I think the portal should charge a tariff

[miamicuse]

Forget about multi year contracts, the portal should be a neutral zone that athletes must pay to enter.

You want to transfer? You enter the portal, it charges a 25% tariff of your previous season pre-tax NIL earnings. If you didn't get any NIL you enter for free, if you were paid 1M you leave 250k on the table. This portal tariff is than distributed to the school you departed from to dedicate to non revenue sports.

If you run out of eligibility and still enter you pay first and take your chances, I bet no 5th year hopefuls will enter.

This should cut down on portal entries and transfers.

 

[Brooky03]

This would fly in the face of the court rulings that have been the driving factor behind the current portal landscape. It would be challenged in court immediately and the NCAA would lose. As it stands, the NCAA cannot put up barriers to student-athletes changing schools and/or have that hinder their eligibility to participate.

If the NCAA member institutions want more control over the athletes, they either make them employees or make them sign contracts in which consideration (money) is exchanged for their services (which might make them employees or might not). Contracts can have buyouts/penalties attached for early termination.

 

[miamicuse]

This would fly in the face of the court rulings that have been the driving factor behind the current portal landscape. It would be challenged in court immediately and the NCAA would lose. As it stands, the NCAA cannot put up barriers to student-athletes changing schools and/or have that hinder their eligibility to participate.

If the NCAA member institutions want more control over the athletes, they either make them employees or make them sign contracts in which consideration (money) is exchanged for their services (which might make them employees or might not). Contracts can have buyouts/penalties attached for early termination.

But all that is a matter of degree. I can argue that having a portal transfer period or having to keep good grades are barriers to participation right?

 

[JarHeadJim]

 

[Brooky03]

But all that is a matter of degree. I can argue that having a portal transfer period or having to keep good grades a barrier to participation right?

I won’t pretend there isn’t nuance, but requiring substantial money to change schools (and/or tying that to money you earned off your own name/image/likeness) is probably much more likely to be a problem than requiring good academic standing or establishing a transfer period to curtail chaos.

 

[jncuse]

This has legal issues all over it.

Could this work if the players and the NCAA had a "CBA" like the pro-leagues do. Possible. But there is no CBA in college sports, I guess in part because they are not employees.

 

[Hopkins16]

I think to make it simple and for consistency for programs which would help retain fans is to tie both sides in to a minimum of a 2 year binding contract for all players except seniors (for seniors they have to first figure out this 5th year or extra year nonsense).

 

[miamicuse]

Well I think contracts whether 2 years 3 years 4 years are anything but simple and consistent. Will the contract between player A and USC be the same terms as player B with Duke? What if a players family gets sick? What if he gets injured seriously or can't keep minimum grades? What if the coaches leave? What if he is not happy can't leave and just create distractions off the court (look at the Miami Heat Jimmy Butler situation)? You take all those exit conditions into account and you end up with a very complicated contract, just to keep someone for another year?

At the end of the day to have some continuity you are looking for ways to make it sticky, either making it easier for a player to stay or harder to leave. My concerns with contracts will be a road down the employee/contractor path and completely removing the needs to be a student which at that point my support will end. Yes I do know some were paid under the table before this portal/NIL era.

 

[miamicuse]

Obviously I started this thread as a joke with the recent worldwide tariff situation but I think some out of the box thinking is needed to keep the fans engaged for the sake of the name on the front of the jersey.

 

[grepal]

Obviously I started this thread as a joke with the recent worldwide tariff situation but I think some out of the box thinking is needed to keep the fans engaged for the sake of the name on the front of the jersey.

I would doge the ---- out of it. I'm asking Trump!

 

[Cusefan95]

Obviously I started this thread as a joke with the recent worldwide tariff situation but I think some out of the box thinking is needed to keep the fans engaged for the sake of the name on the front of the jersey.

Why do they need to keep fans engaged “for the sake of the name on the front of the jersey”?

They need to keep enough fans engaged to sell a very small number of tickets relative to total viewers. How everyone else remains engaged is irrelevant - and gambling seems to be able to maintain a high level of fan engagement.

You want to fix a problem that doesn’t actually exist. And I say that as someone increasingly less engaged myself with college sports - coming to terms with the fact I don’t really matter in the grand scheme of things was key in accepting this isn’t a real world problem.

