I like it. Let one garbage conference champion play another conference champion in a bowl is fine though. What’s wrong with the acc playing the pac12 in a bowl game.
Stopped watching about 10 years ago after gradually watching less and less of all pro sports. I might catch a few playoff games if I'm not doing anything. I watched final 20 minutes of the Superbowl this year, which happpened to be the most interesting part. I didn't even watch much of my beloved Gators this year, my priorities have largely shifted. A far cry from 40 years ago when I would catch all of my Expo's baseball games either on TV or radio.
A player has no NIL worth if he doesn’t play so it makes perfect sense to me to tie dollars to games played. Of course there needs to be protection from injury and players can fake that. And a player can still opt out, he just loses some NIL dollars. Tbis should be the case whether I’m an entity driven by profit motive (eg the Caitlin Clark endorsements) or some football collective using NIL as a front to pay players
I like this... give these players a piece of pie. How much are companies shelling out for "sponsorship rights". The old era is dead.... it's business now
People are welcome to criticize but the power brokers also added 2-3 extra games compared to back in the day with no plan (pre-NIL) to compensate the players for those extra games. It's a mess and bad for the health of college football but I can't blame guys when coaches are making $10 mil a year standing on the sidelines.
When I pay $500 to get in the gate, I have no problem with the players I came to see getting half of that money.
You buy your tickets on the secondary market so the athletes would never see any of that money. You also pay over face value and all the overage goes to the vendor and the previous owner.
Actually you can’t. The money can’t be tied to performance or playing time. You could add a supplemental contract that required an appearance in the bowl city, but you couldn’t do that until you knew what bowl you would be in. That still wouldn’t make them take the field, just travel to the bowl site. I don’t know why people have such a hard time grasping this. NIL money doesn’t force anyone to play in any games, and you’re still on the hook for the contract no matter how they perform if they do play. The money can’t even be tied to a specific school or team. How the hell is it going to be tied to playing time? Who are you forcing them to play for?
I don’t make the system. If they want to give me the option to click whatever players name as I walk through the gate, that would be fine with me. I won’t click guys loafing on the field.
This entire premise all depends on the NCAA actually or even being able to enforce the NIL rules, which based on several court rulings is sketchy at best. At present they can't even control eligibility rules in the transfer market. My view of the landscape is anything goes. If a not so scrupulous collective wants to write bowl appearance stipulations into their private NIL contracts with players, they will.
These are state laws. It would be unwise to write and sign contracts that knowingly break the law. They would be completely void and unenforceable anyway.
The laws that the rest of us must adhere to are the precedent that the courts use to determine for all of us. Why should college athletes be treated differently .
I’m just saying what you pay for your tickets would never be factored in to what the athletes might get. Any revenue sharing would be based on the original purchase (and the original purchasers money), not secondary market pricing/money.
I can also understand why some choose to stay in school another year and improve their draft stock from, say, the first round to the second round; a $20M gain on their investment, even without considering the additional multi-million dollar NIL gains. If you can make $10M for your senior year in college NIL, then the loss of the second round year of NFL money is a wash.
The State laws are in a constant flux and complete hodge-podge. Virginia just signed a law that the Universities can pay NIL directly to the athlete. Do you know if all 50 States ban this particular NIL requirement? Additionally, please wake me up when you see the first State investigating State U's NIL collective for wrongdoing. I'm certainly not going to hold my breath.
Exactly. I, as a private individual, can contract with you, as a private individual, to stand on the sidelines of the 2025 Orange Bowl for an agreed upon sum. I'll bet any court in the State would laugh at concept that this was an "illegal" contract. I wonder what the specific items in the FL statute bans simple contractual terms in FL Even if they do, that would be subject to the courts interpretation of contract law.
I certainly wouldn’t take the risk until the laws are changed. Virginia is headed towards the schools becoming employers, and the athletes becoming employees. Which will lead to unions, and cba’s, etc. If other states follow suit, the entire landscape will change again. People are acting like NIL money in its current form is the same as an employee contract, and it just isn’t. It’s a contract for a side job, not the primary. As much as it is really “pay for play”, that’s not what it is, and it doesn’t have the same rules. The contracts aren’t for playing football, legally. The states made these rules, not the schools.
Making them stand on the sideline at the orange bowl seems like it would be legal under the current laws, but you wouldn’t know your team was going to be in the orange bowl when the initial contract was signed, and being on the sideline still would not make them take the field.
