NIL/Transfer portal in 5 years-Predictions?

[djcon57]

I'm not designing the system but it would likely have to be agreed upon by the schools and obviously enforced by whatever governing body there is. Nobody wants to drag anybody into court because the fallout from that could be much worse than anyone wants.

The schools and whatever governing body can agree on all they want.

The players don't have to agree to it based on what Kavanaugh said.

He specifically said the NCAA should engage in collective bargaining with the players.

If they just say "Oh by the way, there's a cap now". It will be in the courts immediately.

 

[orangecuse]

I'm not designing the system but it would likely have to be agreed upon by the schools and obviously enforced by whatever governing body there is. Nobody wants to drag anybody into court because the fallout from that could be much worse than anyone wants.

No doubt.

With the genie out of the bottle and never going back in, the institutions/schools need to change the present paradigm. As we all know, college sports is a huge business and schools should shift and transition to that model. The status of these particular individuals/athletes; i.e., independent contractor, etc. to be determined accordingly.

The NFL rule is 3 years post one's high school graduation date/year in order to be eligible to play in it. So, until the NFL changes its rule (which is highly unlikely) the schools still have considerable leverage, as where else are these young men going to go? The fact is, they certainly don't have any better platforms, opportunities, etc. afforded/provided to them.

Schools need to get rid of the letter of intent contracts as is, etc. and transition it to a legal contract fitting the current landscape. It can be year to year, or multiple, depending upon how the individual/schools agree to negotiate the terms, etc. Incorporate an agreed upon salary cap type limit a la the NFL, etc.

Have these young and generally unproven men have to bet on themselves, so to speak. One can take the one year scholarship, free room and board, etc. and everything that comes with it, limitations and all, or negotiate a separate contractual agreement. In either case, there can be a clause relative to good academic standing, etc. Therefore, there's a semblance of consequence relative to eligibility in order to enter the transfer portal and be able to play at another FBS type school the following year if one chooses to go that route.

Let the chips fall where they may.

 

[PhatOrange]

The schools and whatever governing body can agree on all they want.

The players don't have to agree to it based on what Kavanaugh said.

He specifically said the NCAA should engage in collective bargaining with the players.

If they just say "Oh by the way, there's a cap now". It will be in the courts immediately.

that's fine, then like I said, form unions and collective bargaining so what.

those players who don't agree don't play and the ones who want to play will. You can't sue someone to pay you more money.

It's where it's headed because once the power schools start getting into bidding wars against each other that they can't match then there will be changes.

 

[djcon57]

that's fine, then like I said, form unions and collective bargaining so what.

those players who don't agree don't play and the ones who want to play will. You can't sue someone to pay you more money.

I don't think you are comprehending this. The schools AREN'T PAYING the players. What are they putting a cap on and how?

If they say players have a cap on what they can earn on their NIL, they will be brought into court.

 

[721Comstock]

I don't think you are comprehending this. The schools AREN'T PAYING the players. What are they putting a cap on and how?

If they say players have a cap on what they can earn on their NIL, they will be brought into court.

Yeah - Lebron doesn't have a cap on his endorsements.
Neither does Tom Brady.
Nobody does.

That's what this is - NOT a salary.
And NOT "pay for play".

(even though we all know that is actually is, defacto pay for play)

 

[PhatOrange]

I don't think you are comprehending this. The schools AREN'T PAYING the players. What are they putting a cap on and how?

If they say players have a cap on what they can earn on their NIL, they will be brought into court.

We're talking about two different things so my bad. I get it that if some AC company wants to pay DeColdness Crawford a million dollars to sell AC units then there is nothing that can be done to cap that.

 

[orangecuse]

Yeah - Lebron doesn't have a cap on his endorsements.
Neither does Tom Brady.
Nobody does.

That's what this is - NOT a salary.
And NOT "pay for play".

(even though we all know that is actually is, defacto pay for play)

Tru dat.

Using the NIL badge is nothing more than a loophole to pay for play. The fact that "everyone" knows it's the case, but hiding behind NIL is a joke. What ends up being done about this fact, who knows?

No more than the "carried interest" loophole that exists for those wealthy money and hedge funds managers, etc. that get away with only paying income tax at the capital gains rate vs. ordinary income. A complete sham.

