PWO and NIL

[Devo182]

The scotus case was about educational benefits provided by the schools. It dealt with the NCAA being a monopsony. Not really the same as NIL. But regardless there’s no way they’d make a rule restricting NIL to only scholarship players

Between Alston and House, and various congressional committees, it was more than enough to push their hand. It would be naive to suggest otherwise. The universities (read: the NCAA) never wanted any of this. They have been pushed by the feds to move things into another realm.

 

[GAVol]

A few…….and these rules will probably change soon as well….

Maybe so . . . but I'd think it would trigger a Title IX challenge if teams start routinely doing this.

 

[1world1love]

Maybe so . . . but I'd think it would trigger a Title IX challenge if teams start routinely doing this.

How could they remotely tie this to Title IX? This is one of the driving factors for laws prohibiting the schools from getting involved outside of disclosure rules. The schools know how slippery this could get if they inject themselves at all.

 

[1world1love]

The same roster limit is still in effect. It's not like FBS schools can just expand and add 20 more walkons.

I think the implication is that schools could start to get around the scholly limit by having NIL deals in place to cover costs. So although the overall limit is still in place, a school could use NIL to fill the 85-105 slots scholarship quality players instead of walkons, except they wouldn't take up scholly spots. Just a way for more stockpiling.

And for sure, it won't be long before we see a blue-chipper PWO somewhere.

 

[golfballs]

Between Alston and House, and various congressional committees, it was more than enough to push their hand. It would be naive to suggest otherwise. The universities (read: the NCAA) never wanted any of this. They have been pushed by the feds to move things into another realm.

Yeah I’m just saying the ruling was about educational benefits. However it put the NCAA on notice. They know what’s coming down the pipe and NIL is peanuts comparatively. Easy concession for the NCAA to make and no way they limit it. Though it’s too little too late for the NCAA

 

[peaygolf]

Maybe so . . . but I'd think it would trigger a Title IX challenge if teams start routinely doing this.

Women's sports are allowed to do the same.

Also…..it’s not like it’s going to happen tomorrow. Just down the road.

 

[GrayWaterCanine]

I am betting the NCAA is exploring several ways to control the processes legally.

I am thinking they can establish NIL cap numbers, where each school will have a limit but zero restrictions on each player. He will have his choice of schools with room. Similar competitive controls like scholarship limits. Just like NFL salary cap. Schools can have players with a bunch of small deals or a few big ones. I have heard the deals cannot be linked to performance or to playing for particular schools. His image, his likeness, not the school's pantone number. He can be a QB at TAM or Vandy. Hundreds of schools willing to accept a guy under their cap. If he gets a deal during a school year that exceeds the school's limit he can immediately enter the portal.

None of that is possible. The NCAA and the schools have no authority over NIL in any manner. The team's involvement is unofficial, and already frowned upon by the NCAA. The NCAA cannot restrict the student athlete's NIL in any way. Those transactions are between the athlete and the business partner. Officially there is nothing for the NCAA to regulate because the schools are not theoretically involved. The court basically told them that they'd slap them down if they restricted NIL for athletes in any manner. I can't see your scenario even being discussed.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

None of that is possible. The NCAA and the schools have no authority over NIL in any manner. The team's involvement is unofficial, and already frowned upon by the NCAA. The NCAA cannot restrict the student athlete's NIL in any way. Those transactions are between the athlete and the business partner. Officially there is nothing for the NCAA to regulate because the schools are not theoretically involved. The court basically told them that they'd slap them down if they restricted NIL for athletes in any manner. I can't see your scenario even being discussed.

Not read a lot of information not in this forum but what I did read indicated the players have to report their deal to the institution. The NCAA already has to set limits on that cost of attendance money the athlete receives. I will be shocked if the NCAA cannot limit each sport at each school NIL participation amounts. Just like schollies the kids can go to any school that has room I think NIL will follow suit and can do so with zero involvement with the establishment of a single deal. Only need the names and the amounts to regulate. There is now no damage to the players with the one time transfer in place, though they might have to add an exception for immediate transfer ALSO if a new deal takes the school past the limits and he is not allowed to participate but the player still gets his money and the option to keep his schollie till the next cycle. The business partner still gets to flash his face on the adds of their choice. Just one more element to regulate for the NCAA. I would guess that the NCAA might also have to agree to allow a school to keep and use any one player if his deal exceeds the limit and he is the only NIL participant. Even the NFL now has deal limits All doable with no damage to the kids ability to cut his deal.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Not read a lot of information not in this forum but what I did read indicated the players have to report their deal to the institution. The NCAA already has to set limits on that cost of attendance money the athlete receives. I will be shocked if the NCAA cannot limit each sport at each school NIL participation amounts. Just like schollies the kids can go to any school that has room I think NIL will follow suit and can do so with zero involvement with the establishment of a single deal. Only need the names and the amounts to regulate. There is now no damage to the players with the one time transfer in place, though they might have to add an exception for immediate transfer ALSO if a new deal takes the school past the limits and he is not allowed to participate but the player still gets his money and the option to keep his schollie till the next cycle. The business partner still gets to flash his face on the adds of their choice. Just one more element to regulate for the NCAA. I would guess that the NCAA might also have to agree to allow a school to keep and use any one player if his deal exceeds the limit and he is the only NIL participant. Even the NFL now has deal limits All doable with no damage to the kids ability to cut his deal.

I'm not an attorney but I believe the Alston v NCAA decision no longer allows the NCAA to limit "cost of attendance" benefits specifically. The NCAA can no longer keep a school from providing athletes with things needed for school like laptops, etc beyond the old cost of attendance rules.

Those are gone.

The NCAA really has virtually no power to limit NIL legally because the schools aren't involved except to report that the deals aren't connected to the school.

To "cap" the total NIL amount available to all athletes is not going to stand a legal challenge because it AGAIN prevents an athlete from earning money while it doesn't prevent another student from earning whatever. The athletes sue AGAIN that they are being singled out, financially, by the NCAA with regulations simply because they're athletes.

The NCAA cannot prevent Americans from earning money outside of school just because they're athletes. They will not legally prevent an athlete from playing simply because they "earn too much" or their teammates already "earn enough."

Just on the surface, that's an ugly way for America to go.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I'm not an attorney but I believe the Alston v NCAA decision no longer allows the NCAA to limit "cost of attendance" benefits specifically. The NCAA can no longer keep a school from providing athletes with things needed for school like laptops, etc beyond the old cost of attendance rules.

Those are gone.

The NCAA really has virtually no power to limit NIL legally because the schools aren't involved except to report that the deals aren't connected to the school.

To "cap" the total NIL amount available to all athletes is not going to stand a legal challenge because it AGAIN prevents an athlete from earning money while it doesn't prevent another student from earning whatever. The athletes sue AGAIN that they are being singled out, financially, by the NCAA with regulations simply because they're athletes.

The NCAA cannot prevent Americans from earning money outside of school just because they're athletes. They will not legally prevent an athlete from playing simply because they "earn too much" or their teammates already "earn enough."

Just on the surface, that's an ugly way for America to go.

I think the CAP can survive legal challenge because the NCAA will not in any way restrict the size of any deal and where they go as long as the school has CAP space. Just like COUNTERS. Many kids are denied the chance to go to Bama when they run out of counters.

His name and his image and his likeness is what it is whether in Tuscaloosa Tallahassee or Jackson State. The guys in the light blue coats just proved that for the NCAA. Those handing out the money simply have to measure the risk of the deal with no guarantee the player gets to go to or remain at the school of either of their choices. Does not alter any element of NIL nor can they require any school to take a kid even if in their view it alters his value to them. A school taking that position will be at risk for being a partner in the formulation of a deal which is prohibited.

The NCAA simply has to craft a methodology that does not limit the size of any one deal and that should not be a problem. A player with value will not have a problem finding a landing spot. Pretty simple to let a school keep one offender, even if a kid gets a ten-million-dollar deal with a one-million-dollar cap.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I think the CAP can survive legal challenge because the NCAA will not in any way restrict the size of any deal and where they go as long as the school has CAP space. Just like COUNTERS. Many kids are denied the chance to go to Bama when they run out of counters.

His name and his image and his likeness is what it is whether in Tuscaloosa Tallahassee or Jackson State. The guys in the light blue coats just proved that for the NCAA. Those handing out the money simply have to measure the risk of the deal with no guarantee the player gets to go to or remain at the school of either of their choices. Does not alter any element of NIL nor can they require any school to take a kid even if in their view it alters his value to them. A school taking that position will be at risk for being a partner in the formulation of a deal which is prohibited.

The NCAA simply has to craft a methodology that does not limit the size of any one deal and that should not be a problem. A player with value will not have a problem finding a landing spot. Pretty simple to let a school keep one offender, even if a kid gets a ten-million-dollar deal with a one-million-dollar cap.

Negative.

There are X number of athletic scholarships available. The NCAA limits both which schools are NCAA schools and how many athletic scholarships they can offer...... this is X..... a definite number.

If the NCAA "caps" NIL at each school this creates Y, a definite amount of money earnable by all athletes.

You have, for sake of argument, 100 NCAA athletes and the NCAA has 100 schools and caps each school at $1. The NCAA could only allow: $10,000 in total NIL money across the NCAA.

There's NOTHING legal or fair about the NCAA arbitrarily creating a Y amount that is "enough money earned outside athletics" for athletes.

That's BS. You think an organization should be able to tell an American they can't earn more money simply because they play college sports?

Ridiculous. Why?

What does the NCAA do when an athlete is signed to a school, below the cap without an NIL deal, then signs an NIL deal? Can the NCAA dismiss a player because he "makes too much money outside athletics?" Basically, you think the NCAA can control what a player earns after they sign with a school?

 

[BeardedVol]

Negative.

If the NCAA "caps" NIL at each school this creates Y, a definite amount of money earnable by all athletes.

The NCAA cannot "cap NIL", as schools themselves are not involved in NIL deals, those are between athletes and private businesses/organizations.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

The NCAA cannot "cap NIL", as schools themselves are not involved in NIL deals, those are between athletes and private businesses/organizations.

Exactly. This guy is suggesting the NCAA cap the NIL total a school can have.

As though that will not be seen by the courts as capping the amount a player can earn, indirectly.

It's ridiculous.

 

[ArmchairQB]

Some random ideas...

1. Reduce the number of student athletes you can have on roster to 70, since that's already a fairly common number to see used as the limit for a travel squad. If your team doesn't need you for away games, how important a part of the team are you really? 105 is ridiculous and somehow the NFL gets by on 53, with only 46 allowed to suit up for a game.

2. Get rid of redshirts. Instead, you simply get five years of eligibility from the get-go, so you don't stand to lose out on a year if you play in a fifth game. This would incentivize going ahead and playing the students on your roster and getting them experience wherever possible since there's nothing to lose by doing it. It probably also helps at least a bit with parity, since a 23-year-old on his 5th year has a fairly big developmental advantage over an 18-year-old, and the teams everyone wants to keep up with have rosters full of kids who want to go pro early.

3. Set rules up such that students who are on a single-year scholarship can transfer at the end of the year with no limits. Offer multi-year scholarships where you want to "protect" a player and then structure NIL deals so that the payouts are predicated on students honoring their full scholarship deal, and have students sit out a year when they've opted to terminate a multi-year deal early.

4. Right now you could, not real likely but feasibly have zero players on scholarship and just have some "no really, we're not affiliated" entity sign everyone to an NIL deal, and then the NCAA has zero scholarships to yank as a punishment. Instead of looking strictly at scholarships, track the total compensation package, both scholarships and NIL deals a player has in place. If it's over x amount of dollars, you count against the roster cap. If a player doesn't cross that cost threshold, then they can be on the practice squad/scout team, or whatever teams do to keep having more players than you can have on the official team roster.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Negative.

There are X number of athletic scholarships available. The NCAA limits both which schools are NCAA schools and how many athletic scholarships they can offer...... this is X..... a definite number.

If the NCAA "caps" NIL at each school this creates Y, a definite amount of money earnable by all athletes.

You have, for sake of argument, 100 NCAA athletes and the NCAA has 100 schools and caps each school at $1. The NCAA could only allow: $10,000 in total NIL money across the NCAA.

There's NOTHING legal or fair about the NCAA arbitrarily creating a Y amount that is "enough money earned outside athletics" for athletes.

