- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
https://www.espn.com/college-sports...caa-group-oks-conditional-player-endorsements
Not a matter of if. Just a matter of when.
Not a matter of if. Just a matter of when.
NCAA voting on NIL rights in January
- Thread starter Mr Janny
- Start date
".... provided that the schools they attend are not involved in any of the payments...."
Oh yeah, suuure....
I admit, I'm cynical
Oh yeah, suuure....
I admit, I'm cynical
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
Nobody should be expecting this to be without its issues. But there's no going back anymore.".... provided that the schools they attend are not involved in any of the payments...."
Oh yeah, suuure....
I admit, I'm cynical
".... provided that the schools they attend are not involved in any of the payments...."
Oh yeah, suuure....
I admit, I'm cynical
Says boosters can though, but there will be 'guardrails' which will be translated into "do whatever the **** you want."
At first glance it’s bad for ISU.
But so was “paying” the players via spending millions on the facility arms race and under the table.
If it makes more explicit the value of being a star, it may also help. If there becomes some sort of cap, we’ll be okay. Come to ISU and become a brand, or go to KU and wear their’s.
The booster part is what really sucks. You’ve got SEC programs that have booster arms able to raise millions for this every year imo.
But so was “paying” the players via spending millions on the facility arms race and under the table.
If it makes more explicit the value of being a star, it may also help. If there becomes some sort of cap, we’ll be okay. Come to ISU and become a brand, or go to KU and wear their’s.
The booster part is what really sucks. You’ve got SEC programs that have booster arms able to raise millions for this every year imo.
Last edited:
Hopefully in the final NIL guidelines, approved NIL deals will be required to have no booster affiliation. Guidelines will also need to have Fair Market Value restrictions for each approved deal where an athlete can't get $500K for one hour long autograph session.
If it were any other entity I’d think those would be certain. Even billionaire owners realize this type of greater good model is best. The conferences with pooled TV rights and equal revenue sharing did as well, and are the strongest because of it. Yet, the NCAA isn’t capable of keeping things inline
TitleIX lawsuits are going to be flying. This will be done for every men’s football and basketball team, and a few other choice programs depending on what the school emphasizes(wrestling for PSU and Iowa is likely). There won’t be many women’s teams getting this treatment though, so it will start en masse.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
Maybe I don't understand. All athletes, men and women, could profit from their NIL and the schools can't be involved in the money. I guess I don't see how TitleIX would have any say in that. What's the scenario that you're envisioning?
Yeah, I don't see how Title IX comes into play here, just because it is a market value thing and schools aren't the ones paying. Now, if they got into schools paying players, and the women's athletes weren't getting the same as FB/MBB, then I could see lawsuits. My bigger concern here is opening a Pandora's Box with boosters. Who's to stop the local car dealership from giving a kid $50k? Or a coach from promising recruits $100k in endorsements to sign? You know the SEC will do it. It just gives schools with huge rabid fanbases another way to get around the rules. The NCAA can hardly govern/punish now...how are they going to when they open this door?
What CFB needs is a commissioner. Someone with a staff that has full subpoena power and ability to punish. And every school needs to agree to the rules that they put forth. Paying a governing group like that would be a drop in the bucket for most schools and it would clean up the overall product.
I think it evens the playing field more than anything... or brings the playing field closer to even. This gives ISU a legitimate avenue to offer athletes money. Could we offer as much as the blue bloods? No. But we couldn't before either. But now we can legitimately offer more than those below us, and have one less thing that separates us from the big boys. Maybe not as much money as the blue bloods, but maybe enough to remove one more barrier from a blue chip or two coming to ISU. The top teams are already getting almost all the best players, so how could this make things any worse?
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
I have no doubt that a strong governing body with subpoena rights would be better able to police things, but that's something that all of the member schools would have to agree to, and I just don't see that happening. The fact of the matter is that many schools don't want it cleaned up, not really.
Maybe I'm naive, but why is this a problem?
Can you imagine how much Niang could have made at ISU? His kind of outgoing personality and stuff could have netted him 50k from some car dealerships and he would have probably been worth it.
The real thing will be the shoe companies. What if Zion can sign his Nike deal as soon as he finishes his high school season for 10 million? That'd be wild.
I don't have a problem with guys getting some extra money. My issue is with using it to recruit. If it destroys what little competitive balance we have left, that's not good for the sport. The problem is, no one is looking out for the greater interest of the sport. It's schools and conferences looking out for themselves.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
Here's the thing, extra benefits are already being used to recruit players. That's been happening for a long, long time. See SMU. Not allowing players to profit from their NIL rights doesn't prevent that from happening.
As far as competitive balance goes, big time college sports is anything but competitively balanced. Look at recruiting rankings. Look at teams in the playoff discussion every year. Look at the teams vying for #1 seeds in the NCAA tournament every year. It's basically the same group every year with just enough token anomalies to maintain plausible deniability by the NCAA.
It would be different if college sports was this model of purity, balance, amateurism, and innocence. But it's not. And it really hasn't ever been, at least in my lifetime.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 43,020
- 34,535
- 113
That doesn't seem too far from where we already are.
I mean, there are 130 FBS schools and it's national news when Alabama DOESN'T make the playoff.
