- 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: Free Enterprise has entered College athletics
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:48 am to Gravitiger
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:48 am to Gravitiger
quote:
The courts have actually not spoken on a player's right to profit from NIL, other than in dicta in a concurring opinion in the Alston case. State statutes gave them that ability.
I'm no lawyer, but I remember the Supreme Ct ruling that described the ban on compensation as violation of antitrust.
1
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:55 am to dittohead
quote:
This situation is not unique to college athletics. This is the asset bubble we see in real estate, private equity and the price inflation in commodities. Anyone who thinks we’ve seen free enterprise in America the last decade and a half is mistaken.
A true economist has entered the chat. Welcome. My point is that the current "model" in college athletics is closer to free enterprise, than it's ovely regulated predecessor.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 7:14 am to prepsportsallday
Not an economist - though I have an economics degree.
Markets need rules to function properly, for them to “clear”, which is a crude way of saying approach equilibrium. What equilibrium is being approached here? There is, as a practical matter, an unlimited amount of cash available so there’s no possibility of markets functioning correctly in the current situation, which is not a unique situation to college football, but is demonstrated across our dysfunctional economy.
Markets need rules to function properly, for them to “clear”, which is a crude way of saying approach equilibrium. What equilibrium is being approached here? There is, as a practical matter, an unlimited amount of cash available so there’s no possibility of markets functioning correctly in the current situation, which is not a unique situation to college football, but is demonstrated across our dysfunctional economy.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 7:16 am to prepsportsallday
I do appreciate the compared to what question though. I would say the old system where car dealers would take care of the players instead of private equity imposed some sort of equilibrium, because the fear of getting caught imposed some restrictions.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:27 pm to dittohead
quote:
I do appreciate the compared to what question though. I would say the old system where car dealers would take care of the players instead of private equity imposed some sort of equilibrium, because the fear of getting caught imposed some restrictions.
Man some of this sounds a little counter intuitive. But I get it. NIL and collegiate is in its infancy. Corrective measures are likely to (or continue) develop.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 2:30 pm to prepsportsallday
Correct the rule that doesn’t allow them to go straight to the NFL needs to go away. After a couple years of guys going to the NFL and failing might cool the market. More guys will realize they need college athletics more than college needs them.
It might surprise a lot of people but if the top players left the viewership would be the same for college football. The draw isn’t the players it’s college football and the fans enjoyment of watching their favorite team. The pendulum always swings back and what’s going on now won’t last.
It might surprise a lot of people but if the top players left the viewership would be the same for college football. The draw isn’t the players it’s college football and the fans enjoyment of watching their favorite team. The pendulum always swings back and what’s going on now won’t last.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 2:34 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 2:50 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
I agree with that perspective, but the near impossibility of separating out true NIL from pay for play was the reason for regulations against NIL in the first place.
it would be difficult, but not impossible.
pro sports leagues do monitor and regulate who their athletes endorse.
the NCAA could do something similar.
athletes would be 100% free and clear to sign endorsement deals (which is basically what NIL is).
the NCAA would approve those deals. plus, the NCAA would have a good idea of what "market value" would be for different types of endorsements.
and those deals, much like in pro sports, the guy paying would get something in return.
whether that's the athlete appearing in commercials, on billboards, putting his name on a product, etc. that can be monitored by the NCAA.
"Larry Ellison decided out of the kindness of his heart to give me $12 million dollars. I don't have to do anything at all for Oracle on a scale that remotely justifies that paycheck. and by mere coincidence I signed at his wife's Alma Mater" is not an NIL deal. That's pay for play.
Phil Knight paying some true freshman a bigger Nike deal than Derek Jeter would probably also get nixed. Because that's not market value, that's pay for play.
Dr. Pepper paying Bryce Young more than Brian Bosworth to be in those Fansville commercials would likely get approved. Because Young was a hot name and defending Heisman Trophy winner when he was doing those.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:19 pm to Nutriaitch
quote:
it would be difficult, but not impossible.
Yes, I debated my wording on that one and chose the simplest, though not the most precise, description. You’re right that if the NCAA possessed the will and the resources to police this, they could weed out many of the examples of pay for play, and certainly the most egregious. The problem is that the NCAA is already underfunded and understaffed, so I don’t see them being capable of administering the necessary oversight in a consistent and fair manner. I think they also fear additional lawsuits for any perceived interference and they’d just rather wash their hands of it all than try to police it. That being the case, they should have removed all barriers to pay for play and allow for contracts to be drawn up on that basis.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 10:00 pm to prepsportsallday
quote:No, it was a limit on academic support spending that they held to be an antitrust violation. Kavanaugh's concurrence said basically that they would be inclined to rule similarly in an NIL lawsuit, if it were brought to them, but that was not the issue or holding in Alston. Common misconception.
I'm no lawyer, but I remember the Supreme Ct ruling that described the ban on compensation as violation of antitrust.
This post was edited on 12/14/24 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 10:12 pm to Nutriaitch
quote:This is part of the approved House settlement.
the NCAA could do something similar.
athletes would be 100% free and clear to sign endorsement deals (which is basically what NIL is).
the NCAA would approve those deals. plus, the NCAA would have a good idea of what "market value" would be for different types of endorsements.
and those deals, much like in pro sports, the guy paying would get something in return.
whether that's the athlete appearing in commercials, on billboards, putting his name on a product, etc. that can be monitored by the NCAA.
Posted on 12/11/24 at 2:37 pm to BayouBaw84
quote:
Correct the rule that doesn’t allow them to go straight to the NFL needs to go away. After a couple years of guys going to the NFL and failing might cool the market. More guys will realize they need college athletics more than college needs them.
Interesting perspective. But I generally agree.
quote:
It might surprise a lot of people but if the top players left the viewership would be the same for college football. The draw isn’t the players it’s college football and the fans enjoyment of watching their favorite team. The pendulum always swings back and what’s going on now won’t last.
1000% agree
Posted on 12/11/24 at 3:20 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
quote:
the NCAA could do something similar.
athletes would be 100% free and clear to sign endorsement deals (which is basically what NIL is).
the NCAA would approve those deals. plus, the NCAA would have a good idea of what "market value" would be for different types of endorsements.
and those deals, much like in pro sports, the guy paying would get something in return.
whether that's the athlete appearing in commercials, on billboards, putting his name on a product, etc. that can be monitored by the NCAA.
This is part of the approved House settlement.
This is good stuff.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News