House settlement finally released….

[Speedlimit]

Student-Athlete NIL Deals

This website lays out the new system in place, overseen by the College Sports Commission.

www.collegesportscommission.org

The VBP tab essentially details how the CSC tries to put the kabash on collective 3rd party NIL deals.

The Nebraska media has not really discussed how this will impact 1890.

 

[NU_Alum]

Student-Athlete NIL Deals

This website lays out the new system in place, overseen by the College Sports Commission.

www.collegesportscommission.org

The VBP tab essentially details how the CSC tries to put the kabash on collective 3rd party NIL deals.

The Nebraska media has not really discussed how this will impact 1890.

Thanks for the link.

The same collective’s deal with a student-athlete to promote the collective’s sale of merchandise to the public would not satisfy the valid business purpose requirement for the same reason; the collective’s whole purpose in selling merchandise is to raise money to pay that student-athlete and potentially other student-athletes at a particular school or schools, which is not a valid business purpose under NCAA Rule 22.1.3.

These same deals would satisfy the valid business purpose requirement if the entities paying the student-athletes, and receiving the proceeds from the general public, were businesses that had a broader purpose outside of paying student-athletes at a particular school or schools (e.g., a golf course, an apparel company).

As I read this, if you start up a clothing company that sells player specific shirts (think of a catch phrase or nickname "Mr. Touchdown" or "The Jet", as examples) and use that money to pay your expenses and the rest (or some large portion of the rest) go to the athlete, that's "illegal" under this collective.

If you're Nike, you can do the same deal though and it's legal.

Try and justify that in court.

 

[Farmer Jake]

This is all too confusing for my little mind. How long will it be that college will have nothing to do with college athletics?

 

[NU_Alum]

This is all too confusing for my little mind. How long will it be that college will have nothing to do with college athletics?

It could move that way or there could be a seismic shift back to small regional conferences/teams. Depends if the tv revenue continues to be high or gets reduced. Right now live sports are a major draw, basically a lock on people watching live tv. Nothing else comes close.

 

[Cornjob]

I am of the opinion that all sides are guilty and that there are no innocent parties in this whole mess

Or….college football is a very successful business that is generating record viewership and revenue, and we are simply seeing how the sausage gets made in real time as the players are finally getting their due share. I’m not any less excited to watch my team or upcoming race to the playoffs than I was when we were in the Big 8.

 

[Speedlimit]

Everytime the sun rises the NCAA seems to chum the water with more legal issues, drawing in the attorneys. After nearly 1/2 billion in legal fees over the last decade one would think that the NCAA would be trying to avoid litigation. Perhaps the NCAA and now the CSC should try to adopt a new philosophy:

More Football
Less Lawyers!

 

[Smoker]

This is all too confusing for my little mind. How long will it be that college will have nothing to do with college athletics?

By the end of the year

 

[Kilgore Trout]

This is all too confusing for my little mind. How long will it be that college will have nothing to do with college athletics?

We are nearly there. I was surprised at the comment about how long a player can stay a student and keep playing. If we end up with 30yr old "kids" playing 8-10 yrs...I just don't know what to think about that other than It ain't right! If they try and tie academics to athletic eligibility we will have a bunch of players pursuing Phd's in basketweaving. Or worse.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Every time I read something about NIL compensation I think we are one step closer to the game we all love being a thing of the past. I'm all for change if it creates an improved game. But I dont see any evidence than paying a high school kid several million before he even commits to a school, to say nothing about actually doing something, will make college football a better game. Just the opposite. For me, loyalty to one's school and community is the most important thing. Talent comes in as a close second. I want to see what a kid does to improve. What he does to handle waiting his turn. What he does when he becomes the next man up following an injury of a starter. When a kid who may have sat for a year or two suddenly is in the spotlight and surprises us all...there is nothing better. NIL is taking that away. It is too easy to run away to another team. If you can't meet the goal, change the goal.

 

[goodnterribles]

Every time I read something about NIL compensation I think we are one step closer to the game we all love being a thing of the past. I'm all for change if it creates an improved game. But I dont see any evidence than paying a high school kid several million before he even commits to a school, to say nothing about actually doing something, will make college football a better game. Just the opposite. For me, loyalty to one's school and community is the most important thing. Talent comes in as a close second. I want to see what a kid does to improve. What he does to handle waiting his turn. What he does when he becomes the next man up following an injury of a starter. When a kid who may have sat for a year or two suddenly is in the spotlight and surprises us all...there is nothing better. NIL is taking that away. It is too easy to run away to another team. If you can't meet the goal, change the goal.

You're not wrong, but what is happening now isn't what NIL was intended to be. This is just good, old school bribes. I'm all for a kid signing an endorsement or marketing deal to make money off his celebrity. But to just give a high school senior a million dollars to come to your school isn't NIL. That's like the SWC in the 80s except it's legal now.

 

[Speedlimit]

You're not wrong, but what is happening now isn't what NIL was intended to be. This is just good, old school bribes. I'm all for a kid signing an endorsement or marketing deal to make money off his celebrity. But to just give a high school senior a million dollars to come to your school isn't NIL. That's like the SWC in the 80s except it's legal now.

Technically the NCAA and member institutions have been violating federal antitrust laws and they have been doing so forever, including in the 1980's.

So, it was the NCAA actually breaking the law and preventing boosters from compensating the student athletes.

 

[goodnterribles]

Technically the NCAA and member institutions have been violating federal antitrust laws and they have been doing so forever, including in the 1980's.

So, it was the NCAA actually breaking the law and preventing boosters from compensating the student athletes.

Was them preventing boosters from compensating student athletes breaking the law? Or was it preventing student athletes from earning money themselves while profiting off of the student athletes through apparel, merchandise, and video games?

Maybe I'm completely off on this, but when NIL was ruled on, it was clearly about athletes being able to use their celebrity to earn money through marketing/advertising/endorsement deals. That's different than revenue sharing or direct bribes to athletes to come to a school. If the system stays as it currently is today, it's unsustainable.

 

[Hville]

Was them preventing boosters from compensating student athletes breaking the law? Or was it preventing student athletes from earning money themselves while profiting off of the student athletes through apparel, merchandise, and video games?

Maybe I'm completely off on this, but when NIL was ruled on, it was clearly about athletes being able to use their celebrity to earn money through marketing/advertising/endorsement deals. That's different than revenue sharing or direct bribes to athletes to come to a school. If the system stays as it currently is today, it's unsustainable.

I think people have to understand what they were use to was unsustainable. The path forward to a sustainable model is a little rocky. Those yearning for the old unsustainable days need to move on.

 

[goodnterribles]

I think people have to understand what they were use to was unsustainable. The path forward to a sustainable model is a little rocky. Those yearning for the old unsustainable days need to move on.

I'm definitely not wanting to go back to the "old days". But basically making 1980s SWC booster bribes legal and unlimited can't keep going.

 

[Speedlimit]

A collective paying a student-athlete is just a way for student-athletes to leverage their NIL.

The NFL uses group licensing to help their players earn NIL. This is totally separate from paragraph 5 salaries and other compensation from the club. Those group licensing deals do not count against the salary cap.

The collectives at the college level are serving similar roles, except they focus on one school.

If the CSC shuts down collectives, which seems to be their goal, they will effectively end most NIL opportunities for student athletes. This is a restraint that will face serious legal scrutiny and was not the intent of the House settlement. House was antitrust and dealt with revenue sharing and NIL, which are distinct concepts.

If 1890 goes away, Nebraska will be in a world of hurt...IMO.