[Beeg_Dawg]

For, another disturbing revelation about NIL payments. 
https://apnews.com/article/sports-ohio-b...1RlgfVYdrE

Maybe I missed it in another thread, but is Stanford working with third party collectives for collecting and disbursing NIL money?

[Beeg_Dawg]

For, another disturbing revelation about NIL payments. 
https://apnews.com/article/sports-ohio-b...1RlgfVYdrE

Maybe I missed it in another thread, but is Stanford working with third party collectives for collecting and disbursing NIL money?

[Softball Fan]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

[Softball Fan]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

[Spiny_Norman]

NIL is out of control IMO.

Not according to the Supreme Court which has indicated that they will look unfavorably on any attempt to restrict athlete compensation. There is nothing really that the NCAA or the conferences can do to control NIL payments.

[Spiny_Norman]

NIL is out of control IMO.

Not according to the Supreme Court which has indicated that they will look unfavorably on any attempt to restrict athlete compensation. There is nothing really that the NCAA or the conferences can do to control NIL payments.

[BostonCard]

I’ll preface this by saying I’m not a lawyer, so I would welcome correction by people who know more about this than me. As best I can tell, The Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on NIL per se.  The Supreme Court (in NCAA v. Alston) has only said that the NCAA can’t place limits on educational expenses such as laptops or graduate tuition.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/in-un...rust-laws/

The ruling established that the NCAA was not immune to anti-trust law.  It affirmed a lower court ruling that said the NCAA could not restrict educational expenses, but, also held that the NCAA could restrict expenses unrelated to education.

A federal district court in California agreed in part: It ruled that the NCAA could restrict benefits that are unrelated to education (such as cash salaries), but it barred the NCAA from limiting education-related benefits. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that decision, the NCAA and the athletic conferences went to the Supreme Court, which late last year agreed to take up the case.

(Emphasis mine)

However, the case that dealt with NIL (O’Bannon vs. NCAA) was decided in O’Bannon’s favor in the ninth circuit court of appeals, but the Supreme Court denied the petion to hear it, thus the ruling stands (and would apply to the Western US), but the Supreme Court has not actually ruled on NIL.

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/ca...on-v-ncaa/

I think the fact that the Alston case was decided unanimously, plus the fact that Brett Kavenough issued a concurrence which suggested he would go further, strongly suggests that if the O’Bannon case were in front of the USSC, that they would uphold the Ninth Circuit’s decision.

[Kavenough] questioned the legality of the remaining restrictions on benefits for college athletes. He made clear that although those restrictions were not before the court in this case, Monday’s ruling established a framework for future challenges to the restrictions – and, he wrote, there are “serious questions” about whether those rules “can pass muster” under that framework.

I don’t think, however, that anyone else signed onto his concurrence, so we don’t know how the other justices feel. I will note that the Gorsuch decision stated:

Some people may think that the district court should have gone further, he suggested, while “others will think the district court went too far by undervaluing the social benefits associated with amateur athletics.” But in the end, Gorsuch emphasized, the Supreme Court agreed with the 9th Circuit that although “[t]he national debate about amateurism in college sports is important,” it is not the Supreme Court’s job to resolve it.

I have a feeling that the NCAA probably wouldn’t be able to make a blanket prohibition on NIL deals. However, if it wanted to restrict collectives, it might be able to argue that an inducement to play for a specific school would be incompatible with amateurism, thus that it has an interest in regulating NIL deals.

I think people have been quick to jump on the Alston decision. It was a major loss for the NCAA, but I don’t think it established what is and is not permitted in terms of compensating players.


BC

[BostonCard]

I’ll preface this by saying I’m not a lawyer, so I would welcome correction by people who know more about this than me. As best I can tell, The Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on NIL per se.  The Supreme Court (in NCAA v. Alston) has only said that the NCAA can’t place limits on educational expenses such as laptops or graduate tuition.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/in-un...rust-laws/

The ruling established that the NCAA was not immune to anti-trust law.  It affirmed a lower court ruling that said the NCAA could not restrict educational expenses, but, also held that the NCAA could restrict expenses unrelated to education.

A federal district court in California agreed in part: It ruled that the NCAA could restrict benefits that are unrelated to education (such as cash salaries), but it barred the NCAA from limiting education-related benefits. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that decision, the NCAA and the athletic conferences went to the Supreme Court, which late last year agreed to take up the case.

(Emphasis mine)

However, the case that dealt with NIL (O’Bannon vs. NCAA) was decided in O’Bannon’s favor in the ninth circuit court of appeals, but the Supreme Court denied the petion to hear it, thus the ruling stands (and would apply to the Western US), but the Supreme Court has not actually ruled on NIL.

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/ca...on-v-ncaa/

I think the fact that the Alston case was decided unanimously, plus the fact that Brett Kavenough issued a concurrence which suggested he would go further, strongly suggests that if the O’Bannon case were in front of the USSC, that they would uphold the Ninth Circuit’s decision.