 

[Brooky03]

Why do they need to keep fans engaged “for the sake of the name on the front of the jersey”?

They need to keep enough fans engaged to sell a very small number of tickets relative to total viewers. How everyone else remains engaged is irrelevant - and gambling seems to be able to maintain a high level of fan engagement.

You want to fix a problem that doesn’t actually exist. And I say that as someone increasingly less engaged myself with college sports - coming to terms with the fact I don’t really matter in the grand scheme of things was key in accepting this isn’t a real world problem.

I assume his point was more so that most college basketball viewers are fans of schools. There isn’t a high percentage of college basketball fans that are watching because they’re fans of college basketball as a whole. It’s unlike the NBA in that way. If teams are just fresh batches of free agents every year, with hardly any continuity, those fans of schools are going to naturally be less interested.

Winning because you bought the right guys at the right time feels fundamentally different than winning with guys who feel like a part of the program/community (even if that feeling was artificial in the past), which will affect viewership and ticket sales. Interest will spike when those free agents happen to be great but fall dramatically when they aren’t. A future where you’re rooting for players in college instead of schools is a future in which college basketball is competing with NBA basketball. If you’re just watching for the players, you might as well watch the best ones (NBA).

 

[dan7800]

1) The NBA should take an NFL like stance - 3 years out of HS.
2) Both the NFL and NBA should require a college degree. Plenty of jobs do. Make the athlete be a student and get a degree. Most dont make it in the NFL or NBA, so set the young man up for bettering the rest of their life.

Neither are likely to happen obviously.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I won’t pretend there isn’t nuance, but requiring substantial money to change schools (and/or tying that to money you earned off your own name/image/likeness) is probably much more likely to be a problem than requiring good academic standing or establishing a transfer period to curtail chaos.

I think this is a really good idea that just needs tweaking. It's not the kid who pays to enter, but 20% or whatever of the new portal fee should go to the school who just lost their star player so they can try to get a replacement. I like it.

 

[Sudano]

Well I think contracts whether 2 years 3 years 4 years are anything but simple and consistent. Will the contract between player A and USC be the same terms as player B with Duke? What if a players family gets sick? What if he gets injured seriously or can't keep minimum grades? What if the coaches leave? What if he is not happy can't leave and just create distractions off the court (look at the Miami Heat Jimmy Butler situation)? You take all those exit conditions into account and you end up with a very complicated contract, just to keep someone for another year?

At the end of the day to have some continuity you are looking for ways to make it sticky, either making it easier for a player to stay or harder to leave. My concerns with contracts will be a road down the employee/contractor path and completely removing the needs to be a student which at that point my support will end. Yes I do know some were paid under the table before this portal/NIL era.

Basic contracts cover all those situations.

 

[miamicuse]

I think this is a really good idea that just needs tweaking. It's not the kid who pays to enter, but 20% or whatever of the new portal fee should go to the school who just lost their star player so they can try to get a replacement. I like it.

That does nothing. If the fee is from the new school to the old school, the kid has nothing to lose, they will still transfer every year to get a bigger bag. The school who receives that 20% payment have to pay the school they get the replacement player from, that will just be a mechanism for paperwork to move money around. You still have players who have no eligibility left entering the portal hoping for an exemption.

The objective is to get more players to stay committed to the same school longer, either by making it easier to stay or harder to leave.

 

[IthacaMatt]

That does nothing. If the fee is from the new school to the old school, the kid has nothing to lose, they will still transfer every year to get a bigger bag. The school who receives that 20% payment have to pay the school they get the replacement player from, that will just be a mechanism for paperwork to move money around. You still have players who have no eligibility left entering the portal hoping for an exemption.

The objective is to get more players to stay committed to the same school longer, either by making it easier to stay or harder to leave.

When teams get relegated in European soccer, they get a payment as they go down.
This is kind of the same thing.
Or compare it to baseball, where if someone selects an unprotected playert beyond your 40 man roster, your team gets compensation for it. See what I'm saying?

 

[miamicuse]

When teams get relegated in European soccer, they get a payment as they go down.
This is kind of the same thing.
Or compare it to baseball, where if someone selects an unprotected playert beyond your 40 man roster, your team gets compensation for it. See what I'm saying?

