Georgia NIL Law

[UpstateSM]

I thought communism was bad?

 

[texascpa]

That 75% rule is sickening.

 

[DoctorBombay]

That 75% rule is sickening.

Not a lawyer but how does that stand up in court? 75%?
And if Georgia wants 75% why not go to school in a state that asks for only 30 or 40%? This will get interesting very quickly.

 

[Chip]

Is this the intersection of Capitalism St and Socialism Ave?

You're free to earn, but we're taking 75%?

 

[OrangeMojo]

Not a lawyer but how does that stand up in court? 75%?
And if Georgia wants 75% why not go to school in a state that asks for only 30 or 40%? This will get interesting very quickly.

It doesn’t say Georgia wants 75% - it says it allows schools to take up to 75%. So it’s a matter of a school potentially putting itself at a disadvantage depending on how it distributes or does not distribute endorsement money

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

IMO -massively stupid, if not unconstitutional. State & federal law & the US Constitution already entitles anyone to profit from their NIL. Only if you are on an athletic scholarship is there a prohibition.
How does Ga think it has the right to direct someone’s money to go back to the school.
Better to take 75 percent of the governor’s and legislature’s salaries and redirect those.
This is a 75% tax on largely less economically well- off kids.
What if the kid says no?

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

Just let any kid who wants to go pro. You can't have it both ways. You're an amateur or you're a pro. Pros get to keep what they kill. Amateurs are in it for the degree (until theyre not).

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

It doesn’t say Georgia wants 75% - it says it allows schools to take up to 75%. So it’s a matter of a school potentially putting itself at a disadvantage depending on how it distributes or does not distribute endorsement money

What should the school get anything. They get 100% now

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Just let any kid who wants to go pro. You can't have it both ways. You're an amateur or you're a pro. Pros get to keep what they kill. Amateurs are in it for the degree (until theyre not).

Why do they have to be amateurs? It used to be intercollegiate competition; now it’s a multi-billion dollar industry.
Let’s be up front. For FB and basketball, those kids are there to market the brand of the school and to bring in revenue to support the school’s athletics. Education is an afterthought in that if they get a degree great, but they just have to stay in the track toward a degree in order to be eligible.
If education was the focus, why was it necessary for the NCAA to enact legislation taking away scholarships if kids aren’t progressing towards degrees? If it’s your mission, you don’t need to be incentivized to achieve the mission.

 

[All4SU]

It’s time for fans to unionize.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

No knowledge of this at all, but this screams of a compromise. I'd guess UGA and GTech were crying foul of it existing at all, so this is the bone thrown at them.

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

Why do they have to be amateurs? It used to be intercollegiate competition; now it’s a multi-billion dollar industry.
Let’s be up front. For FB and basketball, those kids are there to market the brand of the school and to bring in revenue to support the school’s athletics. Education is an afterthought in that if they get a degree great, but they just have to stay in the track toward a degree in order to be eligible.
If education was the focus, why was it necessary for the NCAA to enact legislation taking away scholarships if kids aren’t progressing towards degrees? If it’s your mission, you don’t need to be incentivized to achieve the mission.

I agree with everything you wrote. These schools are incredibly hypocritical.

However, from a pure ability to earn standpoint, I'd say its because nobody would care about these kids if they were not propped up by the educational institution. I think most would agree that Eric Dungey is the most charismatic football player we've had since Donovan McNabb, and if he didnt wear a uniform with "Syracuse" across his chest or "Orange," most could not care less about him. His "value" is purely based upon being an Orangeman. So yeah, they prop up the institution's athletic departments as a source of labor, but the institution would still exist without them - no one would care about Eric Dungey without Syracuse University.

Admittedly, almost on a daily basis I am more and more grossed out by major college athletics (and maybe more so by fanatics/consumers that truly drive all of this).

I think what the Ivy's did this year with athletics was really interesting.

 

[EuclidBred]

No knowledge of this at all, but this screams of a compromise. I'd guess UGA and GTech were crying foul of it existing at all, so this is the bone thrown at them.

I don't think it's the schools/athletic departments crying foul. It's the IMG/Learfields and the likes that know that once potential sponsors can work with student-athletes directly, their inflated guarantees that they provide schools for their rights are going to be harder to attain.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

Why do they have to be amateurs? It used to be intercollegiate competition; now it’s a multi-billion dollar industry.
Let’s be up front. For FB and basketball, those kids are there to market the brand of the school and to bring in revenue to support the school’s athletics. Education is an afterthought in that if they get a degree great, but they just have to stay in the track toward a degree in order to be eligible.
If education was the focus, why was it necessary for the NCAA to enact legislation taking away scholarships if kids aren’t progressing towards degrees? If it’s your mission, you don’t need to be incentivized to achieve the mission.

i have said before that this is the inevitable outcome of multiple factors, including 1) the lack of a minor league ala baseball. Colleges become the de-facto farm system for the NFL and NBA. 2) Somewhere along the line, otherwise fine academic institutions sold their souls to be in the entertainment industry.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

That 75% rule is sickening.

