- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Great story about the transfer portal and nil in general
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:02 am to mortis381
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:02 am to mortis381
quote:
A QB who threw for 2700 yds on a G5 team isn't worth $4M/yr.
Depends what for.
Is he bringing them a natty? Of course not. But does it sell more tickets, more food/drinks in the stadium, have more people fly in for the game and create a busier time for restaurants, shops etc.
Some of these deals aren’t about wins and losses on the field. It’s just about getting that money back in some way, shape or form.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:09 am to LSU Patrick
In 2020, that would have been the narrative
BLM!! 


Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:18 am to mortis381
quote:
Artificial bump to get players before revenue sharing goes into effect.
Yep. Thats what the article talked about.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:20 am to BornAndRaised_LA
quote:
This makes it fair. The value of any player is set by the rarity of the value he provides (relative to other available players at that moment) and the number of teams competing for his services.
It’s up to the teams to determine how much they need that skill set and thus set the market.
Yeah, that was more or less my point. None of this is "fair", as I think what constitutes "value" in sports, as opposed to real world value, is absolutely absurd. They're playing a game, and there are guys sitting on the bench making millions. But sports do not operate under normal economic conditions. It's like one giant auction. And that is why I asked the question "who decides fair market value?". A clearinghouse cannot arbitrarily decide what an individual team is willing to spend, no matter how ridiculous I think the spending is, the value is determined by the team that is willing to pay the cost of what they deem necessary.
This is why I never wanted to see something like NIL become a reality. People said it wasn't fair that they weren't being paid, but never considered the fallout. Sometimes what seems fair is not what's best. And there are things much less fair in life that nobody ever talks about. Where are the bleeding hearts, demanding that soldiers and firefighters and cops make more than the little they are paid, to put their lives on the line?
Back to the point, we can't pretend this is amateurism if we continue down this route. College sports will die out, and it will just be semi-pro leagues, and fewer opportunities for high school athletes, as budgets will be tightened, meaning rosters will have to shrink, and many sports will be dropped by universities all around the country. Will all of that have been worth it?
This post was edited on 12/24/24 at 9:26 am
Posted on 12/24/24 at 10:53 am to Metaloctopus
I would imagine getting a cap on the amount of times players can transfer would create an organic cap on the amount of money a player can demand. It would reduce the yearly bidding wars that players can create. 1 transfer into you graduate with exceptions for a coaching change.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:06 am to Chalkywhite84
Everyone is for capitalism when it benefits them and complains when it doesn’t or they think it is outrageous -
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:46 am to Metaloctopus
quote:
I see no legal standing for a clearinghouse to do anything meaningful about this
When revenue sharing hits there will be contracts because the CFB programs are finally recognizing the players as employees.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 12:01 pm to Chalkywhite84
Many programs are scrambling at anything right now to stay competitive. Throwing crazy money on the wall to see if it sticks.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 12:19 pm to Amused Lurker
College game is a joke now. And this 12 team playoff sucks so far. Couple more bad games probably upcoming.
Life without sports is less $ and time with family is certainly more fulfilling.
Life without sports is less $ and time with family is certainly more fulfilling.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 12:29 pm to TigerBlood17
How on earth do you determine fair market value when what is being compared are all individuals with separate skill sets and abilities? How can a Burrow be limited by a lesser talented QB?
The effort to be objective in a totally subjective environment won't hold up in court. It's the wild west forever.
The effort to be objective in a totally subjective environment won't hold up in court. It's the wild west forever.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 1:39 pm to TigerBlood17
quote:
There are reports that each NIL deal (next year) will have to go through a clearing house and will have to be fair market value for true NIL.
If any cap is put on NIL, then schools will just have bagmen dropping in extra cash under the table. Cheaters will rule the recruiting world again.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 3:14 pm to The First Cut
quote:
You missed the Supreme Court part.
The Supreme Court never ruled on NIL.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 6:35 pm to GetmorewithLes
quote:
When revenue sharing hits there will be contracts because the CFB programs are finally recognizing the players as employees
What difference would it make? You can't cap endorsement earnings. Revenue sharing is separate from that. That's the point I'm stressing here.
