NCAA to Allow Players to be Compensated for their Names, Likenesses, and Images

[PittsburghTiger 6350]

That's great work grabbing all those Tweets. Much appreciated. 

I've spoken before in the Bundesliga thread about my Godson who plays for Borussia Mönchengladbach's U19 squad. He has advanced through the ranks and signed a contract with them going on three years now. He has played most of the season with the U23 because the U19 squad was put to the sideline because of the Plague.

I love college sports, like we all do. I go to football, basketball and soccer games, as well as some wrestling matches. But I can't help but have a deep loathing for the NCAA. They suck. They have always sucked and will continue to suck. I'm just wondering if we wouldn't all be better if the NFL and NBA took a more active role in funding player development, from a young age, as the soccer teams do. I don't like Coach K being paid something around $9,000,000 a year to coach amateurs. I don't like the Bag Man used by so many schools to get players. The shoe issue we just went through with coaches on tape, big schools, and yet nothing happens to them as far as a penalty. 

Then we have kids forced to go to college for one semester, just so they can go to the NBA Draft after playing the one season for Duke, UNC, UCLA, etc etc.

It's all crap. 

If the NBA G-League, or whatever it is called now, took the top 100 high school players and had them playing for money I don't know if that would destroy the game for colleges. I'd still go to games because it is fun, I get to see friends, get back to campus and get out of the house during the shitty Pittsburgh winters.

I don't blame any kid for going pro as soon as he can. I don't begrudge any pro player getting as much money as he can have someone pay him. I don't like multi-million dollar college coaches who can leave any school for another without any penalty and coach right away.

I hate the NCAA and have no idea what will happen with this case. I have a lot of friends/acquaintances who played in the NFL and a few in the NBA. One of these days I shall have to ask some of them what they think. Maybe it is all better for them to get this type of compensation, rather than $100 in the shoe that's waiting for them after a game.

Edited April 1, 2021 by PittsburghTiger

[Beau Vine 55874]

On 3/31/2021 at 10:28 AM, Richard Kimball said:

First of all, nice job on grabbing all the tweets. 

Barrett brings up the thing that's going to be the next round of lawsuits, Title IX. 

There are currently two college sports that actually produce revenue, football and men's basketball. Whatever is decided, it will probably take about a week for there to be Title IX lawsuits over female basketball players getting less money than the men. 

NIL has absolutely dick to do with Title IX as long as the universities aren't involved.  

[Beau Vine 55874]

On 3/31/2021 at 11:23 AM, Richard Kimball said:

There's only so many schools with boosters that care enough and have deep enough pockets to pay players. If it turns into a bidding war, even some traditionally solid schools could have trouble keeping up.

For the fucking love of Pete, I don't understand why so many people can't seem to get it through their heads that absolutely none of this is about the schools paying the players.

[Richard Kimball 1523]

55 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

For the fucking love of Pete, I don't understand why so many people can't seem to get it through their heads that absolutely none of this is about the schools paying the players.

I didn't say anything about the schools paying the players. I said BOOSTERS. The example I used was Phil Knight offering endorsement deals to players who commit to Oregon. 

[JMFP 1126]

2 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

For the fucking love of Pete, I don't understand why so many people can't seem to get it through their heads that absolutely none of this is about the schools paying the players.

 

Uh, I thought the Alston case was all about what the schools can pay players? I mean when I read articles about it that's what they say. Maybe that's where people get the idea?

 

 

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/31172473/supreme-court-questions-validity-amateurism-ncaa-business-model

 

Quote

A federal district court judge decided in her ruling in the Alston case in 2020 that the limits NCAA member schools mutually agree to place on what each school can provide to its athletes in compensation are illegal. The judge's ruling opens the door for athletes to receive unlimited benefits as long as they are related in some way to education.

 

 

 

[notre dame joe 205]

On 4/1/2021 at 10:32 AM, n64ra said:

Justice Clarence Thomas: “It strikes me as odd that coaches’ salaries have ballooned and they are in the amateur ranks, as are the players.”

