How to Regulate NIL

I'm no legal, scholar BUT I've been around a few lawsuits and NDAs in my time on this planet, hence a rough idea of how the law works via contracts and agreements. The SCOTUS has ruled out any caps so those ideas using them are non starters. Again you cannot have the institutions and coaching staffs earning with no caps whatsoever and then limiting what the product on the field earns which plays out as a form of slavery. Let me assist, ANY agreement an individual player signs is THE cap. It's what both sides have agreed is fair market value. I think what needs to occur is someone like an agent begins to function like Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes agents did for them for years. Recognizing if they want to operate at the peak and win they have to have a team around them. Even though they get mega bucks, they do not take so much the team around them can not gain the best players with money as well. Smart players and agents should and will find a way to share some of the mega $s of NIL money to entice other players to be with them to win. Some players will not do it, keep all the money to themselves not have a high performing team around them that performs at the peak year in and year out. Could NIL payees require and manage a fund for the mega buck receiving players? Sure players can contract and agree to almost anything with their NIL payee orgs. To my mind the NIL orgs and player contracts have to be separate and aside from the whatever the player agrees to with the educational institution where they play.

Could an NIL paying group have provisions the signing mega buck player to get the money where and when as part of their contract? Sure. What group would pay out all the money and have the player quit in practice before the first game of the season for example? None. All sorts of things are possible within the NIL contract agreement. I expect players would sign on to the agreement they feel suits them them best, you know like Nico did.

Portal issues and NIL I view as completely different things. However I can see where perhaps an NIL paying entity has per it's contract no portal transfers are allowed for the player and if they occur the contract has been broken. Again all sorts of possibilities are out there under NIL agreements between two parties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
We're past NIL. The Alston decision laid out clear directions for the next lawsuits to challenge the "student-athlete" model as illegal under Sherman.

You don't get to pick and choose when you apply it. Kavanaugh clearly stated that no other industry could be built on the model the NCAA uses to not compensate players at market value.

Does NIL satisfy that? NO IT DOESN'T. Just because players can earn NIL money DOESN'T mean the NCAA is not responsible to pay market value to the players.

Kavanaugh made it clear that the dang "student athlete" idea is in violation of Antitrust Law.

Then what? You have professional players.
The people that advocate for a way to regulate NIL or to cap it don't understand that the NCAA can't legally do that...absent paid professional college athletes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAVol and Remy
My question is how do you really legally unionize when in 4 years none of the kids that are being forced to abide by it voted on it.

With college being a revolving door, it seems like it would be difficult having so many players lives being controlled by something none of them voted for.
If the players become paid by the schools to play sports, the "student eligibility" rules won't hold up in court. There'll be no "you are out of eligibility" which can be enforced without getting some kind of lawsuit.

Employee status is the end of the road for the college connection.
 
The people that advocate for a way to regulate NIL or to cap it don't understand that the NCAA can't legally do that...absent paid professional college athletes.
If players are sharing in the revenue directly from the school, they will be seen as employees and, legally, as pro players.

All bets are off on unions, collective bargaining, salary caps (NOT NIL, SALARY CAPS,) and and eligibility restrictions.

If you're saying continue with the NIL without restrictions, as it is, until the NCAA "players are employees" lawsuits destroy it....... that's what I selfishly want so college ball continues.

With the portal lawsuits and the NIL rules lawsuits coming at the NCAA fast and hard, all are based on Sherman. The more of them that exist, the bigger chance one gets to the SCOTUS and Kavanaugh made it clear: the student athlete model is in violation of Sherman.

If someone brings that to the SCOTUS, college ball becomes pro ball.

Letting it "rock on" until SCOTUS puts a bullet it in has been my opinion all along but the NCAA insists on poking schools like UT and forcing court cases. Eventually, they'll find out.
 
If the players become paid by the schools to play sports, the "student eligibility" rules won't hold up in court. There'll be no "you are out of eligibility" which can be enforced without getting some kind of lawsuit.

Employee status is the end of the road for the college connection.

"
If the players become paid by the schools to play sport"
It's why the NIL paying orgs are separate and distinct and have no direct ties to the educational institutions at all. I agree it should remain that way. The players have a legally binding contract with the NIL paying groups. The players have a contract or agreement with educational institutions. There is not supposed to be a formal connection between NIL paying groups and educational institutions, nor should there be IMO.
 
"

It's why the NIL paying orgs are separate and distinct and have no direct ties to the educational institutions at all. I agree it should remain that way. The players have a legally binding contract with the NIL paying groups. The players have a contract or agreement with educational institutions. There is not supposed to be a formal connection between NIL paying groups and educational institutions, nor should there be IMO.
I am afraid the UT and VA case seeks to say ANY NIL restrictions by the NCAA are Antitrust violations. Donde Plowman seemed to pretty much say, "the rules prohibiting NIL 'signing first' are not legal" and what that means is UT wants to use Spyre (and UT is by no means the only school) to recruit directly. They apparently did this with Nico.

While they said it was "risky" I'm seriously doubtful there wasn't a strong 'quid pro quo' that Nico would sign at UT after signing with Spyre.

Sure, I want to believe that's not how it went nor how it would go in the future, but we're REALLY edging toward open "pay to play" and everyone sees it. Saban, Harbaugh..... that's what it is.

How long will the court let that ruse go when cases are piling up?

It's broken. How long until the Court kills it?
 
If players are sharing in the revenue directly from the school, they will be seen as employees and, legally, as pro players.

All bets are off on unions, collective bargaining, salary caps (NOT NIL, SALARY CAPS,) and and eligibility restrictions.

If you're saying continue with the NIL without restrictions, as it is, until the NCAA "players are employees" lawsuits destroy it....... that's what I selfishly want so college ball continues.

With the portal lawsuits and the NIL rules lawsuits coming at the NCAA fast and hard, all are based on Sherman. The more of them that exist, the bigger chance one gets to the SCOTUS and Kavanaugh made it clear: the student athlete model is in violation of Sherman.

If someone brings that to the SCOTUS, college ball becomes pro ball.

Letting it "rock on" until SCOTUS puts a bullet it in has been my opinion all along but the NCAA insists on poking schools like UT and forcing court cases. Eventually, they'll find out.
The players are not sharing in revenue from the schools. NIL money doesn't come from the schools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Remy
Didn’t we all cheer when our AG sued the NCAA? And the basis of his argument is that the NCAA is not allowing a person (athlete) to maximize their earnings. Reading these post it sounds like many of you disagree with the AG and agree with the NCAA that there should be restrictions/rules. You can’t have it both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
The players are not sharing in revenue from the schools. NIL money doesn't come from the schools.
I get it. You want to ignore the obvious coziness but that trick will easily be nothing more than a "pay to play" sham.

Can we honestly agree that Spyre essentially works for the coaches, offering NIL to those the coaches select? It's a "pay to play" ruse system.

The courts will likely address the "student athlete" model. They would've addressed it in Alston if that portion of the lawsuit had been appealed. For some reason, it was left out of the appeal. It's just a matter of time.

Whether the court addresses it in one of the other lawsuits, I assume depends on how they're filed and presented. If someone goes after the "student athlete" concept, it's a loser at this point.

We're all losers, actually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
I get it. You want to ignore the obvious coziness but that trick will easily be nothing more than a "pay to play" sham.

Can we honestly agree that Spyre essentially works for the coaches, offering NIL to those the coaches select? It's a "pay to play" ruse system.

The courts will likely address the "student athlete" model. They would've addressed it in Alston if that portion of the lawsuit had been appealed. For some reason, it was left out of the appeal. It's just a matter of time.

Whether the court addresses it in one of the other lawsuits, I assume depends on how they're filed and presented. If someone goes after the "student athlete" concept, it's a loser at this point.

