2024 Football Portal

[boger2337]

Without an antitrust exemption? That’s illegal constraint of trade, which is how we got here.

Currently the plan is to make kids employees of the school is my understanding.

 

[boger2337]

You are wrong. The NCAA has no jurisdiction over how much a NIL collective pays a single student athlete, let alone how much they pay all the players in a program. Further, if they tried to set a cap, it would get shut down by the courts in a second since they would be infringing on the players non school related income. Caps work in professional sports because the players are employees of the league and the league can establish team salary caps for competitive purposes.

Repeat after me....

Neither the schools nor the NCAA pay NIL so they cannot cap NIL.

What I am saying is there is a push to make the student athletes EMPLOYEES of the school.

 

[beeteam]

Back to the point that @leatherneckjacket and I were making earlier, any attempt to control player compensation, whether from the schools or outside organizations, legally or under the table, is bound to fail. They need to find other means of leveling the field. One way is roster control, another is progress toward a degree. The NCAA already has both of these, so tweaking them shouldn't be too much of a stretch.

I think roster control is the best approach since progress to a degree is not a level playing field as each school determines the definition of what course work defines a degree. Exhibit A: UNC AFAM scandal.

 

[stinger78]

What I am saying is there is a push to make the student athletes EMPLOYEES of the school.

Yes, and this would be a huge mistake, IMPO.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

What I am saying is there is a push to make the student athletes EMPLOYEES of the school.

But they are not employees. And just because there is a push by some to make them employees does not mean they will become employees nor does it mean that that schools will continue to participate in this madness if they ever do become employees. Further, even if they become employees, the NCAA and participating schools would require antitrust exemption in order to limit income of the employees, which they do not have nor will they get. NIL is allowed because it is not direct compensation for playing college sports. Direct payment from the schools is not allowed.

 

[boger2337]

But they are not employees. And just because there is a push by some to make them employees does not mean they will become employees nor does it mean that that schools will continue to participate in this madness if they ever do become employees. NIL is allowed because it is not direct compensation for playing college sports. Direct payment from the schools is not allowed.

The push is real.... What I am saying is this ultimately becomes minor league football. Students will become employees. Their will be a Players Association and there will be a cap. Some schools are already funding NIL collectives FYI.

 

[boger2337]

Yes, and this would be a huge mistake, IMPO.

I don't think so. It ends the BS that the athletes are also students. It will also finally make give it the final resting place. Minor league football. "amateur football" is dead and never coming back.

 

[boger2337]

But they are not employees. And just because there is a push by some to make them employees does not mean they will become employees nor does it mean that that schools will continue to participate in this madness if they ever do become employees. Further, even if they become employees, the NCAA and participating schools would require antitrust exemption in order to limit income of the employees, which they do not have nor will they get. NIL is allowed because it is not direct compensation for playing college sports. Direct payment from the schools is not allowed.

Here is a quote of what is happening.

"A victory for the Dartmouth players’ unionization efforts could motivate other private schools in conferences with more diverse membership than the all-private Ivy League to organize themselves. If the ongoing trial into an unfair labor practice charge in California confirms that USC, the Pac-12 and the NCAA should be considered joint employers of athletes, that could allow all athletes to unionize, regardless of the state they live in or type of school they attend. A third case currently in federal appeals court, Johnson v. NCAA, argues that college athletes should be treated like other student workers on campus and should be entitled to hourly wages at or around the minimum wage. Each outcome would pave the way for a different business model."

 

[boger2337]

But they are not employees. And just because there is a push by some to make them employees does not mean they will become employees nor does it mean that that schools will continue to participate in this madness if they ever do become employees. Further, even if they become employees, the NCAA and participating schools would require antitrust exemption in order to limit income of the employees, which they do not have nor will they get. NIL is allowed because it is not direct compensation for playing college sports. Direct payment from the schools is not allowed.

Just read through this. California schools are likely to make SA's employees soon enough. The rest will likely follow suit. This is likely the path forward.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5313992/2024/03/04/college-athletes-employees-dartmouth/

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Here is a quote of what is happening.