[Kavenough] questioned the legality of the remaining restrictions on benefits for college athletes. He made clear that although those restrictions were not before the court in this case, Monday’s ruling established a framework for future challenges to the restrictions – and, he wrote, there are “serious questions” about whether those rules “can pass muster” under that framework.

I don’t think, however, that anyone else signed onto his concurrence, so we don’t know how the other justices feel. I will note that the Gorsuch decision stated:

Some people may think that the district court should have gone further, he suggested, while “others will think the district court went too far by undervaluing the social benefits associated with amateur athletics.” But in the end, Gorsuch emphasized, the Supreme Court agreed with the 9th Circuit that although “[t]he national debate about amateurism in college sports is important,” it is not the Supreme Court’s job to resolve it.

I have a feeling that the NCAA probably wouldn’t be able to make a blanket prohibition on NIL deals. However, if it wanted to restrict collectives, it might be able to argue that an inducement to play for a specific school would be incompatible with amateurism, thus that it has an interest in regulating NIL deals.

I think people have been quick to jump on the Alston decision. It was a major loss for the NCAA, but I don’t think it established what is and is not permitted in terms of compensating players.


BC

[martyup]

The problem is that the NCAA is too cowardly to attempt to regulate the NIL collectives.

[martyup]

The problem is that the NCAA is too cowardly to attempt to regulate the NIL collectives.

[OutsiderFan]

Disturbing?

I came away from that article seeing a market figuring itself out. Different business models competing in the market place to see which ones will work best. Isn't that what free markets are all about?

[OutsiderFan]

Disturbing?

I came away from that article seeing a market figuring itself out. Different business models competing in the market place to see which ones will work best. Isn't that what free markets are all about?

[Mick]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

[Mick]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

[BostonCard]

Wikipedia tells me he is a Wharton grad.

BC

[BostonCard]

Wikipedia tells me he is a Wharton grad.

BC

[lex24]

Oregon recruiting heavily with NIL.  Wholly owned subsidiary of Phil Knight Empire…..

[lex24]

Oregon recruiting heavily with NIL.  Wholly owned subsidiary of Phil Knight Empire…..

[82lsju]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

we do have one former athlete who is a billionaire...Tiger Woods...maybe he'd be interested in starting an NIL collective...

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/340...per-forbes

[82lsju]

Quote from article:  "Marcinick said Cohesion has raised a “few million” dollars and was positioned to guarantee every member of the latest football signing class a starter NIL deal upon enrollment."

That should not be permitted.  Basically you are telling potential recruits, "You'll get money if you commit to our school". 

NIL is out of control IMO.  I'm waiting for the day when some billionaire offers to pay recruits  $1mil each "upon enrollment".

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

we do have one former athlete who is a billionaire...Tiger Woods...maybe he'd be interested in starting an NIL collective...

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/340...per-forbes

[BostonCard]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

[BostonCard]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

[SamuelMcF]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

[SamuelMcF]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

[Maple Leaf]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

There is a chance that many of these freshmen will enter the free agency portal in search of more $$$ and playing time which will add more $$$.

[Maple Leaf]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

There is a chance that many of these freshmen will enter the free agency portal in search of more $$$ and playing time which will add more $$$.

[Spiny_Norman]

[twitter]https://twitter.com/AJTarpley/status/1610024946289496064[/twitter]

[Spiny_Norman]

[twitter]https://twitter.com/AJTarpley/status/1610024946289496064[/twitter]

[81alum]

Disturbing?

I came away from that article seeing a market figuring itself out. Different business models competing in the market place to see which ones will work best. Isn't that what free markets are all about?

Universities are not and never have been free markets.  What is the meaning of a "free market" at a "non-profit" institution?

It is time for football to go the way of baseball and have "free markets" in the sense of minor league teams.  Universities can continue with the amateur ideal.  Keep the two systems separate, and give young talent the choice of which system they want.

[81alum]

Disturbing?

I came away from that article seeing a market figuring itself out. Different business models competing in the market place to see which ones will work best. Isn't that what free markets are all about?

Universities are not and never have been free markets.  What is the meaning of a "free market" at a "non-profit" institution?

It is time for football to go the way of baseball and have "free markets" in the sense of minor league teams.  Universities can continue with the amateur ideal.  Keep the two systems separate, and give young talent the choice of which system they want.

[BostonCard]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

Probably playing for someone else, given the portal.

BC

---

[twitter]https://twitter.com/AJTarpley/status/1610024946289496064[/twitter]

Tarply is right, in that college football milked the golden goose.  Had the NCAA, the conferences, and the schools just once put the welfare of the student/athletes ahead of their own pockets, we wouldn't be in the position we are.  But, alas, this is why we can't have nice things.

BC

[BostonCard]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

Probably playing for someone else, given the portal.

BC

---

[twitter]https://twitter.com/AJTarpley/status/1610024946289496064[/twitter]

Tarply is right, in that college football milked the golden goose.  Had the NCAA, the conferences, and the schools just once put the welfare of the student/athletes ahead of their own pockets, we wouldn't be in the position we are.  But, alas, this is why we can't have nice things.

