Andrew Hyde of KSL.com reports:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50689905/mwc...r-nil-help

(07-19-2023 07:23 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Andrew Hyde of KSL.com reports:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50689905/mwc...r-nil-help

Gloria Nevarez is also joining Mr Sankey and Mr Swarbrick in calling for Congressional action.

"We need Congress to assist in a solution to help the NCAA regulate NIL in a way that we can prevent 'pay-for-play.' Without national regulation, you can't have national competition which culminates in national championships."

She later told KSL.com that she hoped Congress implemented a proposal to ensure transparency with NIL deals rather than a market "governed by rumor and hearsay." She added that, overall, most athletes felt NIL laws, as they stand, are a "good thing."

(07-19-2023 07:33 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(07-19-2023 07:23 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Andrew Hyde of KSL.com reports:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50689905/mwc...r-nil-help

Gloria Nevarez is also joining Mr Sankey and Mr Swarbrick in calling for Congressional action.

"We need Congress to assist in a solution to help the NCAA regulate NIL in a way that we can prevent 'pay-for-play.' Without national regulation, you can't have national competition which culminates in national championships."

She later told KSL.com that she hoped Congress implemented a proposal to ensure transparency with NIL deals rather than a market "governed by rumor and hearsay." She added that, overall, most athletes felt NIL laws, as they stand, are a "good thing."

I'll agree that the current NIL laws, as compared to the "nothing" that existed before, are a good thing. Players should get paid, probably at the same ratio that NFL players get paid in relation to revenue.

That said, guardrails need to be put in place and enforced to ensure a level playing field, with terms/windows that make sense and prevent tampering.

The NFL salary cap model makes the most sense. Players and the NCAA programs get together and agree on the fair market value of total player comp in relation to revenue. Set a cap, which would probably be whatever mid-level P5 programs are generating in NIL spending, and set that as the ceiling to be revisited each year. Yes, the Texas's's would have to curb spending a bit. And yes, some G5s would have work to do to get up to that cap(or be comfortable operating below it).

Implementation would make games more competitive. If all the best players can't congregate on a single roster, then you might end up with point spreads closer to the 3-7pt range you see in the NFL rather than the 30+pt spreads you often see WITHIN a conference when teams like Alabama/Missouri or Michigan/Rutgers play against each other.

(07-20-2023 08:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-19-2023 07:33 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(07-19-2023 07:23 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Andrew Hyde of KSL.com reports:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50689905/mwc...r-nil-help

Gloria Nevarez is also joining Mr Sankey and Mr Swarbrick in calling for Congressional action.

"We need Congress to assist in a solution to help the NCAA regulate NIL in a way that we can prevent 'pay-for-play.' Without national regulation, you can't have national competition which culminates in national championships."

She later told KSL.com that she hoped Congress implemented a proposal to ensure transparency with NIL deals rather than a market "governed by rumor and hearsay." She added that, overall, most athletes felt NIL laws, as they stand, are a "good thing."

I'll agree that the current NIL laws, as compared to the "nothing" that existed before, are a good thing. Players should get paid, probably at the same ratio that NFL players get paid in relation to revenue.

That said, guardrails need to be put in place and enforced to ensure a level playing field, with terms/windows that make sense and prevent tampering.

The NFL salary cap model makes the most sense. Players and the NCAA programs get together and agree on the fair market value of total player comp in relation to revenue. Set a cap, which would probably be whatever mid-level P5 programs are generating in NIL spending, and set that as the ceiling to be revisited each year. Yes, the Texas's's would have to curb spending a bit. And yes, some G5s would have work to do to get up to that cap(or be comfortable operating below it).

Implementation would make games more competitive. If all the best players can't congregate on a single roster, then you might end up with point spreads closer to the 3-7pt range you see in the NFL rather than the 30+pt spreads you often see WITHIN a conference when teams like Alabama/Missouri or Michigan/Rutgers play against each other.

While I agree that the players should get something, I think many are overstating their impact. Bryce Young for example IMO added nothing to Alabama. If he wasn't QB, someone else would be. He didn't contribute to the TV contracts signed by SEC, he didn't put butts in the seats. Those things are accomplished by the brand that's already been created way before he came along. Counter that with the impact that Tom Brady had when he went to TB. He did more in 2 years than others accomplished in 2 prior decades.

In regards to competitive balance, I believe 6-10 schools hoarded the majority of 5* players last year. That's why I am confused at the CFP over expansion. Why would people want to give a team like 2022 Clemson a 3rd and 4th chance? The team underwhelmed with a large number of 5* players. And now people want them to gain entry to CFP through a weak ACC, get hot, and possibly win a cheapened title? Doesn't make sense to me. (Not picking on Clemson, they've been great sans 2022.)

(07-19-2023 07:23 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Andrew Hyde of KSL.com reports:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50689905/mwc...r-nil-help

What do Notre Dame, the SEC and MWC all have in common, that they would join forces to push for NIL oversight? And, why are the commissioners of the B1G, Big12, ACC, PAC, & AAC not joining them at this point?

Does Notre Dame, the SEC, & MWC fear the other conferences will gain a competitive advantage under the current unregulated NIL structure?

This needs to be looked at very closely.

The main problem with NIL right is each state has their own rules regarding it. This is why they are calling for congressional oversight on the issue. Teams from the same conference have different rules to follow regarding NIL in what they can do and how they can do it. If the commissioners can get Congress to act and that is a BIG IF, they could put regulations across the board for everyone to follow.

I rarely expect government to fix or repair a problem. But heck there is always a first time I guess.

(07-20-2023 10:07 AM)Aztec Since 88 Wrote:  The main problem with NIL right is each state has their own rules regarding it. This is why they are calling for congressional oversight on the issue. Teams from the same conference have different rules to follow regarding NIL in what they can do and how they can do it. If the commissioners can get Congress to act and that is a BIG IF, they could put regulations across the board for everyone to follow.

The problem with that argument that you have to ask the question.... Where do you stop regulating the differences? At this point every state has different standards as to how they fund their college athletic programs. Some can sue student fees, while others can't. Some state allocates larger amounts of money to universities and those universities choose to funnel different amounts of money to their respective athletic departments. And, you also have private universities in the mix. How do you tell those universities they can only spend so much? Asking congress to intercede is like opening a huge pandora's box. Personally, I don't want to go there. Nothing ever gets better once the federal government gets their hands on it.