Jump to content

NIL Recruiting News Megathread


texifornia

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

I’d expect to see more of this…state is LA going to be spending 7 figures on PSA’s starring LSU players. Wonder if there title 9 shit there m, not that they care… 

Been hanging out with Spider2YBanana? Your typo's are getting a bit worse, maybe he let you have some of his ayahuasca.

All the same, I think you said the state of LA is going to spend 7 figures on LSU's starting players. Interesting that the state government is getting involved, but at it's core I don't really see a problem with it. Besides the fact that the funds were ear marked for an orphanage. Allegedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BornAndRaised said:

Been hanging out with Spider2YBanana? Your typo's are getting a bit worse, maybe he let you have some of his ayahuasca.

All the same, I think you said the state of LA is going to spend 7 figures on LSU's starting players. Interesting that the state government is getting involved, but at it's core I don't really see a problem with it. Besides the fact that the funds were ear marked for an orphanage. Allegedly.

Yeah, he's been on a heater with typos, missing words, misspelling words, homophone issues, you name it. I had a business meeting with the guy yesterday and he seemed fine. We went to a happy hour afterwards and my theory is that he just plowed right on through and turned it into a bender that hasn't ended. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Yeah, he's been on a heater with typos, missing words, misspelling words, homophone issues, you name it. I had a business meeting with the guy yesterday and he seemed fine. We went to a happy hour afterwards and my theory is that he just plowed right on through and turned it into a bender that hasn't ended. 

I want to meet this guy 

 

no homo

Edited by MontereyMX
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Yeah, he's been on a heater with typos, missing words, misspelling words, homophone issues, you name it. I had a business meeting with the guy yesterday and he seemed fine. We went to a happy hour afterwards and my theory is that he just plowed right on through and turned it into a bender that hasn't ended. 

You should see me at my kids school right now. Some uppity cunt deliberately parked so close to me I can’t get out, because her rich old ass can’t stand walking an extra 20 feet inside. So I winged one of the empty fifths of old grandad from the floor of my car at her fucking head, and told her what I thought of her. Sort of like you and your many encounters with crossing guards. 
 

 

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You should see me at my kids school right now. Some uppity cunt deliberately parked so close to me I can’t get out, because her rich old ass can’t stand walking an extra 20 feet inside. So I winged one of the empty fifths of old grandad from the floor of my car at her fucking head, and told her what I thought of her. Sort of like you and your many encounters with crossing guards. 
 

 

a man is sitting in the driver 's seat of a car holding a bottle .

 

 

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You should see me at my kids school right now. Some uppity cunt deliberately parked so close to me I can’t get out, because her rich old ass can’t stand walking an extra 20 feet inside. So I winged one of the empty fifths of old grandad from the floor of my car at her fucking head, and told her what I thought of her. Sort of like you and your many encounters with crossing guards. 
 

 

Proud Of You Yes GIF

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pavia granted injunction, another year of eligibility.  This necessarily includes a finding that he is likely to prevail on the merits of his argument that the NCAA's eligibility restrictions, as applied to him, are a violation of antitrust laws.

https://www.on3.com/nil/news/vanderbilt-qb-diego-pavia-granted-eligibility-for-2025/

I haven't read the order yet, but this is another nail in the coffin of the NCAA's irrelevance.  NCAA should've settled with him and given him another year.  This is a big one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

I’d expect to see more of this…state of LA going to be spending 7 figures on PSA’s starring LSU players. Wonder if there title 9 shit there, not that they care… 


They should just say that 1) football generates all of the income and 2) women are welcome to play for the football team because, in Louisiana, they don't believe in discriminating on account of gender

Edited by Hornius Emeritus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

You should see me at my kids school right now. Some uppity cunt deliberately parked so close to me I can’t get out, because her rich old ass can’t stand walking an extra 20 feet inside. So I winged one of the empty fifths of old grandad from the floor of my car at her fucking head, and told her what I thought of her. Sort of like you and your many encounters with crossing guards. 
 

 


IMG_1149.thumb.png.af8d61ef5754c3b9599a3c3af9a8ea6f.png
…or maybe I do, hmm…

Edited by Wishbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread might need a name change - NIL news has essentially become fallout from cases the NCAA loses that require a change to their rules and open new challenges to long-time rules. The Pavia ruling (removing JuCo years from consumed eligibility) also suggests two other rules may be challenged successfully:

  1. Draftable players may not hire agents
  2. If a player enters the draft with eligibility, they may not return. 
  3. If a player plays professional sports and returns to college with eligibility, they may not use their eligibility to play.

Full post

Spoiler

image.thumb.png.fee12ba4407a81869a9482da88293c5f.png

 

 

Edited by Ricky's one-hitter
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ricky's one-hitter said:

This thread might need a name change - NIL news has essentially become fallout from cases the NCAA loses that require a change to their rules and open new challenges to long-time rules. The Pavia ruling (removing JuCo years from consumed eligibility) also suggests two other rules may be challenged successfully:

  1. Draftable players may not hire agents
  2. If a player enters the draft with eligibility, they may not return. 
  3. If a player plays professional sports and returns to college with eligibility, they may not use their eligibility to play.

Full post

  Hide contents

image.thumb.png.fee12ba4407a81869a9482da88293c5f.png

 

 

The NCAA should’ve settled the Pavia case before this ruling. It’s not binding precedent on any other court, and it’s only a preliminary ruling, but it’s devastating for the NCAA. The court found that Pavia is likely to prevail on the merits of his claim that the NCAA’s eligibility rules, as applied to his specific situation, violate anti-trust law. 

Although the ruling is necessarily limited in scope, it’s a clear signal that the NCAA’s house of cards is about to fall. IMHO, any challenge to eligibility rules is likely to prevail. 

This was the day after NCAA Pres Baker got roasted on Capitol Hill.  I’m not going to get into that because I don’t want to CR this thread.

What does completely unregulated college sports look like?  We’re about to find out. 
 

Edit: the X account linked by @Ricky's one-hitter above has some excellent analysis of this case and ruling. It’s really a landmark case.  The implications are huge. 
 

For the nerds that want to dive into it, I’ve uploaded the ruling.

Pavia v. NCAA - Memo Granting Plaintiff Motion for Preliminary Injunction (12-18-2024).PDF

Edited by nnm
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ricky's one-hitter said:

This thread might need a name change - NIL news has essentially become fallout from cases the NCAA loses that require a change to their rules and open new challenges to long-time rules. The Pavia ruling (removing JuCo years from consumed eligibility) also suggests two other rules may be challenged successfully:

  1. Draftable players may not hire agents
  2. If a player enters the draft with eligibility, they may not return. 
  3. If a player plays professional sports and returns to college with eligibility, they may not use their eligibility to play.

Full post

  Reveal hidden contents

image.thumb.png.fee12ba4407a81869a9482da88293c5f.png

 

 

There’s a policy process term for this: policy bubble, when suppressed change in a policy area finally occurs and over-corrects so that the solution to a problem becomes a problem itself. 

It’s part of a larger policy process theory called punctuated equilibrium theory, which is a way of explaining why most governance systems change very slowly with occasional periods of large, explosive changes (i.e., why you don’t often see moderate, reasonable change in government). PET looks at agenda-setting and information processing to show how the desires and values of the general population get distorted in the policy-making process. 

In the case of CFB, the NCAA was a policy monopoly. They had complete control over the rules of collegiate athletics. Anybody that wanted to create change had to do it through their system. They used that power to dampen such efforts. Grievances with the system slowly accumulated as the difference between the NCAA’s rules and the wants of players/fans/coaches/etc grew. Eventually people found an alternative way to create change: the courts. The introduction of a new policy venue opened up all of collegiate athletics’ institutional rules to change and attracted tons of new policy actors: TV networks, collectives, agents, private equity, etc. They all have their own agendas that may or may not align with what the original stakeholders wanted. The processes of negative feedback that used to suppress change were replaced by positive feedback that encourage it. We’ve completely flown past the moderate change that was originally desired and find ourselves in a policy bubble. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nnm said:

The NCAA should’ve settled the Pavia case before this ruling. It’s not binding precedent on any other court, and it’s only a preliminary ruling, but it’s devastating for the NCAA. The court found that Pavia is likely to prevail on the merits of his claim that the NCAA’s eligibility rules, as applied to his specific situation, violate anti-trust law. 

Although the ruling is necessarily limited in scope, it’s a clear signal that the NCAA’s house of cards is about to fall. IMHO, any challenge to eligibility rules is likely to prevail. 

This was the day after NCAA Pres Baker got roasted on Capitol Hill.  I’m not going to get into that because I don’t want to CR this thread.

What does completely unregulated college sports look like?  We’re about to find out. 
 

Edit: the X account linked by @Ricky's one-hitter above has some excellent analysis of this case and ruling. It’s really a landmark case.  The implications are huge. 
 

For the nerds that want to dive into it, I’ve uploaded the ruling.

Pavia v. NCAA - Memo Granting Plaintiff Motion for Preliminary Injunction (12-18-2024).PDF 391.54 kB · 0 downloads

Well the B1G and SEC can have their own rules just like the NFL and AFL and XFL etc all have their own rules. This was always the endgame, NCAA is stupid for everything except organizing a basketball tournament. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

Well the B1G and SEC can have their own rules just like the NFL and AFL and XFL etc all have their own rules. This was always the endgame, NCAA is stupid for everything except organizing a basketball tournament. 

I agree with you that the NCAA has lost almost all of its usefulness.

But legally, B1G and SECX3 eligibility rules aren't likely to fare much better.  Once athletes became commercial actors with NIL, then any attempt to regulate their ability to earn a living is subject to the Sherman Act, and potentially illegal anti-trust activity.  

Unfortunately, only Congress can fix this.  Is there a worse position to be in than that?  Anyone here want Congress regulating CFB?

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nnm said:

I agree with you that the NCAA has lost almost all of its usefulness.

But legally, B1G and SECX3 eligibility rules aren't likely to fare much better.  Once athletes became commercial actors with NIL, then any attempt to regulate their ability to earn a living is subject to the Sherman Act, and potentially illegal anti-trust activity.  

Unfortunately, only Congress can fix this.  Is there a worse position to be in than that?  Anyone here want Congress regulating CFB?

when you pay players a salary NIL can be unlimited still, but won't be because their salary caps are what make a difference. The main competition isn't in NIL deals and never has been, it's been in pay for play. The biggest performers get paid more endorsements that's how the entire world works. 

Using NIL synonymously with pay for play is stupid and that stupid will end very soon. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also in a world where pay for play is defined and regulated, it's actually bad news for collectives who focus on legitimate NIL because you then have to justify that it's purely for NIL and not for play etc. Why would you give to TOF to do "endorsement deals" when you can just donate to the school and let the coaches handle it. *spoiler alert* you wouldn't. 

That's not to say some direct big corporate deals for NIL or small stuff like burnt ends wouldn't exist, but the days of paying a player some crazy number based on play/performance and disguising it as some big slush fund NIL catch all are ending very soon. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ricky's one-hitter said:

This thread might need a name change - NIL news has essentially become fallout from cases the NCAA loses that require a change to their rules and open new challenges to long-time rules. The Pavia ruling (removing JuCo years from consumed eligibility) also suggests two other rules may be challenged successfully:

  1. Draftable players may not hire agents
  2. If a player enters the draft with eligibility, they may not return. 
  3. If a player plays professional sports and returns to college with eligibility, they may not use their eligibility to play.

Full post

  Reveal hidden contents

image.thumb.png.fee12ba4407a81869a9482da88293c5f.png

 

 

So Vince can come back for one more year?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nnm said:

The NCAA should’ve settled the Pavia case before this ruling. It’s not binding precedent on any other court, and it’s only a preliminary ruling, but it’s devastating for the NCAA. The court found that Pavia is likely to prevail on the merits of his claim that the NCAA’s eligibility rules, as applied to his specific situation, violate anti-trust law. 

Although the ruling is necessarily limited in scope, it’s a clear signal that the NCAA’s house of cards is about to fall. IMHO, any challenge to eligibility rules is likely to prevail. 

This was the day after NCAA Pres Baker got roasted on Capitol Hill.  I’m not going to get into that because I don’t want to CR this thread.

What does completely unregulated college sports look like?  We’re about to find out. 
 

Edit: the X account linked by @Ricky's one-hitter above has some excellent analysis of this case and ruling. It’s really a landmark case.  The implications are huge. 
 

For the nerds that want to dive into it, I’ve uploaded the ruling.

Pavia v. NCAA - Memo Granting Plaintiff Motion for Preliminary Injunction (12-18-2024).PDF 391.54 kB · 0 downloads

They could have settled the case, but it would not have mattered.  They would just need to settle every time the issue of eligibility restrictions came up.  Maybe it's better to have a rule in place and just grant everyone who challenges them an exception, but it's probably better to just rip the bandaid off.

None of the eligibility restrictions are going to be legal under antitrust laws unless and until they let the players unionize and agree to the restrictions in collective bargaining (or unless they are able to convince Congress to basically except the NCAA from all antistrut laws).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Why would you give to TOF to do "endorsement deals" when you can just donate to the school and let the coaches handle it. *spoiler alert* you wouldn't. 

So just a clarifying question from a moron...

Assume SEC & Big 10 agree between each other to stick to a revenue sharing salary cap and assume it passes legal muster. Outside of corporate entities who can swing their own NIL deals with, wouldn't the collectives still be a useful way for little fish to throw money at players via the charitable causes thing?

Also, would there be reporting differences for the person giving the money (to the school vs. charitable TOF)?