BC

[burger]

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

No, Stanford only has connections to felons whose companies were fraudulently valued in the billions.

[burger]

Does Stanford have any connection to Steve Cohen, or any other billionaire nut job?   :D

No, Stanford only has connections to felons whose companies were fraudulently valued in the billions.

[CardinalSagehen]

... college football milked the golden goose.  

Gruesome. That would be one way to kill the poor non-mammal, I suppose. ;-)

[CardinalSagehen]

... college football milked the golden goose.  

Gruesome. That would be one way to kill the poor non-mammal, I suppose. ;-)

[Snorlax94]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

There is a chance that many of these freshmen will enter the free agency portal in search of more $$$ and playing time which will add more $$$.

I think Maple Leaf nails how we are in the early, inchoate stages of NIL. I expect it will look totally different in a few years —
I expect the “collectives” will become more standardized, but smaller. As Maple Leaf points out, the collectives will feel like suckers after funneling tons of money to prospects only to see them never produce, or to transfer for bigger money if they do produce. It actually strikes me as very logical to transfer — in terms of Twitter/Insta/Tik Tok followers, each time your transfer, you’ll probably keep a lot of your old followers, gain new followers from the new school, and gain even more followers by being in the news.

I expect NIL will become all about personas. Players are going to use universities to advance their brand, and their brand may not even involve actually playing or playing well. Collectives will think they are using the players, but because of the transfer portal, ultimately, the players will be playing them.

Eventually, I could see Stanford having some success with NIL. Stanford itself has a major brand and will always catch attention. It’ll always give some buzz and relevance to be a player at Stanford.

NIL also makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. So, it’s unfortunate timing that NIL came along during a football dry spell. Andrew Luck, Shayne Skov, Richard Sherman and many of the O Linemen could have been NIL MONSTERS. 

I could see EJ Smith being successful at NIL next year. If a team has an identity — a Tunnel Works Union, Party in the Backfield, Nerd Nation, that can also combine well with NIL. I could imagine companies with a tough, durable image wanting to associate year after year with members of the Stanford Tunnel Workers Union.

It’s awfully early to be crying doom. We are in an unformed, rapidly changing stage, and I see many possible opportunities for Stanford students.

[Snorlax94]

Well the kings of NIL last year were the Texas A&M aggies, who bought themselves the #1 recruiting class in the nation and a 5-7 record.

BC

Turns out a bunch of 5* freshmen are still...well...a bunch of freshmen. Let's see where they are in 2-3 years.

There is a chance that many of these freshmen will enter the free agency portal in search of more $$$ and playing time which will add more $$$.

I think Maple Leaf nails how we are in the early, inchoate stages of NIL. I expect it will look totally different in a few years —
I expect the “collectives” will become more standardized, but smaller. As Maple Leaf points out, the collectives will feel like suckers after funneling tons of money to prospects only to see them never produce, or to transfer for bigger money if they do produce. It actually strikes me as very logical to transfer — in terms of Twitter/Insta/Tik Tok followers, each time your transfer, you’ll probably keep a lot of your old followers, gain new followers from the new school, and gain even more followers by being in the news.

I expect NIL will become all about personas. Players are going to use universities to advance their brand, and their brand may not even involve actually playing or playing well. Collectives will think they are using the players, but because of the transfer portal, ultimately, the players will be playing them.

Eventually, I could see Stanford having some success with NIL. Stanford itself has a major brand and will always catch attention. It’ll always give some buzz and relevance to be a player at Stanford.

NIL also makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. So, it’s unfortunate timing that NIL came along during a football dry spell. Andrew Luck, Shayne Skov, Richard Sherman and many of the O Linemen could have been NIL MONSTERS. 

I could see EJ Smith being successful at NIL next year. If a team has an identity — a Tunnel Works Union, Party in the Backfield, Nerd Nation, that can also combine well with NIL. I could imagine companies with a tough, durable image wanting to associate year after year with members of the Stanford Tunnel Workers Union.

It’s awfully early to be crying doom. We are in an unformed, rapidly changing stage, and I see many possible opportunities for Stanford students.

[Maple Leaf]

All-America recruiting confidential: Elite ’23 prospects discuss NIL deals, photo shoots, best visits - The Athletic

It seems per this article that the NIL was not the first or second reason that most recruits choose a specific school.  The two main reasons were the relationship with the coaches and the ability of the coaches to develop the player.  A couple of recruits mention academics.  One recruit was very impressed by one school had brought out some cool cars for the photo shoot, like Lamborghini and a Ferrari and which school did this......Georgia Tech.

[Maple Leaf]

All-America recruiting confidential: Elite ’23 prospects discuss NIL deals, photo shoots, best visits - The Athletic

It seems per this article that the NIL was not the first or second reason that most recruits choose a specific school.  The two main reasons were the relationship with the coaches and the ability of the coaches to develop the player.  A couple of recruits mention academics.  One recruit was very impressed by one school had brought out some cool cars for the photo shoot, like Lamborghini and a Ferrari and which school did this......Georgia Tech.