 

What college coaches are considered amateur ?

[Scooter Monzingo 821]

I believe it will eventually fall on whether or not the powers that be determine if the athletes are “employees”. If they fall under labor law (like wage and hour) the universities would have a mess on their hands. Earning money from outside sources would be a lot easier for the universities then having a payroll.

[notre dame joe 205]

8 hours ago, Scooter Monzingo said:

I believe it will eventually fall on whether or not the powers that be determine if the athletes are “employees”. If they fall under labor law (like wage and hour) the universities would have a mess on their hands. Earning money from outside sources would be a lot easier for the universities then having a payroll.

The Justices kept referring to the athletes as "the workers."

[Machinator 32103]

 

[Machinator 32103]

 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

ugh, awful

[Bevo14 8468]

10 hours ago, Machinator said:

 

[Machinator 32103]

 

[MillerEP 30907]

Nice, can't wait to see some long snapper or third stringer who never expected to be big enough for anyone to actually follow them to get caught on camera on the sidelines with @dongmaster3000 or whatever.

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

so in the locker room at halftime, we'll have to have breakouts for offensive position groups, defensive position groups, and social media influencers

[n64ra 1150]

50 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Nice, can't wait to see some long snapper or third stringer who never expected to be big enough for anyone to actually follow them to get caught on camera on the sidelines with @dongmaster3000 or whatever.

That'd be cool if my twitter handle was on TV!

[Jkwellborn 7044]

 

I thought that was photoshopped at first.

[Beau Vine 55874]

4 hours ago, MillerEP said:

Nice, can't wait to see some long snapper or third stringer who never expected to be big enough for anyone to actually follow them to get caught on camera on the sidelines with @dongmaster3000 or whatever.

@besthugecocks

[clapclapclap 9000]

On 4/10/2021 at 11:58 AM, Machinator said:

 

Looks like they'll have 5 versions this fall:  @Louisville, @Navy, @Cincinnati, @Temple, @SMU.

[Machinator 32103]

 

[markstanco 12804]

I didn't say anything about the schools paying the players. I said BOOSTERS. The example I used was Phil Knight offering endorsement deals to players who commit to Oregon. 

This is what I've wondered about as well.

What is to stop Phil knight or coaches from telling recruits they will run a full page ad of the recruiting class in SI or whatever and they will get 50k from the photoshoot? Or 5k or whatever their value is worth?

Certainly there are some checks and balances on this, but I really doubt it being the ncaa

[Richard Kimball 1523]

12 hours ago, markstanco said:

This is what I've wondered about as well.

What is to stop Phil knight or coaches from telling recruits they will run a full page ad of the recruiting class in SI or whatever and they will get 50k from the photoshoot? Or 5k or whatever their value is worth?

Certainly there are some checks and balances on this, but I really doubt it being the ncaa

I don't think the NCAA has the power to control this, and they're scared to touch it.

There was never any law that prohibited college players from making money. It was always the NCAA rules that prohibited athletes from profiting off their college careers. These new laws being passed aren't aimed as much at making paying players legal as they are letting the NCAA know who's really the boss.

Schools will not want to limit the practice, because it will put them at a competitive disadvantage. 

We're heading for an arms race. 

[Jhawk 1075]

On 4/22/2021 at 10:14 PM, markstanco said:

This is what I've wondered about as well.

What is to stop Phil knight or coaches from telling recruits they will run a full page ad of the recruiting class in SI or whatever and they will get 50k from the photoshoot? Or 5k or whatever their value is worth?

Certainly there are some checks and balances on this, but I really doubt it being the ncaa

Nothing at first, but the free market will end it. Just like one and done in basketball. Players declared at an alarming rate in the first couple of years then a ton of them were left without a chair when the music stopped. Now translate that to businesses paying players. If you spend 5k on a kid and then your kid gets recruited over or never plays you’re not going to be as quick to trust the coach when he says “we need your money to get this guy.”  Further, you aren’t going to run a business into the ground to support a football program. There will be massive spending early on but the market will stabilize and only 25% of the roster will get paid at the end of the day. Couple that with the transfer rule and business will not be wanting to dump money on kids for them to just leave. Finally, many of the businesses who are willing to pay players also have owners who independently donate to the program already. Do you think they’ll double their donations via private and business or scale back their donations and only give through the most tax advantageous manner?  
 

