Hard to get your mind around it.
2 Likes
I think this is good. Just let the athletes work it out with non boosters like it should be.
1 Like
Thatâs about as useful as a dried up udderâŠ.if left to the conferences no one will do anythingâŠâŠwhy would they govern themselves and put their teams at a disadvantage if the other conferences arenât doing anything?
Not because of integrity or anything silly like thatâŠ.
There is going to be so much money flowing around
within the new NIL rules , it may never even be noticeable.
In the old system, that kind of teenager wealth would
really standout and raise suspicions. Oh sure, there
were a few players getting nice sports car loans, but this is way beyond those kid trinkets.
But we will see; maybe it will be a blast for spectators
too.
Bama and a number of other schools spent too much money on facilities and street cred to watch players march off to some upstarts with alumni groups willing to splurge. Look at us, as weâve invested and built winning programs just to lose players to the portal or last-minute switches by HS recruits for a new Camaro.
Any new rules or sanctions will wind up in court, so itâll be a couple years to find out what limits are legit. If courts rule in the boostersâ favor, schools like USC could make every football player a millionaire over the course of 4 years.
1 Like
Sounds like Texas State and UTSA are about to get hit hard for all the recruiting violations in Austin and College Station.
3 Likes
Boosters will just go back underground. The bagman is happy he will be employed again.
That scenario was the basis of the NYU and BU gambling scandals of the 1950s.
2 Likes
Iâve never heard this story before and it was before
my time, probably like most here.
I found this about BB from 1951 âŠ
The only thing that will change is point of contact. NCAA will be hit with so many anti-trust lawsuits they wouldnât dare crack down properly.
Everybody is feeling this one out. This is Calvinball until the lawsuits settle the dust. The cautious will try to stay within their perception of the rules, but the bold will buy as many players through NIL as possible and worry about consequences later on.
I agree 100%. Thatâs what the lawmakers, at the federal level, need to get involved. And I hate the thought of that. but itâs still better that 50 different sets of laws.
1 Like
Big schools want a cap but I donât see that happening but they can stop alumni and boosters from inducements and stop total teams getting 50k across the brd like UT lineman , Byu team payments and OU etc doing that. It needs to be what was intended which is the ath dept nor boosters can direct or induce to get kids to sign and itâs up to the kid on their own to do a deal like our great rb did. They canât have a slush fund waiting like a$m which I see going away if they truly crack down.
Isnât the âNCAAâ run by the institutions ?
Supposed to be but UT etc can influence them so they donât crack down on cheating of bigger programs which is why smu got hammered for what UT etc and sec were doing all along.
1 Like
Itâs why we really need the NCAA to be impartial or get another governing entity that does.
Why would any entity not favor its most powerful members? No such thing as equal treatment, not in this life.
The NCAA will try to curb the most egregious practices. Congress will not get involved. If the P5 broke off and tried to control NIL, theyâll be in the same spot as the NCAA. A zillion lawsuits will define NIL. That is, if they are ever settled or decided.
âBlake Lawrence, CEO of a company helping athletes & universities steer their way through NIL, said this week he expects scholarship football & menâs basketball players in the major conferences to âsoonâ each earn a minimum of $50,000 annually, thanks to the boost from collectives, according to the Associated Press.â (bold italics added)
It would cost about 4.9 mil per yr to do for bb and fb only.
Once in the big 12 , we must, we could.
However, thereâs no cap so biding war which is what the NCAA is trying to address.