Hadn't seen this article posted - extremely interesting read, especially the most vocal opponent to the new NIL Enforcement Agency, the CSC

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...eo-nil-enforcement-reminds-schools-your-rules

Just really sad, and telling that duhO$U is loudest, most vocal and public critic of the newly formed regulator that is supposed to serve the rules as written and treat all 138 FBS programs equally under those rules. Just disgraceful, and telling, that duhO$U suggests the following:

Ohio State AD Ross Bjork openly wondered to cbssports.com about the Big Ten potentially breaking away from the pack and writing its own rules. Washington AD Pat Chun told the website "we created this fraudulent market to be able to compensate our athletes."

Just shocking that a representative of a Major College University would state the weak, and bankrupt-values, rationalization that the "fraudulent marketplace" was created so schools could "pay to play" while claiming they aren't paying for play, it's "NIL payments" (hence the Washington AD's comment that the "fraudulent market" was created for them so they could hide their pay-for-play in a fraudulent marketplace hidden as NIL payments.).

This statement from the head of the NIL Enforcement Agency is quite telling:

Seeley said he hears criticism about a slow timeline to clear deals, which can leave schools in limbo, unsure if certain players are eligible. But the CEO calls that a "false narrative."

"Deals are being held up because they don't comply with the rules," Seeley said. "And many times when we ask for information about the deals, we get no response, a partial response that doesn't answer our question, or, increasingly, false responses, which causes delays."

 

[PSU Mike]

Did any rational person think it was real?

 

[Nitt1300]

There used to be reasons to be a fan. I can't think of any now.

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

There used to be reasons to be a fan. I can't think of any now.

I found these comments to also be extremely interesting:

Seeley said potentially a more serious problem is schools making guarantees about third-party NIL payments to players while recruiting them from the transfer portal, which is not allowed under NCAA rules. Deals aren't supposed to be signed until after the athletes are enrolled.

"And they are now finding it quite difficult to submit compliant NIL deals to meet those obligations," Seeley said. "Assuming that is true, that is clearly a problem. The question is, how should the industry attack that problem? You're seeing differences of opinion, in some ways based on whether you're a school who made those commitments or didn't."

As well as these comments:

Seeley said the CSC wants to work with whatever model the schools develop. What he refuses to do is accept blame for enforcing the rules.

"We didn't write the rules," he said. "But the issue now is not, is the CSC broken or not working? The issue is a lot of schools apparently didn't follow the rules."

 

[RolexKong]

I found these comments to also be extremely interesting:

Seeley said potentially a more serious problem is schools making guarantees about third-party NIL payments to players while recruiting them from the transfer portal, which is not allowed under NCAA rules. Deals aren't supposed to be signed until after the athletes are enrolled.

"And they are now finding it quite difficult to submit compliant NIL deals to meet those obligations," Seeley said. "Assuming that is true, that is clearly a problem. The question is, how should the industry attack that problem? You're seeing differences of opinion, in some ways based on whether you're a school who made those commitments or didn't."

As well as these comments:

Seeley said the CSC wants to work with whatever model the schools develop. What he refuses to do is accept blame for enforcing the rules.

"We didn't write the rules," he said. "But the issue now is not, is the CSC broken or not working? The issue is a lot of schools apparently didn't follow the rules."

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

And I'm sure it's pure coinky-dink that duhO$U's AD is suggesting the b1g should leave and set up their own rules [insert eyeroll].

 

[Chumboshifko1]

My, my, my.....

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

My, my, my.....

Not sure many get the significance of NIL Cooperatives being deemed an "Associated Entity" depending upon how they operate, are controlled and act. If an NIL is participating in the recruitment of an athlete via financial guarantees which is "quid pro quo" for an athete's formal, and binding, commitment, they are defacto "Associated Entities" because only University's are permitted to interact with the Athlete and apparently the NCAA Rules (written, and accepted, by the NCAA Member Schools themselves) say schools are not permitted to negotiate and sign NIL deals until after athletes are enrolled.

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

Here is an article that describes the situation a bit better and with more granular detail:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7105088/2026/03/10/college-sports-commission-nil-deals-approval/

The CSC was created via last year's "House Settlement" and has the court granted authority for Compliance of the terms of the House Settlement schools agreed to. When schools control third-party NIL entities actions and offers, it turns them into "Associated Entities". Once they're deemed "Associated Entities" there is a whole host of problems including the NIL being involved in recruiting being an NCAA Rules Violation (not only that, but any amount committed by the Associated Entity counts against the University's Cap... meaning that many of these Universities have blatantly violated ""The Cap" they agreed to abide by in the House Settlement - which we all knew was going on when duhO$U reported their unprecedented large financial deficits in their Athletic Department Budgets).

Again, what makes this situation most hysterical is that this is the very first year of the House Settlement and it's quite clear the head of the CSC is saying that a lot, if not most, of the NIL "X-Fer Portal" deals are not valid, are contrary to NCAA Rules and therefore constitute what is "pay for play" cheating.

 

[RolexKong]

Here is an article that describes the situation a bit better and with more granular detail:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7105088/2026/03/10/college-sports-commission-nil-deals-approval/

The CSC was created via last year's "House Settlement" and has the court granted authority for Compliance of the terms of the House Settlement schools agreed to. When schools control third-party NIL entities actions and offers, it turns them into "Associated Entities". Once they're deemed "Associated Entities" there is a whole host of problems including the NIL being involved in recruiting being an NCAA Rules Violation (not only that, but any amount committed by the Associated Entity counts against the University's Cap... meaning that many of these Universities have blatantly violated ""The Cap" they agreed to abide by in the House Settlement - which we all knew was going on when duhO$U reported their unprecedented large financial deficits in their Athletic Department Budgets).

Again, what makes this situation most hysterical is that this is the very first year of the House Settlement and it's quite clear the head of the CSC is saying that a lot, if not most, of the NIL "X-Fer Portal" deals are not valid, are contrary to NCAA Rules and therefore constitute what is "pay for play" cheating.

The CSC has no "court granted authority."

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

The CSC has no "court granted authority."

My bad, you're correct as the authority comes from the settlement the parties agreed to in the court, the court didn't have to issue it; the court most definitely signed off on the agreement and holds both parties to their obligations and commitments under the settlement - so a bit of a technical wording error on my part. The College Sports Commission was granted authority via Washington and granted authority to be the Compliance and Regulatory Authority under the "House vs NCAA Antitrust Settlement" which was signed off by a US District Court after the litigants agreed to the settlement.

 

[RolexKong]

My bad, you're correct - bit of word error on my part. The College Sports Commission was granted authority via Washington and granted authority to be the Compliance and Regulatory Authority under the "House vs NCAA Antitrust Settlement" which was signed off by a US District Court after the litigants agreed to the settlement.

I'm going to make this simple: there are no legal controls over the amount of money paid to college athletes. NIL is just a sham to cover it up

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

I'm going to make this simple: there are no legal controls over the amount of money paid to college athletes. NIL is just a sham to cover it up

I'll keep this simple, you're quite incorrect - first of all, every member of the NCAA signs the same agreement as a Member... and the NCAA does not allow "pay to play" outside the "House Settlement Agreement" - fraudulently disguising "pay-to-play" as NIL is a clear NCAA Violation. In addition, the full name of the "House Settlement" is actually the "House vs NCAA Antitrust Settlement". The NCAA represented all Member Institutions in that settlement and if you think a US District Court is going to have no problem with fraudulent actions in regards to an NCAA Institutions commitments and obligations relative to a Court governed settlement to avoid Antritrust-related issues, you're dumber than I already thought you were Suckeye jock-sniffer win regardless of means or principles. Just because you don't care if duhO$U commits fraud that violates commitments and obligations under a US Court-adopted Settlement, as well as NCAA Rules (duhO$U is a Member of the NCAA and signed the agreements and contracts) doesn't mean that no one else cares. LMAO

 

[JoePaMajorCFBrecord409Ws]

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-fo...hers-mull-new-governance-model-215315905.html

 

[RolexKong]

I'll keep this simple, you're quite incorrect - first of all, every member of the NCAA signs the same agreement as a Member... and the NCAA does not allow "pay to play" outside the "House Settlement Agreement" - fraudulently disguising "pay-to-play" as NIL is a clear NCAA Violation. In addition, the full name of the "House Settlement" is actually the "House vs NCAA Antitrust Settlement". The NCAA represented all Member Institutions in that settlement and if you think a US District Court is going to have no problem with fraudulent actions in regards to an NCAA Institutions commitments and obligations relative to a Court governed settlement to avoid Antritrust-related issues, you're dumber than I already thought you were Suckeye jock-sniffer win regardless of means or principles. Just because you don't care if duhO$U commits fraud that violates commitments and obligations under a US Court-adopted Settlement, as well as NCAA Rules (duhO$U is a Member of the NCAA and signed the agreements and contracts) doesn't mean that no one else cares. LMAO

Go back to sleep, Gomer. You might be the only person in the world who gives a fluck.