I think NIL will be wild at first but I think it’ll end up calming down once all of the consequences are shown. Ford motors isn’t going to start paying KU players because the CEO was an alumni. 

Edited April 25, 2021 by Jhawk

[Machinator 32103]

 

[Richard Kimball 1523]

On 4/25/2021 at 11:39 AM, Jhawk said:

Nothing at first, but the free market will end it. Just like one and done in basketball. Players declared at an alarming rate in the first couple of years then a ton of them were left without a chair when the music stopped. Now translate that to businesses paying players. If you spend 5k on a kid and then your kid gets recruited over or never plays you’re not going to be as quick to trust the coach when he says “we need your money to get this guy.”  Further, you aren’t going to run a business into the ground to support a football program. There will be massive spending early on but the market will stabilize and only 25% of the roster will get paid at the end of the day. Couple that with the transfer rule and business will not be wanting to dump money on kids for them to just leave. Finally, many of the businesses who are willing to pay players also have owners who independently donate to the program already. Do you think they’ll double their donations via private and business or scale back their donations and only give through the most tax advantageous manner?  
 

I think NIL will be wild at first but I think it’ll end up calming down once all of the consequences are shown. Ford motors isn’t going to start paying KU players because the CEO was an alumni. 

Hmmm... that also brings up the question of if someone could or would make a player sign a "no transfer" clause when they take the money. 

Can they add incentive clauses and outs, like if the player doesn't start so many games, they lose their endorsement deal? 

The current system has been in place for years, and the one thing we know for sure is that things will change, but we have no clue what the ramifications of those changes will be. I do think you're probably right that there will be a "gold rush" and then a lot of companies falling by the wayside. 

[Jhawk 1075]

Yep. I really believe universities will end up suffering at the end of the day. If the AD calls me and says “can you donate 100k to the university for the stadium renovation?” My first response would be “well the coach asked me out to dinner last night and I committed to paying QBX $100k a year to appear in all of my HEB commercials. So I’m already tapped on my $100k donation for the year.” It’ll hurt the university coffers, especially schools like Bama where they don’t need to pay the players (hahaha yeah right) to get better than they are. But a school like Kansas could see great returns if they have a couple of boosters pay a ton of great players and we start winning and increase our donor base by 25k people. Will be interesting for sure. 

[Beau Vine 55874]

5 hours ago, Jhawk said:

Yep. I really believe universities will end up suffering at the end of the day. If the AD calls me and says “can you donate 100k to the university for the stadium renovation?” My first response would be “well the coach asked me out to dinner last night and I committed to paying QBX $100k a year to appear in all of my HEB commercials. So I’m already tapped on my $100k donation for the year.” It’ll hurt the university coffers, especially schools like Bama where they don’t need to pay the players (hahaha yeah right) to get better than they are. But a school like Kansas could see great returns if they have a couple of boosters pay a ton of great players and we start winning and increase our donor base by 25k people. Will be interesting for sure. 

It has worked for Kansas basketball for years, so I don't understand what you're worried about.

