Here’s a nice review from The Guardian on ways in which the the American legal system has impacted sports leagues, including the NCAA:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...unding-support
This is probbably behind a paywall. I found it to be an amazing read.
https://www.latimes.com/sports/usc/s...nil-agreements
The USC QB has many many deals in place, including one that gives him equity in a real estate firm, one with Beats because he loves the brand, and one with a company that specializes in "men's nail art"because Williams likes to paint his nails. There are many others. According to the family football and school come first and they realize that the key is success on the field which seems to be a reason why they followed Lincoln Riley from Oklahoma to LA.
I think his father starting thinking about NIL before the NCAA figured out they would lose in court.
SoCal
Congress to the rescue?
https://al.com/alabamafootball/2022/...ick-saban.html
So let me get this straight. These guys — a Republican and a Democrat — love the free market. Except when they don’t. And they dont like government regulation. Except when they do.
And when they talk about “preserving the time-honored traditions of college sports” that couldn’t be code for “keep as much money in the pockets of the white guys in suits and as little as possible in the hands of the young people who put in the work to provide the entertainment” now could it ?
Duke has unveiled a portal by which businesses can contract with Duke athletes for NIL opportunities. UNC and several other schools have set up similar portals in recent weeks.
![]()
I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.
I certainly can't state this for a fact but I suspect Duke is gearing their operation towards more legitimate NIL opportunities.
Sans direction from the courts or from congress in the form of a new law, I’m not sure what legit and illegitimate is. In that case, it would be foolish of Duke to eliminate any type of comp from a strictly competitive standpoint.
I mean there are some brand considerations there, and additionally a pitch of "we're not just funneling you booster money, we're setting you up with legitimate business opportunities that you will be able use and learn from long after your time at Duke" does seem like the kind of differentiator that Duke might target.
You might well be right, I'm not saying I'd be surprised or disappointed or anything, just saying don't be surprised if Duke approaches NIL a little different.
I am in favor of legislation that sets rules for NIL, although I not sure what form it should take. This needs to be a thoughtful process, and as a former Congressional employee, I still believe this is possible.
Idk how to prevent well heeled boosters from striking NIL deals in the name of their business but NIL deals from booster bundling could probably be curtailed by legislation. Also, rival fan bases can do the heavy investigation lifting these days. Perhaps the NCAA (or it’s replacement organization) could refer malevolent boosters to the Federal Bureau of Unfair and Nefarious Cheating (UNC).
An interesting piece on the continuing evolution of the NIL.
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/...ty-opportunity