• 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.

Nebraska Challenging 18 NIL Deal Denials by CSC

Nehunter88 said:
This is third party NIL deals so the AD won't have anything to do.
Click to expand...
This is related to in-house NIL $ provided to UNL by Playfly. Playfly allocated $10m or so for NIL...which is totally separate and different from revenue share. Rev share is capped by House. NIL has to be approved by CSC.

Husch-Blackwell was retained for arbitration by either UNL or Playfly to represent the 18 student athletes whose NIL deals were denied by the CSC. That is a huge retainer for 18 arbitration cases, so unlikely the players are footing the bill...especially since they are not getting their NIL $!
 
Speedlimit said:
This is related to in-house NIL $ provided to UNL by Playfly. Playfly allocated $10m or so for NIL...which is totally separate and different from revenue share. Rev share is capped by House. NIL has to be approved by CSC.

Husch-Blackwell was retained for arbitration by either UNL or Playfly to represent the 18 student athletes whose NIL deals were denied by the CSC. That is a huge retainer for 18 arbitration cases, so unlikely the players are footing the bill...especially since they are not getting their NIL $!
Click to expand...
It's the same situation many other colleges are facing. A big difference may end up being the law passed in the Nebraska Legislature that protects players NIL deals from interests outside of Nebraska. Eventually someone was going stand up to the CSC's authority and their ability to overrule Nebraska state law. If the players lose in arbitration I expect them to appeal through the court system.

As for payment I'd think it's the players and or Playfly. Some players would have already gotten their money, which means they would have to return it to be able to play if they lose. I'd think Playfly might foot the bill for this with the players agreeing to give future earnings back to Playfly if successful.
 
Nehunter88 said:
It's the same situation many other colleges are facing. A big difference may end up being the law passed in the Nebraska Legislature that protects players NIL deals from interests outside of Nebraska. Eventually someone was going stand up to the CSC's authority and their ability to overrule Nebraska state law. If the players lose in arbitration I expect them to appeal through the court system.

As for payment I'd think it's the players and or Playfly. Some players would have already gotten their money, which means they would have to return it to be able to play if they lose. I'd think Playfly might foot the bill for this with the players agreeing to give future earnings back to Playfly if successful.
Click to expand...
Much of the real issue here is that the participation agreements haven't been signed and that's leaving an opening. They struck a deal on this, and arbitration is the process. But since the agreements aren't in place, they are threating to go to the courts if they lose in arbitration.

The other things is these entities like Playfly aren't the most forthcoming. The deals through them are much more complicated to review and they may not be providing information for those decisions.

Finally, why is it that Nebraska is always so sensitive? There have been millions in deals rejected and these guys haven't even gone the arbitration route yet and are raising the issue so publicly. I think the 18 deals mentioned are the Nebraska ones.

Between January and February, 3,704 NIL deals worth $39.29 million were cleared, while 187 deals worth $14.36 million were rejected.

Currently, 18 deals are in arbitration, though those cases have been consolidated into a single arbitration. Seeley declined to confirm whether the deals involve the same business or school.

"In general, in arbitration, deals are consolidated because the issues are essentially the same," Seeley said. "And what that often looks like is they are different student-athletes, but it's the same or identical deal, or similar or identical deal, and they're all from the same school."

www.cbssports.com

College Sports Commission's NIL clearinghouse strained by surge in school-linked deals

Deals tied to collectives and institutional partners are overwhelming the CSC and triggering growing legal and conference scrutiny
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
 
Cornjob said:
The clearinghouse was heading for legal challenges from the moment it was conceived of. But I never would have guessed it would be Nebraska doing it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps since the Nebraska Legislature passed a law saying interests outside of Nebraska cannot interfere with NIL deals for players, it's thought the best chance to overturn this is here.
 
Cornjob said:
The clearinghouse was heading for legal challenges from the moment it was conceived of. But I never would have guessed it would be Nebraska doing it.
Click to expand...
Arbitration of CSC denials is the process set up by House. All 3rd party NIL deals over $600 have to be approved by CSC. If denied, the athlete has a right to request arbitration, which is what is going with 18 deals from UNL. This is just part of the process.

However, other in-house 3rd part deals have been approved. What this indicates to me is that stock contracts were used by Playfly and UNL and thus they were rejected by CSC for warehousing.

This is why each contract has to be individually structured in a way that meets the CSC algorithms. That requires attorneys who know what the heck they are doing!.

Where this is going to get interesting will be if the Nebraska players lose at arbitration. At that point I suspect the NE AG will get involved and invoke the state statute referenced above which prohibits "institutions" and others from punishing student athletes for receiving NIL.

Several other states have similar laws, so they will be watching to see how this plays out.

IMO Nebraska's best bet is to restructure every contract and then resubmit to CSC...paying some attorneys who know what they are doing with contracts would be way less expensive than arbitrating 18 cases, even if they are consolidated.
 
Last edited:
Not sure why they couldn't give these athletes stipends and campus jobs. This NIL non-sense is beyond ridiculous.
 
BigRedOhio said:
Not sure why they couldn't give these athletes stipends and campus jobs. This NIL non-sense is beyond ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Student athletes do have a "campus job"...participating in the sport they came to play. If you know any D1 athletes, then you know how much time they spend training, healing, practicing, and playing. It is a full time job and then they go to classes.

At UNL, football, basketball, volleyball, baseball, and softball players also attract large crowds to their home contests, which generates significant revenue for UNL AD. That is also part of their "campus job".
 
Last edited:
Husker In Oklahoma said:
Straight up pay for play. It’s not just NU.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 99% of these deals aren't really "Name, Image, and Likeness" fees. It's just bribes. The vast majority of players receiving money have don't have any sort of celebrity recognition to cash in on true endorsements. It's silly that we all call it "NIL" when it is nothing of the sort.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS





Back
Top