- 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
0
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:24 pm to The Mick
The strong will become stronger....
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:33 pm to paulb52
quote:
Salary Cap for NIL Proposed
Link?
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:38 pm to Nutriaitch
quote:No, that case is literally about the schools directly paying players for their NIL. You are wrong.
that case was about the NCAA preventing players from entering into endorsement deals.
NOT about schools themselves directly providing money to the players.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:39 pm to drizztiger
quote:
NIL value in its strictest sense can’t be arbitrarily subject to a cap without the players agreement. Anyone that doesn’t understand that concept is more wishcasting than discussing actualities.
Could a university pay a player for his all NIL rights? Say Bryce Underwood gets $2 million a year (or whatever) from LSU his NIL rights. Any advertiser who wants Bryce then pays LSU, and Bryce cannot take money for NIL on his own (similar to Britney Spears being contractually prevented from advertising for Coke after being paid by Pepsi.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:42 pm to Handsome Pete
quote:Of course. That is effectively what they have done all along. The athletes sign over their NIL rights in exchange for a scholarship. The schools then make money using the athletes' NIL for their own sponsorship deals.
Could a university pay a player for his all NIL rights? Say Bryce Underwood gets $2 million a year (or whatever) from LSU his NIL rights. Any advertiser who wants Bryce then pays LSU, and Bryce cannot take money for NIL on his own (similar to Britney Spears being contractually prevented from advertising for Coke after being paid by Pepsi.
But now that NIL exists outside of that, it means individually negotiating it with every single athlete. Which is wholly inefficient.
This post was edited on 7/8/24 at 6:48 pm
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:42 pm to drizztiger
quote:
NIL value in its strictest sense can’t be arbitrarily subject to a cap without the players agreement. Anyone that doesn’t understand that concept is more wishcasting than discussing actualities.
Could a university pay a player for his all his NIL rights? Say Bryce Underwood gets $2 million a year (or whatever) from LSU his NIL rights. Any advertiser who wants Bryce then pays LSU, and Bryce cannot take money for NIL on his own (similar to Britney Spears being contractually prevented from advertising for Coke after being paid by Pepsi). If that's possible, then the SEC or NCAA can agree on an overall NIL cap for each university. LSU could spend it all on a couple players, or spread it around. Players are free to go where they get the most NIL money.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:44 pm to OJsLifeCoach
and it is freaking ridiculous.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:46 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
But that means individually negotiating it with every single athlete. Which is wholly inefficient.
I don't think negotiating different values for different players is ever going away. Some players are just worth a lot more. What's important is a level playing field, where each school in a power conference has the same overall cap on spending. How they spend it is up to them.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:50 pm to Handsome Pete
quote:I disagree. Eventually, it will come to collective bargaining.
I don't think negotiating different values for different players is ever going away. Some players are just worth a lot more. What's important is a level playing field, where each school in a power conference has the same overall cap on spending. How they spend it is up to them.
Absent a congressional antitrust exemption, the schools cannot set a cap on spending without the athletes being involved in the negotiations.
Federal courts already said decades ago the schools/NCAA can't set a cap on coaching salaries. There is no reason the same legal logic wouldn't apply to the athletes themselves.
Yes, some players are worth more. And just like in the NFL, those players will be paid more, under a collectively bargained agreement.
But the schools still can't arbitrarily make their own cap, under federal law.
This post was edited on 7/8/24 at 6:53 pm
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:51 pm to paulb52
Won’t happen. Capping NIL is akin to telling a private business how much they can earn. I don’t like it but I can’t see a scenario that ends with a NIL cap.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 6:57 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
No, that case is literally about the schools directly paying players for their NIL. You are wrong.
you should read more than just the headlines to articles
quote:
Under terms of the proposed settlement, the NCAA would pay $2.77 billion over 10 years to former and current college athletes who were denied by now-defunct rules the ability to earn money from endorsement and sponsorship deals dating to 2016.
NCAA votes to accept $2.8 billion settlement that could usher in dramatic change for college sports
the lawsuit was specifically about NIL.
and as i said in other post, part of the agreement is to ALLOW (but not require) schools to share revenue with athletes.
and there is literally a specified cap to how much they can share.
as part of a legally binding agreement.
so yes, they absolutely can (and did) cap it.
and no, the suit wasn’t about schools paying, it was about preventing kids from earning money on their own through endorsements.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 7:36 pm to Nutriaitch
You are wrong.
quote:Yes, it was about the schools not paying the players for their NIL.
the lawsuit was specifically about NIL.
This post was edited on 7/8/24 at 7:38 pm
Posted on 7/8/24 at 8:11 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
Yes, it was about the schools not paying the players for their NIL.
i posted the link and quotes.
here is the quote again
quote:
Under terms of the proposed settlement, the NCAA would pay $2.77 billion over 10 years to former and current college athletes who were denied by now-defunct rules the ability to earn money from endorsement and sponsorship deals dating to 2016.
endorsements
sponsorships
that’s not money from the schools.
that’s money from Nike, Dr Pepper, EA Sports, Fred’ Muffler Shop, Get Gordon, etc.
going forward (as in things that happen after the lawsuit is already finalized), they have agreed to begin allowing payments and revenue sharing.
but zero point zero dollars of the back pay (the $2.77 Billion) has anything to do with money coming from the schools, conferences, or the NCAA itself.
so no, they have not (yet) lost any lawsuits about money coming from the schools the schools in the past.
the NCAA and schools are the ones that have to pay the settlement because they are the ones who prevented the athletes from signing those deals.
they agreed going forward in the hopes to prevent a future lawsuit to get money directly from the schools, conferences, NCAA.
so unless you can provide a link with quotes showing they were specifically talking about money being paid directly by the schools and not endorsements and sponsorships, then you are wrong.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 8:33 pm to paulb52
Restraint of trade. This would not stand up in court absent some kind of collective bargaining agreement.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 8:45 pm to Nutriaitch
Profit sharing checks will be from the school, scholarship $ is from the school…NIL one time and monthly payments are from the collective.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 8:53 pm to Gaston
quote:
Profit sharing checks will be from the school, scholarship $ is from the school
going forward, yes.
the $2.77 billion in back pay (the lawsuit settlement) is not for past profit sharing.
it’s for not letting kids sign endorsement deals.
Posted on 7/8/24 at 9:42 pm to paulb52
Won't this just invite them going back under the table to give them "that little bit more" to win them over another school?
Posted on 7/8/24 at 10:13 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Universities cannot hand out money!!!
Posted on 7/8/24 at 10:16 pm to Tigers4Lyfe
quote:
Won't this just invite them going back under the table to give them "that little bit more" to win them over another school?
I much rather those days again. Still wasn’t as ridiculous as it is now.
Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if teams were still doing this in addition to open NIL deals.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News