should there be restrictions on athlete movement and negotiations. I thought this was all supposed to be for the benefit of the athletes.

Up until now they have been illegally restricted in their movement and ability to capitalize on their value. The courts have righted that wrong. Up until about 4 years ago, athletes were, effectively, indentured servants and had little opportunity to correct a bad fit (say a coach or school lied to them).

People may think kids in the past stayed at schools for four years because they were more loyal. They just had very few options.

It may mean you have trouble memorizing the roster, but, that is no reason to illegally restrict the athletes from doing what is best for them.

Honestly, I've had difficulty memorizing the roster (specifically at UNC, my #2 team) for decades. After players started leaving for the NBA after one year.
Now, just root for the uni and coach...Old Roy and Hubert Davis.

 

[Jack Strop]

Why should there be restrictions on athlete movement and negotiations. I thought this was all supposed to be for the benefit of the athletes.

Up until now they have been illegally restricted in their movement and ability to capitalize on their value. The courts have righted that wrong. Up until about 4 years ago, athletes were, effectively, indentured servants and had little opportunity to correct a bad fit (say a coach or school lied to them).

People may think kids in the past stayed at schools for four years because they were more loyal. They just had very few options.

It may mean you have trouble memorizing the roster, but, that is no reason to illegally restrict the athletes from doing what is best for them.

Freedom of movement is not my main issue. Programs simply have to create reasons beyond NIL for players to come into a program and stay. Money is a motivator for some and not so much a motivator for others. Players should be able to earn money through product endorsements, etc. But, the player has to be the entrepreneur leading the charge.

I worry about collectives being unregulated. I have two problems with NIL collectives: 1.) The playing field is, or is likely to become, vastly uneven. And, 2.) Collectives are ripe for corruption. Fix those two issues and NIL becomes more palatable for me.

 

[Patriot8]

Freedom of movement is not my main issue. Programs simply have to create reasons beyond NIL for players to come into a program and stay. Money is a motivator for some and not so much a motivator for others. Players should be able to earn money through product endorsements, etc. But, the player has to be the entrepreneur leading the charge.

I worry about collectives being unregulated. I have two problems with NIL collectives: 1.) The playing field is, or is likely to become, vastly uneven. And, 2.) Collectives are ripe for corruption. Fix those two issues and NIL becomes more palatable for me.

The playing field was already uneven. The rich have stayed rich for the most part.

I actually have a bigger problem with player movement than anything NIL related. I despise the open transfer policy. 1 free transfer is great, anything beyond that I think a player should have to sit out a year with an exception made for very specific circumstances that meet an agreed upon standard. Makes building and maintaining a roster year to year very difficult.

 

[Walter]

Why should there be restrictions on athlete movement and negotiations. I thought this was all supposed to be for the benefit of the athletes.

Up until now they have been illegally restricted in their movement and ability to capitalize on their value. The courts have righted that wrong. Up until about 4 years ago, athletes were, effectively, indentured servants and had little opportunity to correct a bad fit (say a coach or school lied to them).

People may think kids in the past stayed at schools for four years because they were more loyal. They just had very few options.

It may mean you have trouble memorizing the roster, but, that is no reason to illegally restrict the athletes from doing what is best for them.

Two things can be true. As a libertarian, I support the free movement of the athletes. As a basketball fan, I hate it.

As this evolves, I see myself becoming less of a college sports fan.

 

[gmujim92]

Why should there be restrictions on athlete movement and negotiations. I thought this was all supposed to be for the benefit of the athletes.

Up until now they have been illegally restricted in their movement and ability to capitalize on their value. The courts have righted that wrong. Up until about 4 years ago, athletes were, effectively, indentured servants and had little opportunity to correct a bad fit (say a coach or school lied to them).

People may think kids in the past stayed at schools for four years because they were more loyal. They just had very few options.

It may mean you have trouble memorizing the roster, but, that is no reason to illegally restrict the athletes from doing what is best for them.

I generally agree, but even professional athletes — who are necessarily more experienced and accomplished than those in college — don’t have complete freedom of movement.

There has to be some type of collective bargaining so schools can sign and enforce contracts with players without running afoul of the law.

Otherwise this will all become very uninteresting very quickly as our staff assembles a talented roster every year only to watch it picked apart like a dead animal on the side of the road.

 

[Jack Strop]

I generally agree, but even professional athletes — who are necessarily more experienced and accomplished than those in college — don’t have complete freedom of movement.

There has to be some type of collective bargaining so schools can sign and enforce contracts with players without running afoul of the law.

Otherwise this will all become very uninteresting very quickly as our staff assembles a talented roster every year only to watch it picked apart like a dead animal on the side of the road.

I agree.

In "freedom of movement" I failed to detail my preference—which is the previous state: One free transfer ONLY.

I believe their has to be positive AND negative consequences and considerations for all sides of the deal (the player and both teams involved). There's no fairness otherwise. Player, original team, and new team all must gain and lose as equally as possible in the process.

 

[GSII]

Wait until players are deemed employees. Gonna be alot of George Evans in college bball since its against Labor Laws to use age against employment.

 

[GMU79]

Wait until players are deemed employees. Gonna be alot of George Evans in college bball since its against Labor Laws to use age against employment.

UR players have been doing that for years. Golden just changed his name to Grey.

 

[CHRISTOPHER JAMES JOLLAY]

Yeah just wanted to thank all you guys for bring us NIL cause you know, these athletes were starving to death, mostly before. It was terrible. The oppression of free college.

All the while on the other hand arguing how expensive and necessary college is for regular kids while fueling a system that essentially makes it more expensive. Well done.

Who will be my kid's next favorite player for 9 months when Keyshawn leaves the 100k circle for the 200k level next year?

"Oh we just need the NCAA to not suck then everything will be awesome."

f**king naivete of you and your entire f**king stupid generation except Gen X.

 

[CHRISTOPHER JAMES JOLLAY]

Wait until players are deemed employees. Gonna be alot of George Evans in college bball since its against Labor Laws to use age against employment.

This will be a positive in some ways, as I believe Kim English discriminated against me last year by not giving me a fair chance to walk on.

 

[gmubrian]

Two things can be true. As a libertarian, I support the free movement of the athletes. As a basketball fan, I hate it.

As this evolves, I see myself becoming less of a college sports fan.

Agreed, and that was part of my point. Just because it has consequences that we may not like (athletes spending less time on average with a given team, presumably) doesn't mean it would be right to restrict their options for our benefit.

 

[gmubrian]

I worry about collectives being unregulated. I have two problems with NIL collectives: 1.) The playing field is, or is likely to become, vastly uneven. And, 2.) Collectives are ripe for corruption. Fix those two issues and NIL becomes more palatable for me.

Patrio8 already addressed part of this, but, I'll address a different aspect. I urge you to look at the history of regulation. It has almost always benefited those already rich/in power because: 1. They are usually the ones influencing the writing of the regulations. 2. They are the ones that can afford to setup organizations to deal with compliance.

For example, our NIL collective could easily be crushed by any significant regulations that are imposed. It would't be a blip on the radar of the collectives for UNC, Tennessee, Providence etc. It would be a rounding error for those programs.

 

[GMUgemini]

Patrio8 already addressed part of this, but, I'll address a different aspect. I urge you to look at the history of regulation. It has almost always benefited those already rich/in power because: 1. They are usually the ones influencing the writing of the regulations. 2. They are the ones that can afford to setup organizations to deal with compliance.

For example, our NIL collective could easily be crushed by any significant regulations that are imposed. It would't be a blip on the radar of the collectives for UNC, Tennessee, Providence etc. It would be a rounding error for those programs.

So does deciding not to regulate. You will not be able to compete with these collectives for any players in an unregulated market if they want to swoop in and offer 10 times what you can for any of our players or respective players they can easily do that. And now they don’t even have to wait for them to enter the transfer portal to make those offers.

 

[gmubrian]

So does deciding not to regulate. You will not be able to compete with these collectives for any players in an unregulated market if they want to swoop in and offer 10 times what you can for any of our players or respective players they can easily do that. And now they don’t even have to wait for them to enter the transfer portal to make those offers.

We aren't competing with them either way. We never competed with them before NIL, why would be able to now? It is well accepted fact that the big programs were paying players under the table. The only differences now are that it is more public and programs like ours that follow the rules to the nth degree can actually get in on the action as well. All regulating it is going to do is take money out of the pockets of the players and create even further compliance bureaucracy.