[Beau Vine 55874]

 

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

 

Interesting year choice given the tv contracts

[ButtFumble 5287]

I am wondering how this is going to go over in the locker room with some of these players getting paid while others are not

especially if one getting paid looks to be loafing or giving half assed effort especially late in the season to "save it for the league"

we are not exactly talking about a group of angels here with some of these guys.....a former UH player (kicked off the team) just killed two of his high school teammates on "main street" in the middle or Mart, Texas last week.....we can probably all take a guess what that was over, but the reality is it was over MONEY or something that could be sold for money

some of these fuckers are going to be walking around with some big targets on their back on and off the field and some of them if they are a big enough dickhead or a big enough flashy asshole and giving shit effort some of the time might have that target from "their own"

the fucking government needs to go after the NFL and NBA to take 18yos or have a real developmental league

also the best thing the NCAA could do is get some fucking ACADEMICS back in college sports, but they are too stupid to do so

1. make players have a specific GPA and SAT/ACT to step on the field as a freshman

2. make every player have a core set of classes in high school with a specific GPA in those classes to step on the field as a freshman

3. if the above does not work then have it where freshman do not step on the field they automatically redshirt and you can give 6 years to play 4 with another redshirt for injuries

4. make the players have a specific number of hours they have to complete each semester with a min grade of a C that either count towards a degree plan or that are classes for those that fail to meet #1 or #2 out of high school (or for every player if you have rule #3) and they have to work through all or most of those leveling classes before they can step on the field

5. failure to make progress in the required hours for a degree play prior to each season means a player sits......schools cannot dump a player unless they fail out the same way any regular student would

6. all classes taken by players have to have 50% regular students or greater to count towards that progress metric even if the university otherwise lets the class count towards a degree

7. players get the full 5 (or 6 if holding freshman out entirely) years to complete a degree even if they no longer play after 4 years of eligibility is up

 

if the government would force the pro leagues to be opened up and the NCAA would enforce meaningful academics out of high school and through college and possibly no freshman participation that would get a lot of these one and done types and the "pay me" types out of the college game all together

the NCAA needs to stop feeding the NFL and NBA so willingly

as to the "quality" of the college game I actually remembered to watch some of the D1-AA playoffs just last Saturday and the games were still as entertaining as about any other college football to me I do not think a few knuckleheads (especially when you consider how many fail to live up to the hype, leave early, get arrested, drop out ect) not being in the game is really going to lessen the game to me or most fans

in fact as shitty as National Fieldgoal League football is I can barely watch it vs. college football

you also have to wonder if some of these payments for likeness (similar to what was brought up above) will carry over after a player is drafted or could it require them to stay in college of X number of years before they can leave.....if you are a popular local hotel, restaurant, store, brewery, (weed store), and you do not need or give a shit about national exposure because you are a one city place (that college town) do you really care to pay a ton of money to get a player for one year (or more like one season)

as stupid as "pro" women athletes are becoming the reason you do not see them and male Olympic sports players crying about this shit is because they have to place a much higher value on the degree because that is about all that will work for them after college sports is over

if you get the academics back in mens BB and football then you weed out a lot of the other bullshit and you can control the bullshit you have much better

 

I think there is a large risk even with the "endorsement" angle for lawsuits to fly after rapes or killings, robing, and beatings because they can always claim an endorsement is not employment, but you are the one that brought that player to the university and someone will push that envelope.......if universities start paying players themselves (seemingly not what this lawsuit is about yet) then the floodgates are going to open up for sexual harassment lawsuits ect....as an "employee" (or employer) you do not get to pick and choose what parts of employee conduct you are held to just because you are a "student athlete" employee all the more so when other employees are still held to their conduct and terminated for it

[Beau Vine 55874]

9 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

I am wondering how this is going to go over in the locker room with some of these players getting paid while others are not

Exactly what happens now with some of these players getting paid while others are not.

Did you recently fall off a turnip truck or something?

And all of the academic reforms you suggested won't happen because they would cost the NCAA money.  

Edited April 28, 2021 by Beau Vine

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

10 hours ago, Jhawk said:

But a school like Kansas could see great returns if they have a couple of boosters pay a ton of great players and we start winning and increase our donor base by 25k people.

If I’m paying by the ton, I want skill position players. 

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

hopefully they file their taxes correctly!

[ouflak 60]

19 hours ago, Jhawk said:

Yep. I really believe universities will end up suffering at the end of the day. If the AD calls me and says “can you donate 100k to the university for the stadium renovation?” My first response would be “well the coach asked me out to dinner last night and I committed to paying QBX $100k a year to appear in all of my HEB commercials. So I’m already tapped on my $100k donation for the year.” It’ll hurt the university coffers, especially schools like Bama where they don’t need to pay the players (hahaha yeah right) to get better than they are. But a school like Kansas could see great returns if they have a couple of boosters pay a ton of great players and we start winning and increase our donor base by 25k people. Will be interesting for sure. 

The vast majority of university athletic departments are supposedly operating at a loss, yet they can all somehow manage annual 5 and 6 digit yearly raises for their head coaches, assistents, and administrators. It may not be recorded on the books, but the cash is obviously there. I seriously doubt that scenario will ever playout for any school that wants both the money and the success that comes with grabbing/keeping real talent. Sure bigger schools with bigger boosters will do better. But that's already the case.

Edited April 28, 2021 by ouflak

[Jkwellborn 7044]

The vast majority of university athletic departments are supposedly operating at a loss, yet they can all somehow manage annual 5 and 6 digit yearly raises for their head coaches, assistents, and administrators. It may not be recorded on the books, but the cash is obviously there. I seriously doubt that scenario will ever playout for any school that wants both the money and the success that comes with grabbing/keeping real talent. Sure bigger schools with bigger boosters will do better. But that's already the case.

How much of that come directly from the boosters just for the coaches though? Everyone knows shady shit goes down with that.

[Machinator 32103]

 

[Cairn Horn88 8502]

Alabama unveils "The Advantage" program to build players' personal brandsPosted on 5/4/21 at 4:44 pm

 

UA once again leading the game. These new laws certainly won't help build any sense of parity. The rich will get richer.  
 

quote:

---

Alabama Athletics, one of the most recognizable and influential brands in all of sports, has created The Advantage, a comprehensive program that will provide Crimson Tide student-athletes with the education and tools necessary to build and elevate their personal brands.  

In working with both campus partners and external entities, The Advantage, will focus on brand management, maximizing personal social media platforms and financial literacy. 

“We are excited to launch this new program, which even further demonstrates our commitment to fully developing our student-athletes,” Alabama Director of Athletics Greg Byrne said in a release. “We are blessed to have incredible resources on campus with our institution, allowing us to better fit our specific needs and evolve The Advantage, as needed.”

---

LINK 

Yep, nope.....whatever?

[Francisco 2.0 32607]

https://theathletic.com/2566699/2021/05/04/staples-adidas-nike-and-how-mikey-williams-can-get-the-market-value-that-wasnt-available-to-zion-williamson/?source=dailyemail

 

Quote

A filing last week in a South Carolina federal court raises an intriguing question for the new world of college sports that most likely will begin on July 1. How will schools and the NCAA handle athletes who can command endorsement deals while still in high school?

In a case pitting former elite recruit Brian Bowen — who was waived by the Pacers last month — against Adidas, an attorney for Adidas filed a response to a set of questions that included this admission: “Rivers may have transferred $3,000 per month to the Williamson family for an unspecified period of time.”

 

Quote

“Rivers” is Chris Rivers, the former head of the Adidas grassroots basketball program. “The Williamson family” is the family of New Orleans Pelicans star Zion Williamson. As a high-schooler, Williamson was already nationally known because his mind-bending dunks routinely went viral on social media. He committed to Nike-sponsored Duke on Jan. 20, 2018 and played the 2018-19 season in Durham before entering the NBA Draft. After leaving Duke, Williamson signed a deal with Nike. Nike’s Jordan Brand released Williamson’s first signature shoe, the Zion 1, late last month. In April, Williamson also became the fastest player since Michael Jordan to score 2,000 career NBA points.

 

Quote

The admission by Adidas might have been a huge story several years ago. Headlines would have screamed something like “Court docs: Adidas admits to paying Zion’s family” and the case would have been covered as if someone had committed an actual crime. We’d be wondering if the NCAA would retroactively rule Williamson ineligible at Duke — because taking money for being good at sports prior to joining an NCAA team causes a player to forfeit his or her eligibility — and force the Blue Devils to vacate the 29 wins and the ACC tournament they won with him on the court. Theoretically, all of that could still happen if the NCAA were inclined to investigate and it turned out those payments couldn’t be explained away. The rules that governed college sports when Williamson was a recruit are still in effect at the moment.

