Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 371
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by simplyluvin View Post
    Is the thought here that boosters would provide avenues of NIL opportunity for out "student-athletes"? Sorry, I'm a little late to the discussion here. I'm otherwise confused how school boosters would come in to play, since new NIL legislation, I don't believe, is license to hand out wads of cash to players.
    So boosters bundle $1 million to pay a player for his “NIL” to appear on a billboard for an alumni’s used car dealership. Or, to simplify, a booster pays a player $1 million for his autograph. Is the NCAA going to determine market value for a players NIL and enforce it? How?

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I don't believe NFTs will be the centerpiece of anything. Some people might, and have made a quick buck on them, but the market is currently demonstrating there is little interest in their long term value...since they have no intrinsic value.
    Exactly. No one wants to buy anyone's stupid NFT.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by simplyluvin View Post
    Is the thought here that boosters would provide avenues of NIL opportunity for out "student-athletes"? Sorry, I'm a little late to the discussion here. I'm otherwise confused how school boosters would come in to play, since new NIL legislation, I don't believe, is license to hand out wads of cash to players.
    There'll be wads of cash floating around. $10,000, $100,000 for an autograph? Sure, for a fan who cares enough.

    If the "booster" prohibition falters, just think what Phil Knight could do for Oregon - big Nike deals for the best players makes Oregon a basketball powerhouse!

    And getting money in makes it so much easier for the gambling world to cause trouble, too.

    -jk

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Tripping William View Post
    Paolo Banchero says “cha-ching”!
    How many people have ever heard of him?

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Indoor66 View Post
    How many people have ever heard of him?
    Not nearly as many as in six months.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Nashville
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Devil View Post
    Exactly. No one wants to buy anyone's stupid NFT.
    From what I understand there's no intrinsic value to a share of the Green Bay Packers, either, but people treasure those.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    There'll be wads of cash floating around. $10,000, $100,000 for an autograph? Sure, for a fan who cares enough.

    If the "booster" prohibition falters, just think what Phil Knight could do for Oregon - big Nike deals for the best players makes Oregon a basketball powerhouse!

    And getting money in makes it so much easier for the gambling world to cause trouble, too.

    -jk
    A well-heeled booster club starts a subscription service in which a top player posts his/her thoughts on line and gets paid, well, there's no limit is there?

    I'm pretty sure there's little if any limit to the creative ways boosters can and will come up with a way to induce top recruits to attend their school. I'm not a lawyer and I know we have many distinguished barristers on this board. But my possibly misinformed reading of the recent Supreme Court Ruling suggests that it's going to be a free-for-all pretty soon. Money talks.

    One thing we haven't talked about much is the impact on the non-revenue sports. Field Hockey doesn't support itself on gate receipts. It gets by on what's left from men's hoops. What happens when there's nothing left from men's hoops? Can these sports still be funded or will they become club sports?

    Doorbell rings. "Hello, my name is Jane Doe and I'm selling popcorn to support the Duke swimming and diving team."

    Brave New World, people.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    A well-heeled booster club starts a subscription service in which a top player posts his/her thoughts on line and gets paid, well, there's no limit is there?

    I'm pretty sure there's little if any limit to the creative ways boosters can and will come up with a way to induce top recruits to attend their school. I'm not a lawyer and I know we have many distinguished barristers on this board. But my possibly misinformed reading of the recent Supreme Court Ruling suggests that it's going to be a free-for-all pretty soon. Money talks.

    One thing we haven't talked about much is the impact on the non-revenue sports. Field Hockey doesn't support itself on gate receipts. It gets by on what's left from men's hoops. What happens when there's nothing left from men's hoops? Can these sports still be funded or will they become club sports?

    Doorbell rings. "Hello, my name is Jane Doe and I'm selling popcorn to support the Duke swimming and diving team."

    Brave New World, people.
    the SCOTUS decision is extremely limited to academic related expenses from the school and give the NCAA broad scope in regulating them as it sees fit, though a hard cap is banned. It is *almost* meaningless. The state laws allowing NIL are what's going to make substantial change.

    That said, kavanaughs concurrence seems to invite further challenge.
    basketball is back, baby!

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    the SCOTUS decision is extremely limited to academic related expenses from the school and give the NCAA broad scope in regulating them as it sees fit, though a hard cap is banned. It is *almost* meaningless. The state laws allowing NIL are what's going to make substantial change.

    That said, kavanaughs concurrence seems to invite further challenge.
    Extremely limited, yes. In one sense.

    But when SCOTUS states that the NCAA model "would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America" and adds that the current rules are "suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year," that seems to presage a lot more than just an extremely limited ruling involving educational expenses.

    Am I missing something?

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    Extremely limited, yes. In one sense.

    But when SCOTUS rules that the NCAA model "would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America" and adds that the current rules are "suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year," that seems to presage a lot more than just an extremely limited ruling involving educational expenses.

    Am I missing something?
    yes. and assuming the NCAA fights it tooth and nail, which they almost surely would, will involve another case to wind its way up the chain. They might win, they might lose...but it would need to be litigated, and the SCOTUS said based on what was litigated in this case, it does not look good for them. But they did not rule on that, and were very clear on the limit of this decision.
    basketball is back, baby!