And I disagree with saying they are "finally recognizing them" as employees. They are only employees if they are being paid. No one owed it to them to recognize them as employees. It was understood that these are amateur sports, where you hone your craft, and you get a scholarship to pay for your tuition. That was always the agreement, until it wasn't, and now here we are with a runaway train of spending, because some people had no sense to look at the big picture.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 6:45 pm to Cleary Rebels
quote:
Everyone is for capitalism when it benefits them and complains when it doesn’t or they think it is outrageous -
The "it's just capitalism" argument always finds it's way into these things. This is not capitalism. Capitalism is a system of rewards for hard work. Handing out millions to kids who haven't played above the high school level is not about "earnings". These kids don't even have a brand to sell yet. Sports economics are just auctions where players get thrown into the middle of a bidding war, and watch their price go up. That's not how real life works for the rest of us.
This post was edited on 12/24/24 at 6:46 pm
Posted on 12/24/24 at 6:53 pm to Metaloctopus
quote:
What difference would it make? You can't cap endorsement earnings. Revenue sharing is separate from that. That's the point I'm stressing here.
The article did not say NIL could not exist. It said it would have to pass muster. There are players who acutally move the needle for the public and have some NIL value. Most dont but right now they are straight up being paid directly from the collectives for pretty much nothing.
Also,once you sign contracts the team can own a significant portion of the NIL that has anything to do with the team brand.
There is just not the demand for commercial NIL of more than maybe 5% of the players.
quote:
And I disagree with saying they are "finally recognizing them" as employees. They are only employees if they are being paid. No one owed it to them to recognize them as employees.
They will be paid a rate by position as I understand the proposals out there and they will be given benefits of health insurance even for a period after they are done with college football.
Posted on 12/25/24 at 6:39 am to LCTFAN
quote:quote:
Artificial bump to get players before revenue sharing goes into effect.
The court system ruled the NCAA could not keep an athlete from making money from his Name-Image-Likeness
Technically the schools are not involved
The rulings that directly address NIL are the ones that they are in the process of settling with the NCAA, as I understand it. The previous rulings that moved the NCAA away from the NIL ban did not directly address that but it was clear from the ruling the court's direction would get us there eventually. Maybe one of our tRant lawyers could clarify this.
quote:
Who is going to coordinate this revenue sharing
There will be a court directed settlement, as I understand it.
quote:
How can the courts say the Athlete has their right to make any amount of money but at the same time have to share their money
The sharing is related to the money made bt the NCAA and their member institutions, not the NIL money made by the athletes.
quote:
The more rules made makes for a very messy mess
The issue is which rules are enforceable now that the courts are part of the equation. The expectation is that part o the settlement will also involve at lest some guidelines from the court as to what NIL rules can be implemented with the framework of what is permissible thus allowing the NCAA to tame the wild west that is the NIL landscape now. From what I read, it appears the courts are also suggesting that the NCAA has no authority or at least cannot legally prohibit the entity providing the NIL money from tying where the athlete plays to the contract.
Help me out tRant lawyers. Let me know how much I got completely wrong on this.
Posted on 12/25/24 at 8:37 am to Lark225
That ship has sailed and no returning to the dock. I do not think anyone can say how this is going to pan out. Amateur status is now in high school. Three years from now I have no idea what the college game is going to be like.
Posted on 12/25/24 at 9:19 am to Metaloctopus
It’s what ever the market will bare for your services or goods. Plenty of people acquire contracts and money based on potential. They are 18 yo and grown. If people are willing to sell their first born to finance it, then it will continue. It’s not what you think the market should be. A pair shoes may be worth $100 to you but someone else $200. The seller can then get $200, even if you think its only worth a $100.
This post was edited on 12/25/24 at 10:04 am
Posted on 12/25/24 at 9:40 am to Metaloctopus
quote:
Capitalism is a system of rewards for hard work
No it isn’t, at all.
quote:
That's not how real life works for the rest of us.
Not relevant.
Popular
Back to top
