Making Plays post=435780 said:
panther2 post=435734 said:
My first thought was that St Johns would be in great shape to take advantage of this. We are located in NYC, the Mecca. Advertising opportunities abound.
However, after thinking about it for a while, I believe that the NCAA has created a disaster. Teams in the Power 5 Conferences spend millions of dollars on the buyouts of Coaches with the money coming from Boosters. What is to stop these same Booster from setting aside 2 million each year to go after 5 players, guaranteeing each player 400 thousand a year as long as they stay in school? They will just funnel the money to 3rd party businesses. The NCAA does not have the staff, time, or interest to look into all of the problems that will arise from this decision.
If y'all thought the playing field was not level before, just wait until you see what happens now. If y'all think the transfer portal was crowded now, just wait until until a player has a good season and his handlers tell him he can get 3 x the money at University X.
This may be the beginning of the end of college sports as we know them.
You nailed in Panther, it's going to be a mess. I feel bad for low/mid-majors it's essentially going to end them, no way they'll be able to hold onto a star player that has any type of name recognition, boosters will just funnel their money to local businesses that support their school and just have a bidding war in the off-season for them.
From the Athletic:
“College athletes can even enter agreements with school
boosters — so long as it’s in accordance with state laws and school policy.
Could an athlete take $50,000 from one athletic apparel company even though his school has a deal with a different one? That is something that has crossed the coach’s mind.It would seem to depend on what state the school is in and how their university is interpreting things. Maybe they’re allowed to represent a different sneaker company, but just can’t wear them in games, or while wearing their school’s logos, according to one college administrator
The Athletic spoke to Thursday. Then again, how would the school enforce it if they told him he couldn’t play in those cleats?It is up to the schools to put up the guardrails. Some schools, such as The University of Kentucky, have already established that certain categories are prohibited for compensation. Among them for Kentucky: lotteries; casinos; sports wagering facilities; adult entertainment; tobacco, marijuana and nicotine vapor products; as well as apparel and sportswear companies.States have different laws, and in some, the laws don’t address many specific aspects regarding NIL, such as booster involvement or apparel companies. Those places might interpret some of the issues differently, making this all patchwork state-by-state and school-by-school since the NCAA did not provide a bedrock. Instead, this is multi-layers of patch work.In California state’s bill, the word “booster” isn’t even mentioned. There’s also nothing about prohibited categories, so if universities do something that might interfere with an athlete’s ability to earn compensation as a result of using their NIL, the schools might be subjecting themselves to potential litigation: “A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, likeness, or athletic reputation.”
