|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on May 5, 2024 12:06:43 GMT -6
Any idea how our the collective's NIL deals are structured? Are they paid lump sums? Are there signing bonuses? Are they backloaded to the end of the season or academic year? Any multi-year deals where a player (or his next school) might have to pay little extra to get them out of their deal early? Anything other than cash? Cars, etc? Anyone actually have a deal that involves what I thought NIL might have been, which was lending their personality to some local advertising campaign, etc? All of our 22 players who are signed through collective must donate time to second harvest food bank muncie No idea of how payments work This is part of going non profit route.. Cant mix charitable giving with profit business, If you see card on a stoops billboard its likely from outside tge collective itself |
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on May 5, 2024 12:11:11 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 5, 2024 12:39:21 GMT -6
Any idea how our the collective's NIL deals are structured? Are they paid lump sums? Are there signing bonuses? Are they backloaded to the end of the season or academic year? Any multi-year deals where a player (or his next school) might have to pay little extra to get them out of their deal early? Anything other than cash? Cars, etc? Anyone actually have a deal that involves what I thought NIL might have been, which was lending their personality to some local advertising campaign, etc? All of our 22 players who are signed through collective must donate time to second harvest food bank muncie No idea of how payments work This is part of going non profit route.. Cant mix charitable giving with profit business, If you see card on a stoops billboard its likely from outside tge collective itself The greater the number of grads living in and around the community creates value of the brand. The number of businesses and amount of media coverage create opportunity for the athletes We are at a disadvantage on one or more of these counts to a few MAC schools. They either have more grads employed in the community or get more media coverage in the major population center near by. We are better off than a few, though most schools will find auto dealerships, or other businesses who can justify spending advertising dollars and help the athletic department. Staying non profit puts you in competition with the University fund raising but that tax treatment helps. When/if the University pays athletes that will change things in several ways, one by reinstating NCAA booster rules which are on the shelf now. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 7, 2024 15:56:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on May 7, 2024 16:02:53 GMT -6
Its no secret we are going to sign a PG we all know that. We have known that for months. I dont have a clue who it is maybe kid does but just saying we are signing a point guard is like saying Prime Pam Anderson had great tits... We all know this
|
|
|
|
Post by thebsukid on May 7, 2024 16:41:48 GMT -6
I was told by inside sources and I was even told a name but I cannot disclose. It would not be appropriate; for all I know since it was a week ago maybe the kid changed his mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on May 7, 2024 17:00:54 GMT -6
I was told by inside sources and I was even told a name but I cannot disclose. It would not be appropriate; for all I know since it was a week ago maybe the kid changed his mind. That’s the problem— kids change their minds. We get outbid. Etc etc. |
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on May 7, 2024 17:21:21 GMT -6
I was told by inside sources and I was even told a name but I cannot disclose. It would not be appropriate; for all I know since it was a week ago maybe the kid changed his mind. Never give up a name till someone else does |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on May 8, 2024 7:59:23 GMT -6
People are only interested in what they are interested in. Like in this case, the article proceeds under the assumption that there are piles of money around, waiting to be distributed. As we know, this only applies to maybe 15% of the programs in two sports: football and men's basketball. That's a small fraction of all college sports teams. The existence of the other 99% (gymnastics, MAC football, golf, women's soccer, etc) is not addressed. There is no revenue to be shared....only deficits. Just as an example, each BSU football scholarship player would have to pay about $150K per year to cover their share of the deficit. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on May 8, 2024 8:31:46 GMT -6
BSU loses money on athletics and will have no revenue to share. MOST schools are in that same boat, save the 15%ish of programs as Sherm points out.
|
|
|
|
Post by coastalcard on May 8, 2024 8:41:09 GMT -6
I’m still stuck on whether the Pam Anderson reference was pre or post enhancement 🤔
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 8, 2024 8:48:37 GMT -6
People are only interested in what they are interested in. Like in this case, the article proceeds under the assumption that there are piles of money around, waiting to be distributed. As we know, this only applies to maybe 15% of the programs in two sports: football and men's basketball. That's a small fraction of all college sports teams. The existence of the other 99% (gymnastics, MAC football, golf, women's soccer, etc) is not addressed. There is no revenue to be shared....only deficits. Just as an example, each BSU football scholarship player would have to pay about $150K per year to cover their share of the deficit. I agree about how much revenue there is to share. My post, somewhere above, suggests there will be two worlds after the dust settles. One is for the P4 schools where revenue will be shared, maybe across all sports. Another one for the have not schools(60-85% of D1), where revenue sharing just cannot exist (no net revenue) and is much like the pre-NIL world except players may be able to make deals on NIL depending on individual value of their NIL, and the NCAA will be able to regulate it. (requiring scrutiny, maybe requiring institutions to approve). One variation would be to create employee status for the revenue sports, with collective bargaining which would exempt that sport from antitrust. The non revenue sports which were subsidized seem likely to me to be able to NOT have employee status. And the schools who are essentially non-revenue (net) at the present would be old school NCAA regulated. I see no legal reason to think this would not pass antitrust muster. If there is very limited or no revenue to share a different rule by NCAA seems to satisfy the "rule of reason." No reason to think that the law requires college sports to be treated as revenue earning businesses when they simply are not. Title IX already makes numerous exceptions to strict equality in athletics based on revenue vs non revenue status. For example, coaching salaries need not be equal. Educational benefits like scholarship and basics of the support structure like weight rooms and nutrition can be treated differently and require equivalence. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on May 8, 2024 9:14:56 GMT -6
I’m still stuck on whether the Pam Anderson reference was pre or post enhancement 🤔 This is a valid question. |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on May 8, 2024 10:35:16 GMT -6
I’m still stuck on whether the Pam Anderson reference was pre or post enhancement 🤔 Would take Baily Quarters over either. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on May 8, 2024 10:40:59 GMT -6
I’m still stuck on whether the Pam Anderson reference was pre or post enhancement 🤔 Would take Baily Quarters over either. YES. |
|