"A victory for the Dartmouth players’ unionization efforts could motivate other private schools in conferences with more diverse membership than the all-private Ivy League to organize themselves. If the ongoing trial into an unfair labor practice charge in California confirms that USC, the Pac-12 and the NCAA should be considered joint employers of athletes, that could allow all athletes to unionize, regardless of the state they live in or type of school they attend. A third case currently in federal appeals court, Johnson v. NCAA, argues that college athletes should be treated like other student workers on campus and should be entitled to hourly wages at or around the minimum wage. Each outcome would pave the way for a different business model."

Ivy league players are not on scholarship.

Whatever the decision of the California court, it would still have to go the Supreme Court and I doubt they are going to rubber stamp the most overturned Court in the nation.

Regardless, right now they are not employees.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Just read through this. California schools are likely to make SA's employees soon enough. The rest will likely follow suit. This is likely the path forward.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5313992/2024/03/04/college-athletes-employees-dartmouth/

Nah, that is an opinion based on what happened at one Ivy league school, which is irrelevant to the rest of college sports.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Sure there can be. The movement is to allow the schools to be the ones to pay the players. That's when you set the cap.

Without an antitrust exemption from Congress, it's collusion (price fixing).

 

[stinger78]

I don't think so. It ends the BS that the athletes are also students. It will also finally make give it the final resting place. Minor league football. "amateur football" is dead and never coming back.

They don't have to be employees. With employment comes all sorts of additional costs and risk. It may end up that way, but IMPO it would be a mistake.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Currently the plan is to make kids employees of the school is my understanding.

Still collusion

 

[danny daniel]

I noticed today the roster was updated to remove portal players Kelly, Semo, C Brown, Gee, and Blackstrain, but Fortson was still on the roster. Ellis was also removed from the roster. Any change of status with Fortson?

 

[cpf2001]

You get around collusion with a union agreement. This is how most pro leagues do it (some have certain additional legal protection, but not all).

Liability/insurance concerns don’t seem realistic to me - lots of broke minor league baseball teams out there paying peanuts that don’t seem to have problems there.

Can a CBA prevent outside NIL deals? Harder to say; courts and gov aren’t looking kindly on outside work restrictions generally right now. And pro athletes obviously have NIL.

Is there much money to throw at “fake NIL” if programs and thus donors have to fund real salaries instead? I think not at nearly the level of today outside of some superstars; and if not, that reduces tampering a lot.

 

[slugboy]

What I am saying is there is a push to make the student athletes EMPLOYEES of the school.

That enables direct payments and allows the schools to restrict outside income. That doesn’t enable a salary cap.

A salary cap would require coordination between the schools, which would require an antitrust exemption.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

There is NO LEGAL MANNER in which NIL money can be capped. NIL is based on a persons name, image, and likeness and not for performance on the field. (I just said that with a straight face.) Even in pro leagues with salary caps an athlete can make an unlimited amount of additional revenue from their NIL deals.

What could happen eventually is that the SEC and B1G will institute a pay to play format for their athletes where the school cuts them into the revenue that is produced by the athletic department. At that point, the conferences will likely move to an NFL model where there is a cap (and a floor) and a collective bargaining agreement with the players.

 

[cpf2001]

A salary cap would require coordination between the schools, which would require an antitrust exemption.

Pro sports are operating under “non statutory labor exemption” from antitrust enforcement which AFAICT without being a lawyer is basically “courts and parties on both sides have decided salary caps don’t run afoul of the law as long as they’re negotiated by both the leagues + labor unions.” So law or union, but at least one. The statutory antitrust stuff for most is around broadcast rights; and then MLB is extra special.

 

[beeteam]

There is NO LEGAL MANNER in which NIL money can be capped. NIL is based on a persons name, image, and likeness and not for performance on the field. (I just said that with a straight face.) Even in pro leagues with salary caps an athlete can make an unlimited amount of additional revenue from their NIL deals.

What could happen eventually is that the SEC and B1G will institute a pay to play format for their athletes where the school cuts them into the revenue that is produced by the athletic department. At that point, the conferences will likely move to an NFL model where there is a cap (and a floor) and a collective bargaining agreement with the players.

Now how do we solve it for high school NIL's? (said without a straight face).