But now, on the verge of a massive change in those rules, that seems a bit silly. A better question is this: What will the next Zion Williamson be able to do within the new rules?

 

Spoiler

As it stands, college athletes aren’t allowed to take endorsement deals that allow them to cash in on their fame as athletes. High school athletes who do that would forfeit their NCAA eligibility. That is about to change. Alabama, Florida and Mississippi have name, image and likeness laws going into effect on July 1 that would forbid the NCAA from banning athletes to take such deals. Several bills have been submitted in the U.S. House of Representatives and in the U.S. Senate to create a federal law that would supersede a patchwork of state laws set to go into effect between this July and July 2023.

Adidas sponsored the SC Supreme travel team that Williamson played on in high school, and Williamson’s stepfather, Lee Anderson, ran that team. The same legal filing details nine smaller payments to Anderson in specific amounts that probably could be explained to the NCAA as funds directed to the team. The regularity of the $3,000 payment might not be so easy to explain if the NCAA decided to investigate or if Williamson or anyone in his family had any reason to cooperate with an NCAA investigation. (Spoiler alert: They don’t.) But if that figure is accurate and the money did indeed go to Williamson’s family, he was grossly underpaid.

Williamson cracked the 1 million mark in Instagram followers in 2017. (That number has grown to 5.1 million.) In January of that year, rapper Drake posted a photo of himself wearing a custom-made replica of the 16-year-old Williamson’s high school jersey. As a potential endorser for anything, Williamson was quite valuable. As a potential endorser for a company that makes basketball shoes and apparel, Williamson was incredibly valuable.

Blake Lawerence is the CEO of Opendorse, a company that connects pro athletes with social media marketing opportunities. When the NCAA announced in 2019 it was changing its rules to allow college athletes to make such deals, Opendorse began working to create a similar marketplace for college athletes as well as a tool for schools to vet deals to ensure they aren’t considered recruiting inducements or pay-for-play. Lawrence said a person with 1 million Instagram followers can reasonably expect between to be paid from $15,000 to $20,000 for one sponsored post.

Given the number of times Williamson posted images of himself wearing the Adidas logo in high school, he would have made well into the six figures as an endorser with a market-rate deal. He also probably would have had deals with other companies with similar pay rates. So it’s possible he could have closed in on seven figures while still in high school.

Williamson is an extreme case, but other athletes would have had similar opportunities. UConn guard Paige Bueckers had 585,000 Instagram followers when she arrived on campus for her freshman season. (She’s up to 829,000 Instagram followers and 320,000 fans on Tik Tok.) Like Williamson, Bueckers appeared on the cover of Slam magazine as a high-schooler. Gonzaga commit Chet Holmgren, the top-ranked male player in the Class of 2022, has more than 271,000 Instagram followers. In high school, Bueckers could have commanded five-figure payments for sponsored posts. Holmgren could command mid-four-figure payments.

The true test case could be Mikey Williams, a 6-foot-1 Class of 2023 point guard from San Diego who plays for Lake Norman Christian in Huntersville, N.C. Williams has more than 3 million followers on Instagram. Given Williams’ high engagement rate, Lawrence said someone with his follower count could command between $30,000 and $50,000 for a sponsored post. Williams has posted images of himself wearing Adidas, Nike and Jordan Brand. What would it be worth to Adidas or Nike if he only posted images of himself in their gear?

What makes Williams even more intriguing is that he isn’t only considering blue-blood programs. When he posted his top 10 schools last July, alongside Kansas and Memphis and USC were HBCUs Alabama State, Hampton, North Carolina Central, Tennessee State and Texas Southern. If he picked one of those programs, he would bring more attention than any signee in their history.