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    yes. and assuming the NCAA fights it tooth and nail, which they almost surely would, will involve another case to wind its way up the chain. They might win, they might lose...but it would need to be litigated, and the SCOTUS said based on what was litigated in this case, it does not look good for them. But they did not rule on that, and were very clear on the limit of this decision.
    Do we assume the NCAA would fight it tooth and nail? Or even fight it at all? It seems like they waved the white flag last week.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    Do we assume the NCAA would fight it tooth and nail? Or even fight it at all? It seems like they waved the white flag last week.
    I agree. The NCAA fighting this seems like terrible optics, and I doubt they have the stomach for it.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Nashville
    Based on the scathing Kavanaugh decision, if I were the NCAA I'd save my money and not waste any time fighting it. I know that technically the ruling is limited, but they seemed to make it very clear what they would do if the bigger issue got to them.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post

    One thing we haven't talked about much is the impact on the non-revenue sports. Field Hockey doesn't support itself on gate receipts. It gets by on what's left from men's hoops. What happens when there's nothing left from men's hoops? Can these sports still be funded or will they become club sports?
    The NCAA seems to want to hold the line on pay-for-play. Athletes can get whatever they can from NIL, but schools (and boosters) cannot pay them to attend certain schools. It is a reasonable line to draw, though very hard to enforce. If this line-drawing works, though, it may not have any meaningful effect on budgets and ability to support non-revenue sports.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by DCDevil9194 View Post
    The NCAA seems to want to hold the line on pay-for-play. Athletes can get whatever they can from NIL, but schools (and boosters) cannot pay them to attend certain schools. It is a reasonable line to draw, though very hard to enforce. If this line-drawing works, though, it may not have any meaningful effect on budgets and ability to support non-revenue sports.
    There’s a very thin and almost indiscernible line between fan and booster. How many autographs do you buy at $100 a pop before you cross that line? Who’s counting?

  16. #56

    NCAA Who?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I agree. The NCAA fighting this seems like terrible optics, and I doubt they have the stomach for it.
    And of course the power programs may decide to be done with that whole NCAA nuisance.

    While I agree that the SCOTUS ruling per se was quite limited, I sense a shifting of the tectonic plates. Could be wrong, just feel strongly that we're reaching a major inflection point.

    Just too much money on the line, and too much disparity between people wanting to watch the best, de facto professional athletes attached to their school [however tenuous the attachment] who can contend for national championships versus those wanting to watch those athletes that any meaningful student athlete model can provide. This disparity will continue to widen in the emerging new environment.
    “I love it. Coach, when we came here, we had a three-hour meeting about the core values. If you really represent the core values, it means diving on the floor, sacrificing your body for your teammates, no matter how much you’re up by or how much you’re down by, always playing hard.” -- Zion

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    The Raleigh N&O chimes in, saying that no sate law in N.C. could turn out to be a recruiting advantage for the schools in the state - they can make their own rules.

    https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/...252441933.html
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by chrishoke View Post
    The Raleigh N&O chimes in, saying that no sate law in N.C. could turn out to be a recruiting advantage for the schools in the state - they can make their own rules.

    https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/...252441933.html
    Yippee.

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by hustleplays View Post
    And of course the power programs may decide to be done with that whole NCAA nuisance.

    While I agree that the SCOTUS ruling per se was quite limited, I sense a shifting of the tectonic plates. Could be wrong, just feel strongly that we're reaching a major inflection point.

    Just too much money on the line, and too much disparity between people wanting to watch the best, de facto professional athletes attached to their school [however tenuous the attachment] who can contend for national championships versus those wanting to watch those athletes that any meaningful student athlete model can provide. This disparity will continue to widen in the emerging new environment.
    I think leaving NCAA kills college sports. You won't end up with a big 5, you'll end up with a big 1 containing clemson, alabama, OSU, ND, and whoever else they think they can get to optimize their TV dollars per school.
    basketball is back, baby!

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I think leaving NCAA kills college sports. You won't end up with a big 5, you'll end up with a big 1 containing clemson, alabama, OSU, ND, and whoever else they think they can get to optimize their TV dollars per school.
    I disagree completely. What use goes the NCAA provide to revenue sports? Do Power Five schools really need an academic clearinghouse anymore? Do they need tournament selection committees?

    I've been waiting for the "leaving the NCAA" shoe to drop for about ten years. It'll probably be the power five conferences at least for football and men's basketball.

Similar Threads

  1. Name Image Likeness
    By hallcity in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-27-2021, 04:58 PM
  2. NCAA caves, allows athletes to make money off their likeness
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 10-30-2019, 06:19 PM
  3. NCAA forms Comm on Name, Image, Likeness Benefits
    By bundabergdevil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-14-2019, 06:54 PM
  4. Self-image ... would you rather
    By DukeandMdFan in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-17-2015, 10:36 AM
  5. image gallery
    By CameronBornAndBred in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 07-13-2008, 09:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •