How is it easier if they already can’t be caught? There’s literally no change. You don’t think transfers aren’t already offered money to attend a certain school? Lol.
Does image and likeness increase
- Thread starter ImBadRU
- Start date
It’s easier because you have to catch me making the promise. The day after the kid enrolls I can the hand him $10k for a signed jersey at a press conference. Or pay the kid $5K to appear at my car dealership or $5K to show up at an autograph session where any number of like minded boosters would pay $$$$$$ for an autograph. Tell me none of those things will happen. And I know money changes hands now but they have to hide it. Just my opinion.
Is anyone buying a Geo Baker jersey without Rutgers embroidered on it? Doubt it.
But shouldn’t Geo receive a commission from RU when his Jersey, name or likeness is sold on a RU shirt at the bookstore or at Scarlet Fever? That I’d agree with.
Then those boosters are idiots. The publicity from the car dealership appearance and autograph signing with lots of boosters in attendance would attract the attention of the NCAA. Secretly giving recruits cash is the easiest way to do it. That’s not changing even if NIL is given to college athletes.
No, but they may just want to start playing for Nebraska. Some big boosters down there and maybe just maybe they didn't want to do it the shady way. Not everyone does. But now they have a legal way to get that player. Maybe Cliff sees a nice deal somewhere else and decides a transfer is a great idea. Tell me where all these big boosters are for Rutgers? Enjoy the good times now, because they'll be fleeting.
So you have seen the rules that would prohibit those activities or a booster/fan from paying $X for an autograph? Signed jersey? A booster would not be able to send their kid to the Zion Williams (pick a name) 3 day basketball clinic for $5K? Is the NCAA going to regulate what each player is worth? That will go well. Hell, over the web some guy completely unconnected to a program (haha) could buy 1000 jerseys for $20 each. Yeah, NCAA will have no problem keeping this under control.
They already don’t have it under control and that’s my point. The NCAA can say the booster’s kids can’t attend the camp, but who’s watching the camp? What about the booster’s nieces and nephews? Grandkids? What if they give the money to somebody else to purchase a jersey on their behalf? There’s always a way to get around the rules. Blocking NIL vs allowing it will have no effect on rule breaking. Those who want to break them to gain an advantage will continue to find a way.
That goes for pretty much any athlete ever. Pro sports or otherwise. I'm a miami dolphins fan. If Dan marino was a Buffalo Bill or a local electrician, I wouldn't be buying his jersey either.
And yes he should.
Everything you just wrote supports my opinion that it will make breaking/bending the rules that much easier. The rich will get richer. Like I said earlier - You might as well just blow it up and pay them.
Because the 11th guy at Michigan pays more than the first guy at Rutgers. It’s why the NCAA went to limited number of scholarships. To even the playing field. Now schools and boosters with money will openly buy the best players. Nothing to stop it. Good for them I say.
We don’t do that here.
Especially quoting the whole thing.
Not cool, man. Not cool.
I guess I’m of the opinion that just because people are doing something illegal already doesn’t mean we should make it easier. It’s probably a foregone conclusion that some form of payment will be allowed and the NCAA will try to monitor it and put dollar limits on it but the players will ***** again and say the NCAA has no right to limit what they can earn. All the while fewer and fewer top recruits give us the time of day as we don’t have the $$$$ to play the new recruiting game. I’d love to be wrong but don’t think I am.Because it’s not extremely easy already
Here’s an idea - what if they revised the rules so that you regain your “likeness” for earning after playing for a university for a full season or 2? The logic would be to prevent use of likeness as a recruiting tool. Should a kid transfer, the clock would reset.
i think the NCAA big sticking point is that it will cost them massively in both code and policing to implement this. I really don't think they care if someone gets 10k to run a camp in the summer. But it does open up a big angle shoot to pay people through NIL deals off the books. They just dont have the manpower to police it
Then it would serve their interest to open things up only for upper class kids who stick with their commitments. College basketball is a better, more interesting sport with more high quality juniors and seniors that go on to play professionally, than one and done kids. In my opinion, most important to preserve that frosh don’t profit because their branding as a college player hasn’t developed yet to justify market value earnings. Pay for frosh would almost always be tied to initial recruiting which is why it should remain banned. But why shouldn’t a junior be able to make money for an appearance in a camp or to make an advertisement as a 2+ year star for a university team? The school gets the trademark profit from the jersey appearing in the commercial. The kid could get some money too and it doesn’t corrupt the entire sport.
That’s why frosh shouldn’t be able to make money under any circumstance. I think the kids pushing the NIL movement would probably relent on this. It’s reasonable that when committing to play collegiate ball you give up a year of earnings in the first year to get acclimated to the school and transition into the college game. Ideally - earning potential would commence junior year as it would make use for recruiting purposes very difficult.
Let’s bring back NCAA video games branded with upper class players who opt in to earn a fee. Engaging the younger generation in college sports is very good for the NCAA cause. Everyone wins and more G league type kids continue their college careers longer.
You’re of the opinion that shady boosters are going to go through all of the work to promise a player future payment. Then, if the player commits to their school, they’ll pay them through an appearance at a car dealership or an autograph after they’re on campus. Uhh, really?
Why would any of them do that when they can just tell the bag man to make a delivery so they’ll commit? With it or without NIL, that’s the easiest way. I’m not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.
I understand what you’re saying, I just don’t agree with it. If the actual transfer of cash could be done as a legal activity I think most would prefer that. Do you have any thoughts on how it could be used to entice or discourage transfers?
I already answered that the first time you brought it up.
“Hey, we promise to buy your autographed jersey if you transfer here.”
“Hey, here’s $1000 to commit to our school. More to come if you play for us.”
Which is more enticing to a poor 19 year old? Those that want to win at all costs don’t care if it’s legal or illegal because they don’t think they’ll be caught. The bag man won’t suddenly disappear because NIL is given to players.
If players have to play a full season plus with their current team before being eligible to earn - using it as a recruiting tool becomes much harder. Regardless of what they do, there will be earn restrictions that forbid paying kids for recruiting purposes. The best players aren’t going to stick around multiple years if they are good enough for the NBA so an advance promise to buy a jersey of a kid in two years time if that kid is still around is meaningless because if the promise pans out it’s going to be plastered on the violation radar as suspicious. if that kid sticks around it’s likely because he didn’t turn out to be good enough to warrant the price of that jersey. Now suddenly someone is giving that kid a jersey contract and that won’t look suspicious? Huge risk of getting caught to make that deal.
Jersey contract? Wow this thread has jumped the shark. NIL is about the players who aren’t stars being able to hold their own basketball camps in their hometown, sell their own artwork, monetize a podcast. This isn’t going to led to players to sell their own game worn jersey to the highest bidder. The NCAA wouldn’t allow that. It’s about kids being allowed to earn some extra income using their skills or setting the groundwork for a career outside of sports while they’re in school.
wheezer said:
I would not have a problem with this if there is a strictly enforced universal cap on the amount
Colleges earn extra funding when those players make the school attractive to their fanbase and booster donate more when team plays well and they can feel a little part of it.
The NCAA earns its revenue from college sports and charges for that representation.
Schools sell merchandise using the players likenesses and their names to increase sales and profit
If the NCAA and Universities don't feel it's right to share the profits with the players, there is an easy solution, don't use the names and likenesses of players on the merchandise they hawk and
just sell it with only the school's name and image.
The players should be entitled to sharing merchandiser revenue based on them and the school needs to realize thir players agreed to play for them for the scholership they are reciving, not to be part of a commercialized merchandise sale program based on their name.
I would not have a problem with this if there is a strictly enforced universal cap on the amount
college players earn their scholarships by playing.
Colleges earn extra funding when those players make the school attractive to their fanbase and booster donate more when team plays well and they can feel a little part of it.
The NCAA earns its revenue from college sports and charges for that representation.
Schools sell merchandise using the players likenesses and their names to increase sales and profit
If the NCAA and Universities don't feel it's right to share the profits with the players, there is an easy solution, don't use the names and likenesses of players on the merchandise they hawk and
just sell it with only the school's name and image.
The players should be entitled to sharing merchandiser revenue based on them and the school needs to realize thir players agreed to play for them for the scholership they are reciving, not to be part of a commercialized merchandise sale program based on their name.
You seem to have the inside track on exactly which type of player can take advantage of this and at what geographical location they can take advantage of this and what type of products and merchandise they can profit from.
Oh I agree. I was pointing this out in response to the comments about how bad this will be for monetizing the recruiting process. There’s a simple solution to making sure it has very little if any impact. Just don’t let it apply for the first year.
Yes, it’s called common sense. The NCAA is going to just let NIL go without rules. It’s not going to be the Wild West.
Of course there will be rules but you nor I have any clue what those rules will be. And based on how well the current rules are monitored, I’m sure there will be no schools taking advantage.