That's BS. You think an organization should be able to tell an American they can't earn more money simply because they play college sports?

Ridiculous. Why?

What does the NCAA do when an athlete is signed to a school, below the cap without an NIL deal, then signs an NIL deal? Can the NCAA dismiss a player because he "makes too much money outside athletics?" Basically, you think the NCAA can control what a player earns after they sign with a school?

No, the NCAA encourages the company to pay the player and requires the school to honor their schollie till they become compliant, or the player takes his NIL value out the portal with him. The school will have to deal with Cap limits just like they deal with Counter limits. Managing cap space just like the pros. Risk/reward will be out there.

Opportunity is going to be team cap number times hundreds of schools. IF and when there are no schools with cap space then the NCAA would have to adjust team max cap. Don't see that happening. There will be directional schools out there with cap space.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

No, the NCAA encourages the company to pay the player and requires the school to honor their schollie till they become compliant, or the player takes his NIL value out the portal with him. The school will have to deal with Cap limits just like they deal with Counter limits. Managing cap space just like the pros. Risk/reward will be out there.

Opportunity is going to be team cap number times hundreds of schools. IF and when there are no schools with cap space then the NCAA would have to adjust team max cap. Don't see that happening. There will be directional schools out there with cap space.

So a player can be told they can't continue their athletic career AND schooling at their chosen school, even as a walk on, because their NIL is too high?

Yeah. That sounds legal. The NCAA was JUST TOLD by the court in Alston v NCAA that they can't limit scholastic benefits but the court will be happy to let the NCAA limit ====non-scholastic, not even involved with school==== funds athletes might obtain.

What kind of world do you envision? Should your employer be limited by some entity from hiring you because you make too much money already? They should hire someone poorer than you?

My God, man, look at your vision here.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Some random ideas...

1. Reduce the number of student athletes you can have on roster to 70, since that's already a fairly common number to see used as the limit for a travel squad. If your team doesn't need you for away games, how important a part of the team are you really? 105 is ridiculous and somehow the NFL gets by on 53, with only 46 allowed to suit up for a game.

2. Get rid of redshirts. Instead, you simply get five years of eligibility from the get-go, so you don't stand to lose out on a year if you play in a fifth game. This would incentivize going ahead and playing the students on your roster and getting them experience wherever possible since there's nothing to lose by doing it. It probably also helps at least a bit with parity, since a 23-year-old on his 5th year has a fairly big developmental advantage over an 18-year-old, and the teams everyone wants to keep up with have rosters full of kids who want to go pro early.

3. Set rules up such that students who are on a single-year scholarship can transfer at the end of the year with no limits. Offer multi-year scholarships where you want to "protect" a player and then structure NIL deals so that the payouts are predicated on students honoring their full scholarship deal, and have students sit out a year when they've opted to terminate a multi-year deal early.

4. Right now you could, not real likely but feasibly have zero players on scholarship and just have some "no really, we're not affiliated" entity sign everyone to an NIL deal, and then the NCAA has zero scholarships to yank as a punishment. Instead of looking strictly at scholarships, track the total compensation package, both scholarships and NIL deals a player has in place. If it's over x amount of dollars, you count against the roster cap. If a player doesn't cross that cost threshold, then they can be on the practice squad/scout team, or whatever teams do to keep having more players than you can have on the official team roster.

You're essentially creating the NFL. The NCAA really, really, really, REALLY doesn't want players to be seen as professionals.

If they are pros, as you make them with "earnings caps," then they unionize and snatch part of the precious TV revenue like pro players.

The NIL is pennies for players. The TV revenue is solid gold.

 

[ArmchairQB]

You're essentially creating the NFL. The NCAA really, really, really, REALLY doesn't want players to be seen as professionals.

If they are pros, as you make them with "earnings caps," then they unionize and snatch part of the precious TV revenue like pro players.

The NIL is pennies for players. The TV revenue is solid gold.

Yeah and the NCAA really doesn't have a leg to stand on. The Supreme Court's takedown in Alston was pretty comprehensive, and I really think the players getting directly paid is pretty inevitable. All this with NIL is just stopgap.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Yeah and the NCAA really doesn't have a leg to stand on. The Supreme Court's takedown in Alston was pretty comprehensive, and I really think the players getting directly paid is pretty inevitable. All this with NIL is just stopgap.

