I predict this will be widely ignored.

One way to see whether this would hold up in court is to substitute the word "coach" everywhere it says "student-athlete", and "contract" or "compensation" everywhere it says "NIL", etc.

(05-09-2022 07:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I predict this will be widely ignored.

... and thus joining a long list of toothless NCAA edicts, policies and bylaws

If that is the case, how long until athletes have to pay buyouts in order to transfer?

I don't think anyone in the P5 will pay attention to what the NCAA tries to do on NIL. The P5 will decide what rules they want to use, consistent with court cases.

(05-10-2022 11:38 AM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think anyone in the P5 will pay attention to what the NCAA tries to do on NIL. The P5 will decide what rules they want to use, consistent with court cases.

The Division I Board of Directors who issued the updated guidance is dominated by P5 representatives. The current chair is the President of UGA.

The university administrations don't like boosters interfering with the academy, and the boosters resent the university interfering with their sports programs.

Heh heh

"For his part, [Jeffrey] Kessler wouldn’t rule out the possibility that he could eventually 'represent other plaintiffs consistent with my representation' of college athletes, such as boosters who may be punished for paying such athletes."

https://www.sportico.com/

Kessler and Steve Berman are representing athletes in their NIL lawsuit, House vs NCAA, same guys who represented Alston.