The shoe/apparel company factor adds an interesting twist to the endorsement decisions, though. Because the various apparel companies pay different athletic departments to wear their products, would they be considered boosters? Various state laws and several of the federal bills forbid the use of endorsement deals as recruiting inducements to attend a school. But would it be inducement to attend a certain school? Is a shoe company a booster for every program with which it does business? Or are the companies not boosters because they work with multiple schools that all compete for recruits? Did Nike care if Williamson ended up at Duke or Kentucky? Would Adidas have cared if he’d played for Kansas, Miami, Texas A&M or NC State as long as he wore three stripes?

Presented that scenario, a compliance official at a Power 5 school replied, “I would think the latter, but let me think on that.” Lawrence said he thought the high-schooler could take the deal without fear of losing eligibility as long as it was at a market rate and was disclosed to the school with which the player ultimately signed. The company couldn’t insert any language in the contract that involved playing for a particular school, and the player would have to show he or she fulfilled the terms of the deal by producing content for the company. Another compliance official at a Power 5 school pointed to the NCAA enforcement staff categorizing Adidas as a booster in the NCAA’s case against Kansas stemming from the same FBI investigation that also spawned the Bowen-Adidas lawsuit* that produced the admission about Williamson. A different compliance official at another Power 5 school agreed, saying that apparel companies fit the definition of a booster under NCAA bylaw 6.4.2. This is the infamous “representative of athletics interest” bylaw that has allowed the NCAA to define a variety of people as boosters through the years.

*Bowen, originally a Louisville signee, was named in the case and was initially denied eligibility by the NCAA because it was found his father took money in exchange for the younger Bowen’s decision to attend Louisville. Bowen tried to play at South Carolina, but he ultimately turned pro rather than wait out an NCAA suspension.

There also is the matter of which high-schoolers can make deals. Mississippi’s NIL law forbids it. The Florida law and most of the federal bills don’t. Most state high school associations have their own rules on the subject. That most likely would affect football players more than athletes whose sports also play on travel circuits and don’t necessarily have to play for their schools to draw recruiting interest. The fact of the matter is that no one knows exactly what the rules will wind up being once the various legislatures and then the schools finish making them. “It’s a great, vast unknown sh—show waiting to happen,” cracked the compliance official who brought up the Kansas case.

It’s also possible a player who has a deal with one company plays for a school that has a deal with another. On the day the Jacksonville Jaguars made him the No. 1 pick in the NFL Draft, Trevor Lawrence announced he had made a deal with Adidas.

If Lawrence had been an Adidas fan “since day one” and been allowed to make endorsement deals in college, would he have signed with Adidas and then played at Nike-sponsored Clemson? It’s possible, if Clemson is where he thought he’d be developed best as a quarterback. The Florida law that goes into effect July 1 has specific language that states an athlete can’t enter into a contract that violates the terms of the program’s contract. But a federal bill reintroduced in the U.S. House last week by Reps. Anthony Gonzalez (R-Ohio) and Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) would offer broader latitude. The NCAA has endorsed the Gonzalez-Cleaver bill — meaning it’s the most restrictive with any chance of passing. If that became the framework for the NCAA’s rules, a player could conceivably rep Nike and play at an Adidas school or vice versa. How would that work? The player would wear the school’s apparel and shoes for practices and games but would be free to advertise for the other company in his or her spare time. This isn’t that different from Lawrence, an Adidas endorser who now must wear a Nike uniform because the NFL has a contract with Nike to provide uniforms. (NFL players can wear their sponsor’s shoes, though.) So in the case of our hypothetical college player, game day might be spent in Nike, but the following day the player might host a Twitch stream draped head-to-toe in Adidas. (Or Lululemon or Chubbies, if that’s how our hypothetical player rolls.)

We still don’t know the answers to how all of this will work, and it’s quite possible the NCAA won’t have new rules in place by the time those state laws take effect. So the rules surrounding situations such as these will fluctuate.