A hesitation I would have giving to the school is that the money might accidentally buy a book for a nerd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same pressures that caused the bag game before and that have fueled NIL-mania will exist, should any salary cap result in compensation that is less than what the "market" would have found through its own equilibrium. Phil Knight is still going to want Oregon to be stacked. What form the extra-cap compensation takes remains to be seen, but money finds a way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Also in a world where pay for play is defined and regulated, it's actually bad news for collectives who focus on legitimate NIL because you then have to justify that it's purely for NIL and not for play etc. Why would you give to TOF to do "endorsement deals" when you can just donate to the school and let the coaches handle it. *spoiler alert* you wouldn't. 

That's not to say some direct big corporate deals for NIL or small stuff like burnt ends wouldn't exist, but the days of paying a player some crazy number based on play/performance and disguising it as some big slush fund NIL catch all are ending very soon. 

I think we're going to need both to operate at a high level and if TOF can operate outside the scope of the university to lure recruits to Texas with deals and cash that is better. Or else bag game comes into play again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

So just a clarifying question from a moron...

Assume SEC & Big 10 agree between each other to stick to a revenue sharing salary cap and assume it passes legal muster. Outside of corporate entities who can swing their own NIL deals with, wouldn't the collectives still be a useful way for little fish to throw money at players via the charitable causes thing?

Also, would there be reporting differences for the person giving the money (to the school vs. charitable TOF)?

A hesitation I would have giving to the school is that the money might accidentally buy a book for a nerd.

No, because collectives don't exist for little fish. They existed at first for a novel concept, then later for big fish to buy and retain rosters and in the future it will be for supplemental deals, until leagues regulate fake ass pay for play NIL (which they will, through CBA and structure etc.)

NIL is not legally capped by any league etc.

If people would stop using them synonymously then it becomes much clearer and much more aligned with other pro sports and leagues. NIL is a part of professional sports earnings, it's a big part of why LeBron is in LA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think we're going to need both to operate at a high level and if TOF can operate outside the scope of the university to lure recruits to Texas with deals and cash that is better. Or else bag game comes into play again.

 

2 minutes ago, Magus Ossis said:

The same pressures that caused the bag game before and that have fueled NIL-mania will exist, should any salary cap result in compensation that is less than what the "market" would have found through its own equilibrium. Phil Knight is still going to want Oregon to be stacked. What form the extra-cap compensation takes remains to be seen, but money finds a way.

Guys there isn't some unlimited amount of money for this shit. Rosters are damn near 10% of the fucking cap of pro teams. Pull your heads out of your asses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The level of money we are talking about here without return is completely unsustainable and stupid. When it was a few million here and there that's one thing when you get to this level there's also a bunch of mouths to feed not uncles, but agents and reps and infrastructure etc. Its not just paying dudes to do car commercials anymore. 

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So if there is salary cap, then we better setup bag game to supplement and not just rely on corporate.

There won't be a bag game in the same way that NFL teams don't tamper with eachother. 

Cheaters will always cheat but it'll be fucking brutal if you get caught and no one wants a fucking cheater. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I'll believe that when I see it....seems like hopeium.

Why would anyone continue with the status quo? It's awesome for us, but it sucks for generally everyone else and the sport in general because of how unpredictable and how few rules there are now. 

We went from a bunch of rules and restrictions to basically open season with no real enforceable rules and no lines of what cheating even is. Now we are getting more rules at a federal level and soon we will get well defined structure from those who, you know, make this a business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Why would anyone continue with the status quo? It's awesome for us, but it sucks for generally everyone else and the sport in general because of how unpredictable and how few rules there are now. 

We went from a bunch of rules and restrictions to basically open season with no real enforceable rules and no lines of what cheating even is. Now we are getting more rules at a federal level and soon we will get well defined structure from those who, you know, make this a business. 

Wes Anderson winning his Oscar for Live Action Short Film : r/oscarrace

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, immamac said:

Did I miss the part where the NCAA or any leagues or states have prosecuted, punished, or otherwise done anything for NIL rules violations? (The IRS doesnt give a fuck, that's different) 

No, you misunderstood that in the decade or two leading up to NIL, there were no rules and restrictions and that it wasn't arleady open season. You make it sounds like we had this wonderful system, and NIL shit all over it, and then more rules will come back it a feasible system. 

There were no rules or restrictions being enforced leading up to NIL, except those a school placed on themselves. The FBI having tapes of LSU robbing a fucking charity hospital out front should have told ya'. So yeah, I disagree with your police work making it sounding like there were prosecutions and punishmets for any rules violations by anyone the fucking 10-15 years before NIL. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...