This makes college athletics more about paying for players than professional sports at lease at the professional level there is some kind of cap and rule that all teams have to live by, college sports don’t seem to have any rule or limit on how far a school can buy players and kill off competitions. Ever since OU won its lawsuit against the NCAA for its rights to profit from the TV market college football, as dictated by the Power5 schools, seems to violate the very antitrust violation argument that it used against the NCAA in the Supreme Court.
1 Like
It should help UH , I think bc money was under the table and they should nail us for $100 payout. At least now we can have it legal and not get SMU penalties.
1 Like
I think more schools will catch up to what A&M is doing.
Managing all these 5 star egos in the new age of the transfer portal is going to be a full time job for some schools.
2 Likes
That is exactly what is happening! Currently, what governing body tells OU, A&M, Bama, UT, etc how much money they could spend to buy out top football and basketball recruits? At least in the professional level there is a salary cap, do they have a salary cap in college athletics? I haven’t heard of one!
Isn’t it odd that in the professional level there is some concerted efforts to make things fair for all teams, but in college athletics (A supposed “amateur” entity) the teams that have the means have all the right to get rid of as much competition as possible and to concentrate all of the prestige and money among a few fortunate teams? In this way college football and basketball have become more cutthroat and profession in nature than professional sports!
How ironic and hypocritical of OU when it argued that the NCAA has violated the antitrust acts when the NCAA was regulating college football TV rights and revenues. Complete deregulation of anything could have severe consequences just like overregulation.
2 Likes
Not the same comparison. Nike can pay any individual player any amount of money and it has no affect on the salary cap. That’s the equivalent of the NIL
1 Like
Bingo…lets see how many of those kids are still there in 2 years…the egos are going to be a nightmare to deal with for some. Players are just going to be bought and sold…the seedy underbelly is going to be ugly
So, are you saying since the Lakers are the most popular team in basketball they should have the right to get as many companies as possible to buy out the best players in the world for them since all of the monies aren’t coming out of the pocket of the Lakers organization itself? If that is the case then what’s the point of a salary cap or any attempt to make the game more fair and competitive? And you know as well as I do if the Lakers are allowed to do that then they would have more money to buy players than any NBA team since all the companies would be willing to do that for them simply because of their popularity and how often they come on TV and other platforms.
The NCAA were cranky old men who refused to change. When it changed without them, they had no chance of controlling how it was implemented. They could still step up and try to control it, but I think they are too weak to do it.
I don’t know the specifics, but I know on the pro level an owner can’t pay an endorsement deal to one of his players through another of his companies. That would be going around the cap and guaranteeing more money. That is the main thing the NCAA needs to regulate. I’m all for NIL for many reasons, but you can also regulate it to prevent schools/boosters from easily offering contracts with a commitment.
While this is technically correct, and I agree the comparisons are not the same, . Nike would have little say in what team a player is playing for in many cases such as with the draft and contracts and teams making trades. In college they are simply paying to get them to play for a certain team.
Also Pros are actually expected to do something for their marketing contracts (appear in a TV commercial) and are generally paid market value based on how well they are known.
Interesting is that some states have rules that a player cannot be paid more than market value for NIL. There are other rules as well, I just don’t think a single one has been enforced.
I’m not saying anything you wrote. I’m Saying that a company can pay a player for their image and likeness and it has no bearing on the organization he plays for.
You can surmise whether that’s right, or wrong, but it’s the way it is and a salary cap has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Oh, I’m still fine with this because it isn’t really changing anything overall other than finally letting kids make money. But a real governing body could control it. I disagree that there isn’t anything you can do. Would it be easy? No, so that is why the NCAA wont do anything.
At least A&M Is buying most players they already get wasting booster money. If we , baylor or ok state started getting on a roll with this then it would make a diff.
Let’s say Nike provides Alabama with all of the athletic gear and clothing that it uses for its sport programs. You don’t think if the Bama football staff goes to Nike and tells it to give a bunch of 5 star recruits a multi-million dollar contract to represent Nike clothing lines as an incentive for these kids to join Bama’s football program instead of LSU, UT, Georgia, etc that that wouldn’t have anything to do with Nike and Bama? Whether these kids get paid directly from Bama’s funds, a Bama donor’s personal fortunes, or through a company contractually tied to Bama, it is all the same. A bunch of players choose to go to Bama because they got paid for it. After all, money exchanged hands and it is the reason they do it.
Agree. It is an enforcement nightmare and completely undermines any sort of level playing field as different states might even be able to provide incentives with lesser controls or limits. I think it might even leave it up to states to enforce and not the NCAA - ie no enforcement for major state schools.
For a national league, a national set up rules should be required.
Well, this does need to happen.
I feel like you are basically saying that the NCAA can’t make any rules related to a player earning income. With the argument, there could be an antitrust lawsuit if a player wants to leave a program midseason and go play at another where he will make more money. A player couldn’t be restricted from playing in a pro league in the offseason then. I feel like those fall in line more for lawsuits than rules making sure schools aren’t coordinating payments. If that is the case, then yes we need to have a union and collective bargaining agreement.
There is a Lot of exaggeration in those figures according to jimbo, He said sure they have NIL deals for their players but 30 million is laughable
Does anyone here believe Jarace Walker is going to pass up big dollars to come here and play for our great University of Houston for nothing for one year?
Why can’t he make money here? We need to up our coordination with big money alums and alumni businesses in the city.
Who said he couldn’t? To compete with others we are going to have to invent ways to get money in these kids pockets.
No doubt we will never have the clout of the big guys but we can still outbid on some.
Just like we did in the old days