- 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
NIL Recruiting Question
Posted on 9/13/23 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 9/13/23 at 6:26 pm
D. A postsecondary education institution shall not use an athletic booster to, nor shall an athletic booster, directly or indirectly, create or facilitate compensation opportunities for the use of an intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness as a recruiting inducement or as a means of paying for athletics participation
Is this rule unique to Louisiana? Is there a legal work-around in the recruiting world?
Louisiana NIL Bill
Is this rule unique to Louisiana? Is there a legal work-around in the recruiting world?
Louisiana NIL Bill
2
Posted on 9/14/23 at 7:33 am to heatwave
The key is in bold:
This is no different than the NCAA policy. It’s just saying boosters can’t use NIL as pay-for-play - i.e. they can’t say “if you come play for LSU, we will pay you $X.”
I think we all know that this happens, but it clearly violates the NCAA NIL policy anyway. Eventually someone will get busted for this but the NCAA moves very slowly, and surely these boosters are being educated by LSU on what they can and cannot put into writing.
Anyhow it’s not saying boosters can’t participate in NIL. Just that they can’t use it as a recruiting inducement.
quote:
D. A postsecondary education institution shall not use an athletic booster to, nor shall an athletic booster, directly or indirectly, create or facilitate compensation opportunities for the use of an intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness as a recruiting inducement or as a means of paying for athletics participation
This is no different than the NCAA policy. It’s just saying boosters can’t use NIL as pay-for-play - i.e. they can’t say “if you come play for LSU, we will pay you $X.”
I think we all know that this happens, but it clearly violates the NCAA NIL policy anyway. Eventually someone will get busted for this but the NCAA moves very slowly, and surely these boosters are being educated by LSU on what they can and cannot put into writing.
Anyhow it’s not saying boosters can’t participate in NIL. Just that they can’t use it as a recruiting inducement.
Posted on 9/14/23 at 7:36 am to lostinbr
quote:
Just that they can’t use it as a recruiting inducement.
Instead, they have the athlete show up for an autograph session. This does several things; drives business to boosters locale, stuffs the athlete's pocket, and keeps the payment from being "pay to play".
Posted on 9/14/23 at 7:42 am to FCarole
Correct, but the bigger implication is that the NIL contract/offer can’t be contingent on enrollment, athletics participation, or performance at a specific institution.
I don’t know exactly how this is being handled in reality, though. My guess is that the offers are verbal until the kid gets on campus, then probably limited to a certain duration (year to year for example).
I don’t know exactly how this is being handled in reality, though. My guess is that the offers are verbal until the kid gets on campus, then probably limited to a certain duration (year to year for example).
Posted on 9/14/23 at 7:54 am to lostinbr
The "recruiting enticement" was exactly the part I was asking about. Because the current recruiting cycle seems to appear otherwise. Was curious as to how this was being sidestepped by other programs, but I bet they're just doing it however they want and betting the NCAA wont catch them
Posted on 9/14/23 at 10:24 am to heatwave
Basically it comes down to making sure the NCAA can’t prove that it’s pay-for-play.
It gets dicey with recruits because the NCAA says boosters can’t have any communications with a PSA (prospective student-athlete) or anyone affiliated with the PSA for “a recruiting purpose or to encourage PSA’s enrollment at a particular institution.” As far as I know, that rule already existed but the NCAA has gone out of their way to reiterate it in the NIL era.
I would think it’s fairly easy to structure NIL deals in a way that shields them from being considered recruiting inducements. But the NCAA doesn’t technically have to prove that the NIL deal itself was an inducement. They just that have to show that the booster discussed recruiting. And they went out of their way to expand the definition of “booster” to include anyone involved with an NIL collective.
Does any of this really matter? Your guess is as good as mine. But if they do start busting folks for NIL, I would bet many/most infractions will be related to ancillary violations - impermissible contact, facilitation by staff members, etc. - rather than pay-for-play itself.
Getting back to the original question re: LA state law: yes, many other states have similar (or even more restrictive) provisions in their NIL laws. But it’s a bit of a moot point because the NCAA booster/NIL policies forbid using NIL as a recruiting inducement anyway. The states are extremely unlikely to pursue actions against their own universities; the NCAA is the actual concern.
It gets dicey with recruits because the NCAA says boosters can’t have any communications with a PSA (prospective student-athlete) or anyone affiliated with the PSA for “a recruiting purpose or to encourage PSA’s enrollment at a particular institution.” As far as I know, that rule already existed but the NCAA has gone out of their way to reiterate it in the NIL era.
I would think it’s fairly easy to structure NIL deals in a way that shields them from being considered recruiting inducements. But the NCAA doesn’t technically have to prove that the NIL deal itself was an inducement. They just that have to show that the booster discussed recruiting. And they went out of their way to expand the definition of “booster” to include anyone involved with an NIL collective.
Does any of this really matter? Your guess is as good as mine. But if they do start busting folks for NIL, I would bet many/most infractions will be related to ancillary violations - impermissible contact, facilitation by staff members, etc. - rather than pay-for-play itself.
Getting back to the original question re: LA state law: yes, many other states have similar (or even more restrictive) provisions in their NIL laws. But it’s a bit of a moot point because the NCAA booster/NIL policies forbid using NIL as a recruiting inducement anyway. The states are extremely unlikely to pursue actions against their own universities; the NCAA is the actual concern.
Posted on 9/14/23 at 11:11 am to heatwave
When the schools with the $$$ win the national championship thats when lawsutis will start to fly.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 1:44 pm to lostinbr
quote:
is being handled
I believe they make payments to kids in dispursements over several years. This to keep NCAA happy and to make sure a booster doesn't pay up front and kid transfers.
I also believe there's a reporting component of this that the school has to make back to NCAA. Pretty sure this is just the NCAA collecting data for future punishment.
I wouldn't be surprised at some point if the NCAA tries to cap the market with limitations on what "jobs" can pay out. Pretty sure that'd be a tough one to legislate, but they'll damn sure try.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News