Exactly. NCAA football, at the high levels, is pro sports. There's millions and millions being made and players have been paid under the table forever.

Players are going to court and will win to get their share of the TV revenue.

It really is borderline criminal how little players have been paid while schools and the NCAA in basketball got rich. I've zero sympathy for them.

 

[VolsFan-TX]

Yeah, exactly. The horse has left the barn and any chance the NCAA had to even keep it fenced in has long passed. They will now have to get creative and control what they can to keep it from getting even more out of hand.

I know it won't be popular, but I would even be in favor of limiting HS recruiting classes to 20. This might also help distribute talent across FBS.

To me, the goal is not to aim for parity per se, but if the game is to survive NIL, it is imperative that teams not be able to stockpile all the talent. At current, what we are seeing is that the top handful of teams are essentially just swapping 5 stars. "Hey Ryan. This is Nick on the phone. I'll send a 5 star CB your way if you have a spare 5 star ILB for me."

Why not go the other way and limit the number of portal transfers per season? If you limit the number of high school recruits per school to 20 or even fewer, then you are forcing schools to go to the portal more. I would prefer to see a limit on total roster size throughout the season and a limit on the number of transfers.

 

[VolsFan-TX]

If this continues, it's going to kill FCS and D2.

Those schools need the low 3 stars that FBS schools don't sign. If they start going to FBS schools on "NIL Scholarships," it's really going to water down the lower division programs.

According to rivals.com, 3-star players rank in the top 800-850 per recruiting cycle. With about 130 FBS teams signing players each season, how many 3-star guys currently fall to FCS or D2? I get your point about taking all of the better players, but it may be best to put a hard limit on the total roster sizes and signings per season, including walk-on players. A school can have 85 scholarship players, but may carry well over a 100 total players counting walk-on players.

 

[GrayWaterCanine]

No, the NCAA encourages the company to pay the player and requires the school to honor their schollie till they become compliant, or the player takes his NIL value out the portal with him. The school will have to deal with Cap limits just like they deal with Counter limits. Managing cap space just like the pros. Risk/reward will be out there.

Opportunity is going to be team cap number times hundreds of schools. IF and when there are no schools with cap space then the NCAA would have to adjust team max cap. Don't see that happening. There will be directional schools out there with cap space.

Cannot do that, and comparison is not possible based on anti-trust exemptions.

 

[GrayWaterCanine]

Yeah and the NCAA really doesn't have a leg to stand on. The Supreme Court's takedown in Alston was pretty comprehensive, and I really think the players getting directly paid is pretty inevitable. All this with NIL is just stopgap.

NCAA does not want players labeled employees.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Gripe about the NIL all you want.
I don't like it either, no I don't.
Players as captains at their own ship's helm?
Well, long live capitalism, long live capitalism.
Whether a mercenary boss hired or sent to downsize;
Demoting and laying off employees who were once prized.

Giving ledgers and records a serious and greedy look.
To increase the parent company's pocketbook.
Long live capitalism.
Long live capitalism.
Whether it enriches those you want it to or not.
It will always be what it is and what you got.

Gripe about the NIL all you want.
I don't like it either, no I don't.
Players as captains at their own ship's helm?
Well, long live capitalism, long live capitalism.
Long live capitalism.
Long live capitalism.

-WoodsmanVol-

 

[peaygolf]

According to rivals.com, 3-star players rank in the top 800-850 per recruiting cycle. With about 130 FBS teams signing players each season, how many 3-star guys currently fall to FCS or D2? I get your point about taking all of the better players, but it may be best to put a hard limit on the total roster sizes and signings per season, including walk-on players. A school can have 85 scholarship players, but may carry well over a 100 total players counting walk-on players.

Exactly

If there are unlimited numbers of walk ons with NIL money given to them to cover tuition, then down the road the lower divisions will suffer. Some will still decide to go play FCS or D2, but a lot will for to FBS schools with the prayer of making it. It won’t happen tomorrow……but down the road more loopholes will be found
jmo