We're all losers, actually.
I agree to no such thing.
 
Fortunately, Tennessee football isn't done.
Neither is the supreme Court ensuring that the NCAA's illegal exploitation of athletes is done...or well on the way.

Hide and watch.
I'm far too large to hide easily and I'll watch until they kill it.

I agree about the exploitation of athletes but the NCAA isn't their employer (and make no mistake about it, Justice Kavanaugh addressed them as employees when he wrote about chefs, lawyers, etc in his Alston opinion,) nor is the collective their primary employer (just as Curry works for the Warriors, primarily, not Allstate.)

The exploitation is the schools not compensating them at market value. They bring value for the schools...... for which the school doesn't compensate them at market value.

That is what will be addressed by the Court.
 
Are the collectives actually profiting from their business with student athletes? Or do they survive largely on the donations from fans who aren’t expecting that money back?

This question isn’t about can they be regulated or anything like that. I’m just wondering if there’s something about the structure and funding that could play a factor in a court decision.

Yes it’s all being done as NIl, but is it a coincidence that Spyre represents UT athletes. The Georgia collective has Georgia players. Ohio St collective has Ohio St players. Ect ect. I just mean these aren’t traditional businesses. They kinda blew up in the past couple of years did they not? Are they successful independent businesses or are they functional because fans donate to them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
I'm far too large to hide easily and I'll watch until they kill it.

I agree about the exploitation of athletes but the NCAA isn't their employer (and make no mistake about it, Justice Kavanaugh addressed them as employees when he wrote about chefs, lawyers, etc in his Alston opinion,) nor is the collective their primary employer (just as Curry works for the Warriors, primarily, not Allstate.)

The exploitation is the schools not compensating them at market value. They bring value for the schools...... for which the school doesn't compensate them at market value.

That is what will be addressed by the Court.
That was pretty lengthy for someone who previously said "we're done".
 
That was pretty lengthy for someone who previously said "we're done".
Well, you're either not bright about how Spyre works or dishonest.

Obviously, Spyre doesn't "willy nilly" make NIL offers but offers the people the coaches recruit, yet you deny they work at the behest of the coaches.

It's pathetic.
 
Well, you're either not bright about how Spyre works or dishonest.

Obviously, Spyre doesn't "willy nilly" make NIL offers but offers the people the coaches recruit, yet you deny they work at the behest of the coaches.

It's pathetic.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

It's a pathetic rules of proof fail. Go ahead, price it!
 
You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

It's a pathetic rules of proof fail. Go ahead, price it!
Dude. I said exactly:

Can we honestly agree that Spyre essentially works for the coaches, offering NIL to those the coaches select?

You don't agree to that. You apparently want to say Spyre works completely independently?

Please.
 
That's dishonest.

The idea of collectives is to offer NIL to UT players and I believe Spyre may have a couple of pro athletes, I'd heard.

Obviously, it's a pure coincidence that Spyre doesn't have NIL for other teams.
That's dishonest.

The idea of collectives is to offer NIL to UT players and I believe Spyre may have a couple of pro athletes, I'd heard.

Obviously, it's a pure coincidence that Spyre doesn't have NIL for other teams.
It's dishonest for you to make claims for which you can't show any factual evidence, let alone proof.
 
Sure. Spyre is completely not connected to the Vol Club either, I assume.

You probably believe players were never played before.

You're just dishonest.
Now you're just throwing out Red Herring and Strawman logical fallacies.

Your ignorance of the rules of logic is as appalling as your ignorance if the rules of proof.

Ignorance in your part doesn't equal dishonesty in anyone else's part. Duh.
 
Now you're just throwing out Red Herring and Strawman logical fallacies.

Your ignorance of the rules of logic is as appalling as your ignorance if the rules of proof.

Ignorance in your part doesn't equal dishonesty in anyone else's part. Duh.
Absolutely. I've no idea what I'm saying.

 

VN Store



Back
Top