That's not what the opinion says. It doesn't say there can be no limits and it allows each state to set its own rules.
Wow.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Conflicting NIL deals
- Thread starter Hville
- Start date
Wow.
it was worth reading for sure. Lots of good info in it. Some people don't like it when there mistakes are pointed out.
You know what they say about assuming.
Yea that’s why I stated right in the post you quoted that SCOTUS already ruled you couldn’t limit them.
SCOTUS doesn't say there are no limits. Stop being argumentative just because you're wrong. States can limit/not allow NIL deals to exist. The NCAA has limits on them, there's no pay for play allowed. You just want to get another thread deleted because you've been proven wrong again. It's getting old.
When it comes to commerce the Feds stay away to allow greater impacts to be enjoyed by states particular best commerce.
There can be very few one size fits all rules or rulings
There can be very few one size fits all rules or rulings
Ok. I’m assuming that when SCOTUS says you can’t prevent them from making money off their name, image and likeness that includes not limiting how much they can make on it.
And for the record…..you responded to my posts in my thread. Hardly me initiating an argument when you regurgitate a week old thread to stalk my posts.
You always assume, that's the issue.
There are limits. You also said every state has to allow it, they don't. The nil funds can be restricted to education tied.
I did not say every state has to allow it.
I specifically said I found it interesting that some states don’t. Prefer you stayed away from making up lies about what I said.
Oh look.. NU_ALUM starting an argument and then trying to pass it off as someone else's fault. AND he makes up what others say.. hmm, haven't seen that before!
Their
You then said "I presume that's changed". You presumed because you assumed nil was couldn't be limited by anyone.
I presumed it has changed that some states dont allow it. Mainly because I haven’t checked it factually to find out if it has. Presuming best defines my thoughts. Feel free to present facts to the contrary if you like.
Last edited:
