American Top Team plans $540,000 NIL commitment to Miami players

quote:

---

Each of the 90 existing Miami scholarship players will be offered a $500 a month contract

---

$500 A MONTH? THIS RUINS FOOTBALL

If I was going to bet money on one school that would push the legal boundaries of these new rules, it would have have been Miami.

Yes Bc it’s definitely going to stop at $500 a month.

Phil Knight or the Walton family could do this with Oregon and Arkansas and Nike/wal mart and pay $20,000 a month if they wanted.

There are going to be cfb equivalents of Man City and PSG and Chelsea, historically mediocre to shitty programs who get a rich booster willing to outspend everyone else for titles. And the arms race will begin.

Schools with a decent foothold in major cities are about to run shite

“Very very few people will make more than a couple thousand dollars off this. A handful”

quote:

---

Phil Knight or the Walton family could do this with Oregon and Arkansan and Nike/wal mart and pay $20,000 a month if they wanted.

---

I’m not sure of the exact rules, but I believe boosters are prohibited from doing this. Where the line is drawn on a booster, a booster’s company, or someone who does business with a booster’s company will be key.

For example, what if Nike can’t pay Oregon players, but Jordan brand can? Or companies that want to do business with Nike paying Oregon players.

What if Nick Saban’s Mercedes dealerships want to sponsor Bama players?

There seems to be a lot of gray area that people will exploit.

people are freaking out and overreacting

these companies are getting more money for the free headlines than their investment in the NIL payments. that will pass once the concept isn't novel. people freaking out over NIL is, ironically, fueling this. the best example so far is that utter bullshite "$2M" contract Master P claims his son got

in a few years you will have a god tier who may make some real money, a slightly larger profitable tier who may make decent money on a secondary market they create (like social media), and then everyone else making nothing (except hopefully a residual from EA for NCAA)

quote:

---

Phil Knight could do this with Oregon

---

This gets brought up pretty often, but it doesn't really make sense for his business. They already advertise for Nike "for free" (I know Nike pays Oregon to wear Nike). They aren't getting more brand awareness by paying Oregon players to rep Nike.

I guess you could argue that he'd do it to create championships, but we'll see if that is worth it for him.

quote:

---

people are freaking out and overreacting

these companies are getting more money for the free headlines than their investment in the NIL payments. that will pass once the concept isn't novel. people freaking out over NIL is, ironically, fueling this. the best example so far is that utter bullshite "$2M" contract Master P claims his son got

in a few years you will have a god tier who may make some real money, a slightly larger profitable tier who may make decent money on a secondary market they create (like social media), and then everyone else making nothing (except hopefully a residual from EA for NCAA)

---

The premise of your entire argument is wrong.

Most of the concern about college football is surrounding using NIL to pay for play...not true NIL value that is organic.

What people don't want is for money to drive recruiting (even more than it already does) and transfers.

While I'm sure some just don't like the idea of college players being paid, I think the majority just don't want to lose the sport itself as a result.

For example, if there were ways to sign up athletes to a NIL deal which tied to them to their school for a # of years that actually would strengthen the sport. If NIL agreements could limit the number of opt-outs that would strengthen the sport. Instead, it's going the other way.