The NCAA is going in the opposite direction, they are approving unlimited tranfers with no sit out, they are just going to require that a player be in the portal during certain time periods if he wants to be eligible to play the next season. And i am sure the reason for this is that they have consulted their lawyers, and know they can’t win a case in the courts impeding transfers, because the courts almost uniformly support the rights of individuals in these types of artificial restraint situations.
Schiano with Politi on NIL
- Thread starter RUJON
- Start date
The players are not contracting with the University for the money, they can transfer at will.
The contracts are not with Rutgers, Rutgers can not pay players NIL money directly.
What if contracts with the collective and donors are for 2-4 years. Can they still transfer at will?
Why?
GS is making like 4 mil/year
The guys out there busting their tail shouldn’t be able to make money?
Guarantee if any of us were in school and athletes, and somebody was going to pay us but they consider fair market value, our twould change
NIL is going on before NIL
It wasn’t just at a few places, it was rampid amongst the big boys of college football
It was an inevitably going to happen, so anyone that’s surprised either has been paying attention or is it denial faze
They might have to return some money, not saying they wouldn't, but the school that is poaching them i am sure would work the NIL deals to make up the difference.
Said this before but free tuition/room and board plus a $100k nyc salary after graduation is going to trump the vast majority of NIL deals in terms of $ long term except for maybe the high 6 figure/7 figure deals.
Rutgers should really emphasize this
It makes things very complicated. Does a kid and the poaching school really want to deal with lawyers? As long as we put up a fight I think we’ll be fine when it comes to keeping our players in their seats.
Not true… people had every right to question . It appears most , even the original supporters never expected this. Most here were not
against being compensated for NIL. This is now causing concerns about poaching best players yearly with no $$$$ limits attached. Wait until this filters down to kids in grammar school now that will be funny.
Stay tuned for more details. Clearly this whole thing is just beginning and how it works out in reality is anyone's guess at this point. Up front schools will raise yet more millions to hold on to current players and incoming classes but even 1-2 years from now things will be different. Probably a handful of big name schools that stumble out of the blocks will stumble on the field.
Isn't there some semantics going on with this notion that RU will not pay a kid while in HS? If the kid signs his LOI in December of his senior year, isn't he doing it with the understanding that he will be getting x amount of compensation for the following year? Now maybe he does not actually get any of it until he arrives either in Jan or June but the deal is done during the player recruitment period.
Do you even allow for the possibility that Alabama and Clemson were able to attract top athletes because of their extended period of excellence rather that assuming they were paying top dollar for kids all along? Why did it seem like both Dabo and Saban were out there pretty early with their concerns about this system? Probably because they knew other less successful schools in their conferences had deeper pockets.
I will grant you that there has been a need for greater consequences for coaches not honoring their deals and making sure that recruits and players impacted had the ability to move without penalties after meeting with the new coach. I thought we were headed in that direction before the NIL gravy train hit the station.
All this TV revenue for football supports the entire athletic program including many non-revenue sports. Look at the bottom line and tell me how many athletic programs turn a genuine profit. I don't think many. At least donations to facilitates building (which is also an out of control arms race) supports a generations of athletic teams rather than putting money into pockets of individual players.
I just cannot support where this is headed. I am stepping down my interest in RU athletics because despite the optimism that guys like you Geo and Nick are trying to sell many about the "opportunity", I have been around long enough to know RU will not thrive in this environment. Schiano knows his program is at a crossroads and thus is getting involved in a manner I am sure he would rather not have to engage. The smartest guy may have been Fran Brown who realized it was time to get out of town. Having said that, I think we are in a similar boat with at least a third of the conference members. Our ceiling has been lowered and our floor is probably around the same.
You lost me at “NIl is going on before NIL. No… I’ll pay you this $$$$ amount if you attend my school… bagman to Eric Dickerson … just like some others and there are hundreds.
That’s exactly what I’m referring to Bob, it was going on at many places. It wasn’t just SMU / A&M with Dickerson it was rampant throughout college football amongst the big boys, if you weren’t doing it you were getting left behind.
Certainly some of the schools are doing it more than others and on a different scale, but this has been going on forever
My guess is that things actually won't change much in the immediate future. Schools that already have a big money advantage will raise enough money to maintain their advantages. Schools that lag will continue to lag. But you have to wonder what will happen down the road when you have teams with some very highly paid players and some who get nothing, and teams with paid players going against teams with few or no paid players. Will some schools decide it's too much and bail out? Think about midmajor programs like Memphis, Temple, Buffalo, New Mexico that will not be able to come up with much or any NIL money for players. I can't imagine too many of those types of schools have fans and alumni willing to put money together for this. Will they stop playing the big boys altogether? Shifting conferences also mean an awful lot of P5 programs are looking at declining media revenue: everyone left in the Big 12 and the PAC 12. Will some of the programs there, losing the money battle from two directions, bail out?
Depends on the position and money being offered. A guy who develops into a stud LT probably will be offered enough $s to make all the extra fuss worthwhile.
They did. They had rules against it. The Supreme Court invalidated their rules (on anti-trust grounds). You can't blame the NCAA for having the courts invalidate their rules.
EDIT: I'll even go so far as to say, the Supreme Court ruled correctly (based on federal law). That of course, makes the biggest culprit the Congress. The Congress could grant an anti-trust exemption for intercollegiate athletics tomorrow and fix this entire thing.
No. Then again, hundred-dollar-handshakes and car dealers “loaning” new cars to athletes weren’t tax deductible either.
Then why ask for donations? Just act as agents for the athletes and take commission?
While Stanford is great academically in more than just science and engineering (many of their successful graduates were tech majors who did will at startups, Google etc.) quite a few STEM majors have no interest in college football or basketball. May be a significant majority. Also, today's college students seem less interested in those twenty or so years ago. Don't have any hard data, but just incidental discussion with my kids, the friends, and kids of friends, etc.
For whatever reason, Stanford is not a great draw. Except when they play Cal.
Any kid making a deal right out of high school should have a lawyer read their contract and advise them on the terms. What's wrong with dealing with lawyers?
One potential issue is what happens when a school makes a lucrative deal with a 4 star or 5 star athlete who turns out to be a bust? Should they lose their deal, or should there be a sliding scale for each year of play, number of snaps, or something like that to determine their pay?
Here's another wrinkle. In most states (including NJ), the terms of a contract cannot be enforced against a minor. Once the minor turns 18, the minor can affirm or repudiate the contract. So, if some 17 year old hot shot signs a deal with a first college, and then he gets better offers, he can simply repudiate the contract without penalty and take a better deal. He can do this multiple times until he turns 18. Fun stuff.
yes but the regular guys who want to "donate" will ask this question--its important
Then what are the donations for? Seems like a pretty self sustaining program.
Similar threads
