Seeing all the insanity going on a random thought just popped into my head, is there anything saying a G5 Conference couldn't create a fee for any team outside the Conference poaching their players? For example:

-Using Taylor Green at Boise State as an example, he was a starter who was developed for several years at BSU.

-Could have had in his contract (with the same applying to all team members or just those with NIL deals across the MWC) that if he decides to transfer due to the time, effort and $$ invested in him by BSU the team that picks him up will owe Boise State a fee.

-Fee could be calculated by certain metrics: Starter, years at BSU, time played, NIL $$ received during time there ex.

Just thinking it would be a way not only help keep players at G5 schools (due to increased cost, time and effort ex.) but even if they end up leaving the G5 school could be financially compensated so they could turn around and improve their own programs. Any legal precedent preventing this?

(12-04-2023 07:08 PM)Utgrizfan Wrote:  Seeing all the insanity going on a random thought just popped into my head, is there anything saying a G5 Conference couldn't create a fee for any team outside the Conference poaching their players? For example:

-Using Taylor Green at Boise State as an example, he was a starter who was developed for several years at BSU.

-Could have had in his contract (with the same applying to all team members or just those with NIL deals across the MWC) that if he decides to transfer due to the time, effort and $$ invested in him by BSU the team that picks him up will owe Boise State a fee.

-Fee could be calculated by certain metrics: Starter, years at BSU, time played, NIL $$ received during time there ex.

Just thinking it would be a way not only help keep players at G5 schools (due to increased cost, time and effort ex.) but even if they end up leaving the G5 school could be financially compensated so they could turn around and improve their own programs. Any legal precedent preventing this?

all legal precedents right here---------}https://law.justia.com/cases/

As an aside and looking back, I think I prefer federal jury duty over state/county jury duty. Both are equally important, IMO, but at least in my last federal jury duty, the judge thanked me for my time, and said I had served my country. I liked that!!!
County/state jury duty was, "okay, scram, beat it."

(12-04-2023 07:08 PM)Utgrizfan Wrote:  Seeing all the insanity going on a random thought just popped into my head, is there anything saying a G5 Conference couldn't create a fee for any team outside the Conference poaching their players? For example:

-Using Taylor Green at Boise State as an example, he was a starter who was developed for several years at BSU.

-Could have had in his contract (with the same applying to all team members or just those with NIL deals across the MWC) that if he decides to transfer due to the time, effort and $$ invested in him by BSU the team that picks him up will owe Boise State a fee.

-Fee could be calculated by certain metrics: Starter, years at BSU, time played, NIL $$ received during time there ex.

Just thinking it would be a way not only help keep players at G5 schools (due to increased cost, time and effort ex.) but even if they end up leaving the G5 school could be financially compensated so they could turn around and improve their own programs. Any legal precedent preventing this?

Pretty much impossible without a labor union and even that might not even be plausible. Outside of a labor union, restrictive covenants of that nature could be straight up unenforceable in certain states like California even *without* a financial penalty involved. The NCAA was already at risk of violating antitrust laws for making players sit out for a year prior to a transfer and that was without any financial penalty involved. That’s why they changed the transfer rules in the first place. What you’re proposing is even one step further above that.

Let’s put it this way: would *you* want to have other employers be dissuaded from potentially offering a better salary, higher profile, etc. because your current employer requires any new employer to pay a financial buyout? I’ll speak for myself: heck no and, depending on the circumstances, it might be illegal.

You know what the ability to go to another larger brand name employer because they offer more money and potentially higher status is? A good thing for America. That is what we ALL reasonably want… except some fans don’t want what applies to virtually every other American in the employment marketplace to apply to college athletes.

My answer to a G5 school that wants to keep their best players: fund your NIL collective and adapt or die. I would say that for my own P5 school or any other school, too.

Just as a general rule, which I still don’t think many fans are fully understanding, is that the entire point is that any restrictions on player movement and compensation are either already a legal issue or will eventually be a legal issue. That’s the whole point: you *can’t* have a coordinated closed marketplace with rules from up above. That’s *not* the free market. People need to get over that college sports can’t be treated differently than any other industry and the courts are finally recognizing it (and very swiftly so).