NIL, is not supposed to be based on play.

quote:

---

I have to think at some point rules are going to be installed.

---

The NCAA would lose in court on any challenge to limit NIL. And there are already rules that the school can't pay a player to play for their team. But if Gordon McKernan wants to pay a LSU player $50k to appear on a billboard advertising his law firm, the NCAA can't prohibit that. Even if in actuality that $50k is simply to make sure the player plays for LSU.

The problem is not NIL in isolation. It is NIL coupled with the new freedom of transfer rules. The transfer rule has created "free agency" more than anything. Do things cool down a bit after the first wave of players have transferred early and can't do so again without sitting out a year? Maybe to some extent. But if the NCAA is going to give waivers out willy-nilly that won't matter.

College football fans don't want to hear or accept this, but probably the best LEGAL way to bring about more concrete rules and restrictions is to have the determination made that the players are "employees". If/when that occurs, that will allow the players to form a union that can collectively bargain with the NCAA. THEN more firm rules and restrictions can be put in play like in professional sports leagues.

Until then, the only thing the NCAA can do to curb some of this is to revoke the "one free transfer rule".

quote:

---

The NCAA would lose in court on any challenge to limit NIL.

---

quote:

---

And there are already rules that the school can't pay a player to play for their team

---

So you are saying there ARE limits?

quote:

---

The Nc state qb thing was reported to be bullshite

---

UNC, not NC State. Here in North Carolina that’s like using LSU and University of Louisiana (ULALA) interchangeably

Would you get upset if I said Illinois and pronounced the S.

Georgia didn’t take any portal players last year so how can you say Kirby is the dirtiest in the game? I’m not defending Kirby but it least have your facts straight before spewing nonsense.

quote:

---

is not supposed to be based on play.

---

It’s not supposed to be tied to if a player plays or not as in you can’t stipulate the player has to play in X amount of game or for X amount of years or it can’t be tied to future on the field incentives.

It can definitely be based on things the player has done previously on the field.

quote:

---

The NCAA would lose in court on any challenge to limit NIL. And there are already rules that the school can't pay a player to play for their team. But if Gordon McKernan wants to pay a LSU player $50k to appear on a billboard advertising his law firm, the NCAA can't prohibit that. Even if in actuality that $50k is simply to make sure the player plays for LSU.

---

The NCAA or the federal government can crack down on or prohibit collectives in different ways. They are the primary source of pay for play money and kneecapping them would help stabilize the system. That wouldn’t strictly prohibit players from making money through NIL, so it wouldn’t go against the Supreme Court’s ruling.

quote:

---

NIL, is not supposed to be based on play.

---

There's a fine line, technically, on pay-for-play and "paying for enrollment". It is a matter of wording on an agreement (see TAMU) on what qualifies them to get their NIL checks vs. NCAA rules against basing pay on play.

quote:

---

Tampering is a huge issue. At the very least they need to have a third party contact rule. If the kid or his parents contact other schools this could be okay. Uncles and agents need to be tampering violations.

---

The NCAA can only regulate what they have authority to regulate. That would be member schools and students enrolled at those schools. They can't regulate anyone not under that umbrella so using cut-outs, such as an uncle, they really can't do anything about. They can't regulate the general public. Nor do they have a duty to the general public either, conversely, just to make an extra point.

quote:

---

it’s not very hard to impose limits!

---

Yes it is. The moment you put a limitation on what a person can make off of themselves the lawsuits will come out. That is the whole point of how NIL became a thing.

Think of it like a pro sports league. The universities and the league they play in can only control what they pay a player. In pro leagues this is a salary in college athletics it is a scholarship. You are not allowed to limit what a player makes outside of that using their Name, Image, or Likeness also known as endorsements.

And yes I know the way NIL is being used is not the way it is intended to be but you still will not be able to put limitations on it without lawsuits.

But AKSHUALLY ….

You are talking semantics, not in the actual application.

If you limit the process, you limit NIL.

My point is that it is possible to place limits.

Limits exist on NIL and transfers.

I can come up with a dozen scenarios for both that would not be allowed, yet they are supposed to be unrestricted.

Just the concept of a “portal window” or deadlines for immediate eligibility are restrictions on transfers.

Limits on how NIL is negotiated, legit reasons on how it can be earned, or from who, are restrictions.

The NCAA or some other group (conferences, playoff committee, etc) can control all this.

They are choosing not to at this point.