NCAA in "Deep Discussion" to Implement Revenue Sharing with Athletes

[Dr. Strangelove]

44 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

I’m not holding on to anything except fond memories and the desire to have something significantly different than the NFL, which I really don’t care for, exactly because of the commercialization, money, contracts, egos etc.

 

Look, I know the players were getting hosed on the money side of things and I acknowledge that it was not fair. I just liked CFB much better when the players were actually student athletes and it wasn’t a professional sport. So shoot me….

I do deeply understand this. But I also think these kids, by and large, aren't treated as student athletes. It's been a veneer for a very long time. 

 

Now, I do think part of their compensation will depend on them enrolling into schools and maintaining good standing. If anything, schools can - and should - negotiate enrollment into the school, community work, or whatever else into their side of the CBA. How much they want these kids to be part of the University is up to them to negotiate. 

[Madcows]

On 6/3/2024 at 7:31 PM, pigfarmer said:

 

I mean, the NFL basically is.  Also the NBA (I still think they force the one and done?).

 

 

They can if it's collectively bargained with the union.  So, the NCAA would have to allow players to unionize and create contracts with the union to limit salaries, but then players would still be eligible for NIL deals to increase revenue streams.  I wonder if schools could prevent NIL deals?  Imagine Nike offering Raiola $1M a year to wear their gear at press conference and in public even though UNL is an Adidas school for uniforms.

[Red Five]

11 hours ago, Madcows said:

I wonder if schools could prevent NIL deals?

 

I am pretty sure certain NIL deals are not allowed now (alcohol, smokes, etc).

[Mavric]

 

[Madcows]

7 hours ago, Red Five said:

 

I am pretty sure certain NIL deals are not allowed now (alcohol, smokes, etc).

I get those, but hypothetically speaking, if Nike offered Raiola $1M/year to wear their gear when he's not required to wear Nebraska gear, could they? I'm sure the university would try to stop it, but would they legally be able to?

[Mavric]

2 minutes ago, Madcows said:

I get those, but hypothetically speaking, if Nike offered Raiola $1M/year to wear their gear when he's not required to wear Nebraska gear, could they? I'm sure the university would try to stop it, but would they legally be able to?

 

Just reading the tea leaves, I don't think the courts are going to allow any limitations on anything (except possibly the alcohol/nicotine stuff).

[Notre Dame Joe]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:40 AM, JJ Husker said:

 

It was probably bound to get effed up anyway but, personally, I think the schools and NCAA should’ve held the ground that provided a scholarship and stipend in exchange for being a player. Had players sign a contract that they were not entitled to their NIL and that’s the deal. Other than that nobody is forcing them to be a CFB player. But here we are…

No the schools' greed and stubborness prevented them from striking a new deal.  It is untenable to have the head coach making 5 million, the schools takes 50 million, while they tell the young man to get his head impacted for room and board. 

 

On 6/3/2024 at 12:48 PM, hskrpwr13 said:

 

Correct. The court is essentially stating that if someone wants to pay a particular player a million dollars to play a season of football at a particular school, the NCAA can't tell the player "No". 

 

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that if there is collective bargaining between the NCAA and a Player's org, common-sense rules on NIL, transfer, and etc. could be considered legal from an anti-trust perspective. 

The antitrust act says that the schools cannot act in the restraint of trade.  Meaning the schools cannot tell players that they may not sell their NIL to 3rd parties.  A collective bargaining agreement with an employer and a union gets you out of the antitrust law.  I predict that powers that be will herd everyone into a CBA.

[Mavric]

6 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

No the schools' greed and stubborness prevented them from striking a new deal.  It is untenable to have the head coach making 5 million, the schools takes 50 million, while they tell the young man to get his head impacted for room and board. 

 

Good thing this hasn't been the case for a long time.

[gobiggergoredder]

On 6/6/2024 at 3:49 PM, Mavric said:

 

Just reading the tea leaves, I don't think the courts are going to allow any limitations on anything (except possibly the alcohol/nicotine stuff).

Can’t wait to see 19 year olds doing pharma adds. 

[Notre Dame Joe]

On 6/9/2024 at 11:19 AM, gobiggergoredder said:

Can’t wait to see 19 year olds doing pharma adds. 

for blue pills.  

 

I presume they cannot wear the school shirt in NIL, but can they wear obviously the same color?

[ECisGod]

11 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

I presume they cannot wear the school shirt in NIL, but can they wear obviously the same color?

That's how it usually works unless it is a company that also sponsors the team/league.

 

They'd be able to wear their Husker jersey if they were doing an ad for Adidas or FNBO, but not the local car dealership or Apple.

[Mavric]

 

[Mavric]

 

[Mavric]

 

[Mavric]