 

[MikeSU02]

Tru dat.

Using the NIL badge is nothing more than a loophole to pay for play. The fact that "everyone" knows it's the case, but hiding behind NIL is a joke. What ends up being done about this fact, who knows?

No more than the "carried interest" loophole that exists for those wealthy money and hedge funds managers, etc. that get away with only paying income tax at the capital gains rate vs. ordinary income. A complete sham.

NCAA had all the time in the world to address this before the courts did.

And they chose not to.

 

[orangecuse]

NCAA had all the time in the world to address this before the courts did.

And they chose not to.

Well, the fact that the courts ruled on this matter would've superseded anything the NCAA would've "addressed" prior to. Therefore, making it moot.

 

[MikeSU02]

Well, the fact that the courts ruled on this matter would've superseded anything the NCAA would've "addressed" prior to. Therefore, making it moot.

If there was a solution in place beforehand, do you think it would have been a case going to SCOTUS?

Decades upon decades of inaction to ensure that everyone got paid but the players on the field. Actively restricting it.

 

[samspann1]

This is a different form of NIL:

 

[David321]

I’m not sure how things will pan out but I’m pretty confident that the pendulum has swung all the way over now and will correct itself in due time.

 

[HtownOrange]

I don't think anyone really knows, but one thing for sure, is that Mr. Money Bags in most instances have huge egos. They love to throw their money around, and if they reduce their payments, there will always be someone else stepping up to replace them. Assuming, the economy is the same, or better, money will be flow freely and part of that will flow to the recruits at State U. Smaller schools might suffer, but the Big Boys will always be the big boys.

Now, if the economy tanks, that's a different story. But I don't see that happening as long as the USA stays in the money printing business.

The more money that flows, the more interested the IRS will be in the system. If nothing else, the tax system will cool down the system. Once kids learn that the IRS gets 37% (top tax bracket), then Uncle (state equivalent of Uncle Sam here) gets a cut, then the agent and the business manager get cuts, the kids will learn the hard way they don't get what they were "promised".

The free market will also seek equilibrium, it always does.

 

[HtownOrange]

The schools and whatever governing body can agree on all they want.

The players don't have to agree to it based on what Kavanaugh said.

He specifically said the NCAA should engage in collective bargaining with the players.

If they just say "Oh by the way, there's a cap now". It will be in the courts immediately.

I agree with your points in general. The players will receive a tax bill when the enter collective bargaining, to bargain collectively, they must be employees. That means the bench guys will be paying tax on their "scholarship". Money men will have to pay the supporting cast and practice fodder or the kids will leave. Fools and their money are soon parted.

This is a good thing for everyone as it dismisses the notion that kids receive nothing for their play and it makes people realize how much school really costs., two points that need reality checks.

The NIL money remains unaffected, but the schools do have influence with the money mongers. Equilibrium will be achieved, it will not be perfect, but a balance will be achieved...until the next big change.

 

[djcon57]

I agree with your points in general. The players will receive a tax bill when the enter collective bargaining, to bargain collectively, they must be employees. That means the bench guys will be paying tax on their "scholarship". Money men will have to pay the supporting cast and practice fodder or the kids will leave. Fools and their money are soon parted.

This is a good thing for everyone as it dismisses the notion that kids receive nothing for their play and it makes people realize how much school really costs., two points that need reality checks.

The NIL money remains unaffected, but the schools do have influence with the money mongers. Equilibrium will be achieved, it will not be perfect, but a balance will be achieved...until the next big change.

But the NCAA doesn't want to them to be employees. That's why we are were we are at.

 

[rrlbees]

The schools and whatever governing body can agree on all they want.

The players don't have to agree to it based on what Kavanaugh said.

He specifically said the NCAA should engage in collective bargaining with the players.

If they just say "Oh by the way, there's a cap now". It will be in the courts immediately.

He never said he was against a salary cap. In fact he said it was something that may have to be considered in some sports. And after his rant, no other judge spoke up agreeing with him and his rant. Right now their 9-0 ruling only pertained to educational related expenses.