What we do know is that by bringing the black market created by the old NCAA rules into the light, the most valuable players could find out they’re worth quite a bit more over the table than they were under it. Even getting in the door with the next Zion is going to cost a lot more than $3,000 a month.

 

[Machinator 32103]

 

[Machinator 32103]

 

[Machinator 32103]

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

4 minutes ago, Machinator said:

How does this compare to the Texas and Florida laws? Is there similar language? 

[Machinator 32103]

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How does this compare to the Texas and Florida laws? Is there similar language? 

I haven't read the Texas bill (which has only passed the Senate so far), but I don't believe so: https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB1385/id/2379763

I don't believe the Florida law creates any sort of pooling allowance.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10809]

What school is going to tell top prospects... oh yeah we pool a percent of your NIL when other schools tell the top prospects - no way - its 100% your money?

No way schools in on top recruits are going to pool money

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

6 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

What school is going to tell top prospects... oh yeah we pool a percent of your NIL when other schools tell the top prospects - no way - its 100% your money?

No way schools in on top recruits are going to pool money

That pooling policy will be used as a negative in a NIL vs NIL situation vs say a Texas/Georgia recruiting battle.

 

Another thing that will be used in recruiting battles will be taxes/state income taxes vs say a Texas/USC recruiting battle.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5908]

This shit is going to suck isn't it? 

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

5 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

This shit is going to suck isn't it? 

It's going to be the wild west.

 

I'd guess NCAA is going to sue the state that start their NIL this summer/fall to put a hold on it.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10809]

I also thought there was language in it where the schools themselves couldn't be involved in it which seems counter to the branding programs being developed by schools. Also the language that can't be used by boosters for recruiting influence is beyond laughable.

I still think Title IX will be the biggest headache for NIL. Promotion and marketing is currently not level by gender and this makes the NIL not level. How that is going to be rectified (lawyers will be involved) is going to be a big issue?

[BurntOrange&White 41964]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I also thought there was language in it where the schools themselves couldn't be involved in it which seems counter to the branding programs being developed by schools. Also the language that can't be used by boosters for recruiting influence is beyond laughable.

I still think Title IX will be the biggest headache for NIL. Promotion and marketing is currently not level by gender and this makes the NIL not level. How that is going to be rectified (lawyers will be involved) is going to be a big issue?

Not really if ALL athletes have access to the same programs such as "Leverage" for our athletes. A male athlete earning more than a female athlete isn't a title ix issue I don't think.

Edited May 6, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[Burt Macklin 19230]

32 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

What school is going to tell top prospects... oh yeah we pool a percent of your NIL when other schools tell the top prospects - no way - its 100% your money?

No way schools in on top recruits are going to pool money

Yeah, that tweet doesn’t have the full statute, but that portion is written as permissive instead of mandatory. I can’t imagine UGA will require their football players to sign a contract where they have to pool 75% of what they earn from non-official school activities. That’s oils be recruiting suicide.
 

I would expect GA lawmakers will say they wrote this to protect students from being exploited by schools who would try to require 100% pooling, but it seems like BS and probably shouldn’t be in there at all. 

8 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I also thought there was language in it where the schools themselves couldn't be involved in it which seems counter to the branding programs being developed by schools. Also the language that can't be used by boosters for recruiting influence is beyond laughable.

I still think Title IX will be the biggest headache for NIL. Promotion and marketing is currently not level by gender and this makes the NIL not level. How that is going to be rectified (lawyers will be involved) is going to be a big issue?

I also can’t remember exactly what the CA bill sys, but I think it was primarily about prohibiting schools/the NCAA from punishing students for profiting from NLI. This bill seems to contemplate official school activities that provide NLI benefits, which is not currently allowed per the NCAA and I’m not sure if the CA bill addresses that scenario.
 

I would expect that school-sponsored activities which generate NLI money would end up falling under Title 9.  I’d have to look into it more, but I think it’s likely the 75% cap from the GA bill would be superseded by Title 9 and any NLI profits from official school activities would be subject to Title 9 requirements.