SCOTUS says they are entitled to it. Ga - nay, you get 25%.

 

[jgeorge322]

Just let any kid who wants to go pro. You can't have it both ways. You're an amateur or you're a pro. Pros get to keep what they kill. Amateurs are in it for the degree (until theyre not).

i agree but thats a pro rule that prevents the kids from going pro

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

I don't think it's the schools/athletic departments crying foul. It's the IMG/Learfields and the likes that know that once potential sponsors can work with student-athletes directly, their inflated guarantees that they provide schools for their rights are going to be harder to attain.

While I don't fully agree with your reasoning, it's a good point about the media rights holders.

 

[All4SU]

Come play for State U. Well make a star out of you.

 

[texascpa]

IMO -massively stupid, if not unconstitutional. State & federal law & the US Constitution already entitles anyone to profit from their NIL. Only if you are on an athletic scholarship is there a prohibition.
How does Ga think it has the right to direct someone’s money to go back to the school.
Better to take 75 percent of the governor’s and legislature’s salaries and redirect those.
This is a 75% tax on largely less economically well- off kids.
What if the kid says no?

Actually, you could make an easy argument that this is a tax and that the schools have been given taxing authority. That seems unconstitutional as well.

 

[texascpa]

Without knowing the background info or the law to itself, there may be a an element of Title IX to share the wealth or an agreement to share the wealth go keep kids in non-profitable sports from taking a shot at more money in footballs and basketball.

So much for speculation.

I agree that if other states//universities don't follow suit, the kids should look at this as a financial deal and weigh their options. This could work for SU...nah, Cuomo will want a piece of the action somehow.

Title IX is not a share the wealth from individual students earnings. And if that was the case, then the percentage would be flat across the board, including the player that earned it.

 

[javadoc]

Without knowing the background info or the law to itself, there may be a an element of Title IX to share the wealth or an agreement to share the wealth go keep kids in non-profitable sports from taking a shot at more money in footballs and basketball.

So much for speculation.

I agree that if other states//universities don't follow suit, the kids should look at this as a financial deal and weigh their options. This could work for SU...nah, Cuomo will want a piece of the action somehow.

I'm a little bit surprised at the reaction. I haven't read the law, but the way it's described, the schools can take that portion to build a general fund to pay players across the board. In theory, the revenue sports are what allow the non-revenue sports to exist in the first place. So the "wealth" of the revenue programs funds the non-revenue programs, and here they are using the "wealth" of the revenue players to fund the non-revenue players.

I am only commenting on that aspect of the story. An isolated thought, not a comprehensive analysis or critique.

 

[texascpa]

It’s time for fans to unionize.

Agreed, and without turning this political, I am generally anti-union. lol

 

[HtownOrange]

Title IX is not a share the wealth from individual students earnings. And if that was the case, then the percentage would be flat across the board, including the player that earned it.

I'm not arguing Title IX requires distribution, just that the State schools may be self-imposing the principle. Javadoc was more eloquent than I, see his post.

I am not arguing for this, just stating a thought.

 

[AngryOtto]

How does this work with the ncaa and eligibility. Fine a state says a player can get paid for his likeness but ncaa says if you do you are ineligible.
The problem is not the players making money off their likeness it’s the abuse that is going to occur. You are going to have 50 different rules. Also just think of Alabama Georgia or LSU. Billy bob car dealership is paying 50k to every starter on the team to appear on a billboard. Other schools will not have that kind of sec booster money to throw around or will be prohibited under their state law. Wild West of sports.
It will destroy college sports as we know it. They might as well just creat a super league of 10 schools.

 

[texascpa]

How does this work with the ncaa and eligibility. Fine a state says a player can get paid for his likeness but ncaa says if you do you are ineligible.
The problem is not the players making money off their likeness it’s the abuse that is going to occur. You are going to have 50 different rules. Also just think of Alabama Georgia or LSU. Billy bob car dealership is paying 50k to every starter on the team to appear on a billboard. Other schools will not have that kind of sec booster money to throw around or will be prohibited under their state law. Wild West of sports.
It will destroy college sports as we know it. They might as well just creat a super league of 10 schools.

That's the greatness of this country. States can set their own rules. I'm not a fan of the feds getting involved in this. There's nothing in the constitution that NIL is under federal prevue. It should be a state issue.

What's interesting is you list Georgia, yet Georgia's law allows the schools to take up to 75% of a player's NIL earnings. why would any player sign up for that? Even Cali's NIL law doesn't have something like that in it.