 

[dcorangeMEN]

I believe we’re witnessing the beginning of the end of college football. Here’s how it plays out:
-ncaa steps in and tries to regulate nil
-major sec and big ten schools say no thanks and start their own ‘super conference’
-all the schools that join the super conference will be governed on their own. Ie not the ncaa
-new super conference changes eligibility to be anyone ‘working’ at the school and not just students.
-they pay their players now.
-they’re ultimately a new type of pro football under the guise of college football

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

If serious...How would that be implemented and by who?

Well, it can’t be, because the money is from outside the program. It’s not containable.

 

[djcon57]

He never said he was against a salary cap. In fact he said it was something that may have to be considered in some sports. And after his rant, no other judge spoke up agreeing with him and his rant. Right now their 9-0 ruling only pertained to educational related expenses.

correct.

He’s not against the cap. He’s basically suggesting them being employees

Do you think the ncaa agrees? If not, then the suggestion of a cap is pointless

 

[All4SU]

The problem with applying typical market forces to NIL is this: In the real world, money and investment is driven by a profit incentive. With college football, it’s emotional. It’s about big donors who want Ole State U. to be the top dog. They don’t even care if the money doesn’t have a monetary yield. They just want to puff their chests out and wear ugly college logo pants.

 

[All4SU]

No doubt.

With the genie out of the bottle and never going back in, the institutions/schools need to change the present paradigm. As we all know, college sports is a huge business and schools should shift and transition to that model. The status of these particular individuals/athletes; i.e., independent contractor, etc. to be determined accordingly.

The NFL rule is 3 years post one's high school graduation date/year in order to be eligible to play in it. So, until the NFL changes its rule (which is highly unlikely) the schools still have considerable leverage, as where else are these young men going to go? The fact is, they certainly don't have any better platforms, opportunities, etc. afforded/provided to them.

Schools need to get rid of the letter of intent contracts as is, etc. and transition it to a legal contract fitting the current landscape. It can be year to year, or multiple, depending upon how the individual/schools agree to negotiate the terms, etc. Incorporate an agreed upon salary cap type limit a la the NFL, etc.

Have these young and generally unproven men have to bet on themselves, so to speak. One can take the one year scholarship, free room and board, etc. and everything that comes with it, limitations and all, or negotiate a separate contractual agreement. In either case, there can be a clause relative to good academic standing, etc. Therefore, there's a semblance of consequence relative to eligibility in order to enter the transfer portal and be able to play at another FBS type school the following year if one chooses to go that route.

Let the chips fall where they may.

I see no defensible way to pay players and still enforce a rule that says a high school kid can’t go directly to the NFL. Let’s face it. The NFL made that wink wink deal with colleges to allow the colleges to protect their investments, and because the NFL knew 99% of high school kids couldn’t physically compete in the NfL, and the colleges were essentially a breeder farm for the NFL.

 

[rrlbees]

Look who’s talking.

 

[storange]

The portal will be abolished , college football will become squeaky clean and money will have no affect on the sport at all..

 

[HtownOrange]

But the NCAA doesn't want to them to be employees. That's why we are were we are at.

Exactly. The first side to flinch wins the upper hand...for a short while. Neither the athletes (as a whole) nor the schools want the athletes to be employees. However, the athletes want collective bargaining. I interpret the court's position as not liking the special class of student/athlete receiving benefits without being declared employees, courts generally dislike legal fictions. Even if the players are deemed "contractors", the issue of income and taxation are easily addressed.

There are many issues to address: how to calculate the cost of education. I would expect the IRS arguing the private school prices as there are no hidden factors, private schools must generate enough income to pay the bills. We know it costs around $70K/year for private school. We also know that players receive other benefits and that taxes would push the value to more than $100K/year.

Then there is the issue that most athletes are not in revenue sports. Each of these athletes are not likely to be able to pay taxes on their scholarship (assuming a full ride) as they generally have no income - let's be honest, only a few NIL dollars will trickle into the non-revenue sports.

There are many other issues, too. It's easy to see why the courts would want both sides to reach an understanding, and easy enough to see why the court may lean towards collective bargaining,. The unspoken truth is that we all know the kids are playing in exchange for their education, they are either employees or contractors and should be treated as such on all fronts (insurance, workers comp, taxes, etc.) and schools should face the music that they cannot create a special category of pseudo employees.

 

[OburgOrange]

Dick_in_MI said it best. It’s not a program anymore, it’s “lets see who shows up next year”. This is the new normal, and one we have to be resigned to. Including me