I understand that, but my point is if the #1 objective is to discourage everyone from entering the portal even 5th year players with no eligibility, it does nothing. Club A getting some compensation from club B is fine that's more secondary in my opinion.

 

[JustPherU]

This would fly in the face of the court rulings that have been the driving factor behind the current portal landscape. It would be challenged in court immediately and the NCAA would lose. As it stands, the NCAA cannot put up barriers to student-athletes changing schools and/or have that hinder their eligibility to participate.

If the NCAA member institutions want more control over the athletes, they either make them employees or make them sign contracts in which consideration (money) is exchanged for their services (which might make them employees or might not). Contracts can have buyouts/penalties attached for early termination.

The SEC puts up barriers, if they can stop players from going to other SEC schools then why can’t the NCAA go back to the sit out a year model?

 

[cuseincincy]

I think there will be a settling of some sort. The money being thrown at these players right now is reckless and eventually people spending this type of money will want more than they are currently getting in return. I'm not sure how that happens without lowering their expectations of return or lowering their outlay. There are many athletes receiving NIL money right now for programs that lose money. I'm waiting for someone to put together a report comparing NIL received vs. return realized.
Fan engagement will always be affected by winning not just loyalty. I was a little less engaged with SU hoop this year. Watched more games dvr'd but still watched them.

 

[SUfanNC]

I think this is a really good idea that just needs tweaking. It's not the kid who pays to enter, but 20% or whatever of the new portal fee should go to the school who just lost their star player so they can try to get a replacement. I like it.

Call it a service fee for paperwork

 

[Brooky03]

The SEC puts up barriers, if they can stop players from going to other SEC schools then why can’t the NCAA go back to the sit out a year model?

The SEC rules don’t stop a player from playing for another D1 school, it just limits the pool of schools they can pick from. An NCAA rule like that would apply to all schools and that’s where the anti-trust rulings come into play.

Also, players can transfer within the SEC without sitting out a full year; the Spring transfer window is the one that shuts that out. As I understand it, if a football player enters during the winter window, they can play the following Fall at an SEC school (I’m not going to do a deep dive on this, so my understanding could be wrong). It’s more restrictive but not prohibitive. There’s a line somewhere. For now, the SEC is on the right side of that line. If/when challenged in court, that could change.

 

[NineOneSeven]

This has legal issues all over it.

Could this work if the players and the NCAA had a "CBA" like the pro-leagues do. Possible. But there is no CBA in college sports, I guess in part because they are not employees.

Lololol

 

[djcon57]

Lololol

I mean, they aren't. Does the University send them a W2 or even a 1099?

All of the ideas in the thread, per usual, are not possible without massive decisions from the courts overturning already decided cases. West Virginia vs NCAA and Tennessee and Virginia vs NCAA being the main ones. NCAA already had to pay. They won't want to again

And fwiw, the NCAA has already agreed not to change transfer rules. I assume if contracts come into play, that would change

NCAA, states agree in transfer lawsuit settlement

The NCAA and a coalition of states agreed to settle a lawsuit Thursday that would allow athletes to be immediately eligible to play no matter how many times they transfer.

www.espn.com

"In addition, the NCAA would be barred from undermining or circumventing its provisions through future actions that could threaten athletes' rights and freedoms, according to the agreement."

 

[NineOneSeven]

I mean, they aren't. Does the University send them a W2 or even a 1099?

All of the ideas in the thread, per usual, are not possible without massive decisions from the courts overturning already decided cases. West Virginia vs NCAA and Tennessee and Virginia vs NCAA being the main ones. NCAA already had to pay. They won't want to again

And fwiw, the NCAA has already agreed not to change transfer rules. I assume if contracts come into play, that would change

NCAA, states agree in transfer lawsuit settlement

The NCAA and a coalition of states agreed to settle a lawsuit Thursday that would allow athletes to be immediately eligible to play no matter how many times they transfer.

www.espn.com

"In addition, the NCAA would be barred from undermining or circumventing its provisions through future actions that could threaten athletes' rights and freedoms, according to the agreement."

I know they aren’t. Which is funny. Hence the laughing.