I agree there two parts to this: The law says NIL money can't affect eligibility, it doesn't say other things like transferring or academics can't affect eligibility. I think this is cut and dry, no conflict here. It also says you can't make rules that unduly restrict an athlete from making NIL deals. This is a little less cut and dry. One COULD argue that a transfer sitting a year is unduly restrictive. But other rules like only having 4 years of eligibility is way more restrictive, so I don't think this would happen personally. Crushers post above makes this point better than me.
All D1 schools have a hard limit of 50 million a year to hand out to recruits per recruiting class. Schools that do not make a bowl game 3 years in a row (vandy) get an extra 10 million to use for three recruiting periods. If they do make a bowl in those 3 years… they lose the 10 million and can not re apply for it for 10 years. Any school caught tampering with a player or paying over the cap loses bowls for two years, reduced scholarships for 4 years (five per year). And reduced NIL cap to 40 million. Not eligible for the extra 10 million for 10 years. All NIL money runs through/ reported to the conference front office. Conferences report all money/NIL deals to NCAA yearly for review.
The schools aren’t making the payments, so most of this is moot, but… You can’t limit the money, so first and second paragraphs are out. Third paragraph, the money part is out. I’m all for tampering rules, but the ncaa won’t have any more success enforcing it than they did enforcing impermissible benefits before the NIL laws. Fourth paragraph, third party deals aren’t really any of their business.
People can spend their money any way they want so you can't hardly stop that. But, disparity will eventually (if it hasn't already) factor into just about everything in and out of the locker room. Companies don't permit conflict of interest and can release employees, I believe. If NIL is considered as such, I suspect the UAA could do the same if deemed best for the team.
Contracts are the only way. Nil can’t be regulated in any way but a contract restricts them from moving around.
I know what NIL is and how it is supposed to work. But as for how the whole shebang operates and the inner workings, im as lost as everyone else. Then, you hear stuff like the guy that runs the Collective having an alcohol fueled meltdown on social media and reports that some donors pulled a fast one and I do get concered. Even if I dont really know how the whole thing works. Various entities such as conferences, colleges, businesses, private organizations and media outlets are all making money, in part, from what these athletes do. We call them "kids" but the majority are over 18 which makes them adults. I have zero problems with them making NIL money. I mean, hell, they are making everyone else money, right? There just needs to be some serious rules to protect everyone that are ENFORCEABLE and acted on when needed. This whole loose cannon cash carnival is not sustainable. UF doesn't want to be the cherry in his first firefight. I get that. This whole thing is a hot damn mess. I really hope they get it figured out before it ruins some good people and the sport I love.
The problem is that most rules would either create enforcement for a problem that isn't there or be unenforceable. For example, I genuinely don't think the new world of the transfer portal rule is the problem. It makes things more chaotic and it might make someone more likely to take playing time and team depth into consideration, but for every disadvantage that it offers, it also offers advantages. For the amount that people crap on Mullen recruiting, without the portal, we don't get Grimes, Jefferson, Greenard, Shorter all playing basically immediately. It gives new coaches a chance to right the ship an awful lot quicker. Example regarding unenforceable rules: "You can't have an NIL deal contingent upon your commitment to play for a particular school." Good luck getting anybody to play by those rules. All of the big boys were doing it under the table when it was illegal, they'll definitely do it under the new world of NIL. The idea for me is, there's a big difference between not allowing a student athlete to pursue their own independent business ventures based on their own name, image, and likeness, and college football programs bribing student athletes to play for them (in particular) via third parties. There's a whole lot of room in the middle, but the latter was an inevitability without oversight.
Simple fix. Don’t allow NIL deals for incoming freshmen or transfers. This would fix the portal and recruiting BS. If you don’t do that then put players on contracts.
The NFL does not put limits on third party endorsement money, nor does the nfl require the athletes to report that money to them.
You can’t restrict their right to earn money on their NIL. These are laws people, not college rules. The college can’t just implement rules that are against the law.
There are rules that protect the integrity of the salary cap. A team can’t use sponsor money as a replacement for wages
The teams aren’t making NIL deals. A fan/business can give any nfl player money for just about whatever reason they want. Hey, tyreek, sign on with Miami and I’ll give you ten mill to come to my daughter’s birthday party. The nfl can’t stop that. It’s not really a problem in the nfl because there’s not networks in place to circumvent the system already in place. In college these networks are already in place. Simply giving the kids a salary doesn’t eliminate ruiz.
Schools are definitely working with the money groups though. These deals are obviously agreed upon prior to commitment. In the NFL a team cannot tell a FA to go get their bag from a “private” money guy and then sign for the minimum
It’s not that hard to create distance. Schools winning natties have been distancing themselves from impermissible benefits pretty well for decades. It’s fairly obvious who the teams are targeting. The money guy doesn’t need to be told directly who gets what. The same thing could easily be done in the nfl, but it was never a thing there. In college, it’s always happened, and it always will. Paying the kids a salary won’t eliminate the bagman.
My post had nothing to do with binding players to teams. We’re talking about trying to limit NIL and we’re talking about “free agents”. If you want to pay the kids a salary and get them to sign contracts, great, but that’s not really what we’re discussing at the moment. It also doesn’t prevent the third party money when the kids are picking schools. I’m also not sure that’s what you really want. You’re still stuck with the 85 cap and you’re gonna be stuck with a lot of dead weight if you keep everyone you sign for four years.
