On the other hand…..
- Thread starter OG Goat Holder
- Start date
Anyone saying NIL doesn't change has no clue what NIL is currently. Payments from collectives is what NIL is now. Under the new format, NIL will be actual advertising opportunities that have to be registered with and cleared at fair market value. So yes, NIL will absolutely change because currently it is just a school's collective saying "come play here and we pay you $X"
Has this been approved by a court? I’d say you better hope that doesn’t hold, for MSU’s sake. Fair market value ain’t much in MS. That would be an absolute disaster for small market programs.
Everyone remember when Goat was lauding the BCS?
You said NIL will not be limited without the courts doing it. The House settlement, should it ever be approved, will result in a federal court order allowing the NCAA to limit NIL to FMV without running afoul of anti trust issues.
Let's say a big10 team wins this year. Different teams from that conference will have then the last 2.
Um...OK then, cool, way to go. That doesn't at all make me think the big10 is running away with 'it'.
25% of the playoff teams were from the SEC.
Chicken Little freaked out over more real stuff than this.
Um...OK then, cool, way to go. That doesn't at all make me think the big10 is running away with 'it'.
25% of the playoff teams were from the SEC.
Chicken Little freaked out over more real stuff than this.
Define fair market value? Nvidia PE fair? Get real, it’s what someone is willing to pay. LOL $30 million? Duke just signed Tulane‘s QB for $8 million. Ohio State is loaded with mega wealthy alumni who like to watch their team win and $40 million is a realty. Not saying I like it or our 2 SEC Mississippi schools won’t be MAC members one day when left out of a new super conference because our population is what 2.5 million, has no real tv appeal and very little spending power. It is what it is. Haven’t figured out the gambling powers influence on the sport going forward but it’s real.
I hope you’re not talking about me. I mean you’re still a ***** and what not but I’m arguing the opposite.
“Should it ever be approved” would appear to be the key phrase. It will immediately be challenged if it is.
Who is going to challenge it? As the plaintiff class, the student athletes have to approve it before it is final. If the athletes, the schools, the conferences, and the NCAA all agree to a court-approved settlement, then who is left to challenge it?
*My understanding of class actions does not go much beyond reading the occasional settlement postcard that shows up in my mail. I don't actually know what recourse an athlete may have if they are able to opt out of the settlement
That is certainly the big question, but it is a different issue than just claiming there is no legal way to limit NIL.
The draft settlement currently identifies 2 types of NIL third parties: entities associated with the University and entities that are not. The judge did not like the term "booster", so they came up with a complicated definition of "entities associated with the University".
Only the NIL deals with the associated entities are subject to scrutiny, so, presumably, the deals with unassociated entities will help provide a baseline for FMV.
Still, if the starting QB for every Top 25 team is offered $2 mill. To have their face on a single billboard, then who is to say that is not FMV?
As I've said, I think the clearinghouse will be a disaster, and I agree that this is not very encouraging for small market schools.
My only point is the current plan to reign in faux NIL deals will be legally enforceable and should avoid anti trust issues. It definitely has other problems, though.
You are worthy. Legal fees will be astronomical for all involved. Serious question, how does Title 9 play into all of this revenue distribution?
Once the players form a union and collectively bargain the exact rules of NIL with the schools and conferences, the courts will presumably allow what they agree on. That's what will fix college football - unions, contracts, caps, and sharing.
That is a real fly in the ointment: the DOE will not say.
The DOE has said revenue sharing will be subject to Title IX scrutiny, but will not provide any guidance beyond that.
If the revenue sharing is considered financial aid, then Title IX will require equal opportunities for women. If the revenue share is considered payment for services, then they risk the athletes being declared employees. More likely it will be deemed something more like NIL, and they will attempt to claim the revenue is distributed based on how it is generated without regard to sex.
And the students have to vote yes or no on the settlement without knowing how any of this will work.
I think the players who are already making a lot of money should really consider whether this proposed settlement is good for them.
Arizona State played them dead even, the game went to double overtime and ASU outgqined them in yardage by quite a bit (Texas had fifty yards rushing) What are you talking about ? If Texas is significantly better than ASU prove it on the field, they aren’t.
Those teams were about as evenly matched as you can be.
I think the revenue share is capped at $21 Million for every team in the P4. Plus, the Big Ten makes more TV revenue per team than the SEC does.
Be back here in 3 years and let's review the number of Texas players vs ASU players in the NFL (you love Sawyer's NFL cred).
Those teams were not evenly matched. Credit to ASU for making it a great game late.
We were still in it with Texas in the 3rd quarter. Were we evenly matched with them??
Number of players that make it to the nfl is irrelevant.
Sawyer Robertson did pass for 445 yards in Baylor’s bowl game if you are keeping score at home.
Precisely. A professional league with a cap environment if the destination. Only question that would remain is regulating the NIL/advertising payments beyond the cap. There must be a mechanism with teeth to make sure that kids with real advertising power can get paid (they should) while also preventing boosters skirting the salary cap with bogus contracts that are based on pay for play in substance.
It won't be easy but the NFL would be a good benchmark. When the backup RG at Bama is getting a 7 figure NIL offer but the backup RG at the Cowboys isn't sniffing that, you will know something is up. There are smart people that can figure out when a contract isn't based on real value exchanged in both directions.
Kill those and we some stability on the money side. Unfortunately there's a real big caveat. That's just the public money. If it stopped there it's all on the up and up. But as long as there are boosters who get their kicks on paying a 17 year old big money to go to their college of choice, there will be under the table pay for play to skirt salary caps and we are back in the same boat we've always been in - this time with more people and money involved. Cool.
Last edited:
What I mean by that is that all teams will have roughly the same to spend, thus will eliminate some of the outlandishness. Sure there will be NIL, but much less than now.
And more than anything, I don't think it's ALL just money that has propelled Ohio State, Penn State and Notre Dame. They were good programs before, and Ohio State was elite. That still rings true now. The SEC is just down, mainly because Deboar ain't Saban, and Georgia had a slightly down year from normal.
Get unlimited access today.