Get 1 million plus.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31849917/alabama-qb-bryce-young-approaching-1m-endorsement-deals-says-head-coach-nick-saban

Now he can afford to pay others to write his papers.

Laundry.

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

Well this will even the playing field...not

BearForce2 said:

---

Now he can afford to pay others to write his papers.

---

Are you saying football players in SEC have to write papers? Specially in Alabama?

Go Bears!

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Will a voucher for 300,000 top dogs bring 'em in?

---

Have you seen Correa or Mckenzie?

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

I don't see NLI (or NIL) as the straw that breaks the camel's back. As much as this one touchdown career QB is making, the top money earners are expected to be certain gymnasts and twin softball players due to their absurdly large social media followings. A lot of this is about the individual athlete's media skills and looks.

For those who didn't read Justice Kavanaugh's recent unanimous decision, he said (some of it admittedly in dictum) the NCAA rules have been designed to preclude athletes from being recognized as workers and make money, and expressly prohibit athletes from having agents or other representatives to negotiate on their behalf. This was what he called an anti-trust violation. But what is forgotten is the same rules apply at the conference levels. Conferences and their members now control every aspect of their cash-making lives, including ticket prices and TV coverage, in conjunction with ESPN or other partners. Works the same way with bowl alignment. The point Justice Kavanaugh made is the body of rules from these organizations prevent this money flow from going to the players (never mind SCOTUS also screwed the athletes in measuring their damages). But if the conferences are going to get a pass on keeping all this money, they need a model that can withstand legal challenge and that means a professional team model and let's face it -paying players.The pro model places restraints on individual NFL player conduct and salary that are negotiated under a collective bargaining agreement. This ensures that the profitability of their employers is not adversely affected by the players individual actions, whether bad conduct, or anti-competitive conduct (thus limits on when a player can change teams) or compensation.

Btu a professional model is one that many Power 5 colleges will not adopt in a race to the bottom, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they don't view themselves in the professional sports business. I can't help thinking that many fans will say if I want to watch pro sports, I might as well watch the NFL - it provides a superior product.

wifeisafurd said:

---

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

I don't see NLI (or NIL) as the straw that breaks the camel's back. As much as this one touchdown career QB is making, the top money earners are expected to be certain gymnasts and twin softball players due to their absurdly large social media followings. A lot of this is about the individual athlete's media skills and looks.

For those who didn't read Justice Kavanaugh's recent unanimous decision, he said (some of it admittedly in dictum) the NCAA rules have been designed to preclude athletes from being recognized as workers and make money, and expressly prohibit athletes from having agents or other representatives to negotiate on their behalf. This was what he called an anti-trust violation. But what is forgotten is the same rules apply at the conference levels. Conferences and their members now control every aspect of their cash-making lives, including ticket prices and TV coverage, in conjunction with ESPN or other partners. Works the same way with bowl alignment. The point Justice Kavanaugh made is the body of rules from these organizations prevent this money flow from going to the players (never mind SCOTUS also screwed the athletes in measuring their damages). But if the conferences are going to get a pass on keeping all this money, they need a model that can withstand legal challenge and that means a professional team model and let's face it -paying players.The pro model places restraints on individual NFL player conduct and salary that are negotiated under a collective bargaining agreement. This ensures that the profitability of their employers is not adversely affected by the players individual actions, whether bad conduct, or anti-competitive conduct (thus limits on when a player can change teams) or compensation.

Btu a professional model is one that many Power 5 colleges will not adopt in a race to the bottom, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they don't view themselves in the professional sports business. I can't help thinking that many fans will say if I want to watch pro sports, I might as well watch the NFL - it provides a superior product.

---

Under the model you are describing, can a conference, or a school, include terms in an athlete's compensation agreement that include requirements to go to class, maintain a certain grade point average, etc. If that's something that could be imposed by the Pac-12, then there's hope that I'll stay interested. Otherwise, the athletics part of this becomes completely divorced from the student part of this, and I probably will lose interest. That's why I asked in the other thread if people would continue to follow the team in a lower, non-scholarship division.

Jeff82 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

I don't see NLI (or NIL) as the straw that breaks the camel's back. As much as this one touchdown career QB is making, the top money earners are expected to be certain gymnasts and twin softball players due to their absurdly large social media followings. A lot of this is about the individual athlete's media skills and looks.

For those who didn't read Justice Kavanaugh's recent unanimous decision, he said (some of it admittedly in dictum) the NCAA rules have been designed to preclude athletes from being recognized as workers and make money, and expressly prohibit athletes from having agents or other representatives to negotiate on their behalf. This was what he called an anti-trust violation. But what is forgotten is the same rules apply at the conference levels. Conferences and their members now control every aspect of their cash-making lives, including ticket prices and TV coverage, in conjunction with ESPN or other partners. Works the same way with bowl alignment. The point Justice Kavanaugh made is the body of rules from these organizations prevent this money flow from going to the players (never mind SCOTUS also screwed the athletes in measuring their damages). But if the conferences are going to get a pass on keeping all this money, they need a model that can withstand legal challenge and that means a professional team model and let's face it -paying players.The pro model places restraints on individual NFL player conduct and salary that are negotiated under a collective bargaining agreement. This ensures that the profitability of their employers is not adversely affected by the players individual actions, whether bad conduct, or anti-competitive conduct (thus limits on when a player can change teams) or compensation.

Btu a professional model is one that many Power 5 colleges will not adopt in a race to the bottom, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they don't view themselves in the professional sports business. I can't help thinking that many fans will say if I want to watch pro sports, I might as well watch the NFL - it provides a superior product.

---

Under the model you are describing, can a conference, or a school, include terms in an athlete's compensation agreement that include requirements to go to class, maintain a certain grade point average, etc. If that's something that could be imposed by the Pac-12, then there's hope that I'll stay interested. Otherwise, the athletics part of this becomes completely divorced from the student part of this, and I probably will lose interest. That's why I asked in the other thread if people would continue to follow the team in a lower, non-scholarship division.

---

I would think that under a collective bargaining agreement, the conference could get whatever it can negotiate. It no longer is a restraint of trade. It may be irrelevant to schools that say we are not in the "professional sports business" (there is some irony to that for Power 5 schools) that evolve to what is more the "Ivy League" model you describe.

Given this QB already has a million lined up, I am not so sure that many non-football athletes will surpass that. Alex Morgan was the 10th highest paid female athlete in the world in 2020.

AT&T, Nike, Coca Cola, and Volkswagen each paid her roughly 1 million.

I wonder how the dollar amounts on this list

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaab/ranking-top-20-college-athletes-favorites-capitalize-name-image-likeness-july-1

compare to the dollar amounts that are really just a circumventing way for a booster to pay players.

oski003 said:

---

Given this QB already has a million lined up, I am not so sure that many non-football athletes will surpass that. Alex Morgan was the 10th highest paid female athlete in the world in 2020.

AT&T, Nike, Coca Cola, and Volkswagen each paid her roughly 1 million.

I wonder how the dollar amounts on this list

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaab/ranking-top-20-college-athletes-favorites-capitalize-name-image-likeness-july-1

compare to the dollar amounts that are really just a circumventing way for a booster to pay players.

---

well if you look at the list, Young was already predicted to be number 3 and top football player because he has a big personality and has high social media ratings. And he is behind a gymnast, and right behind young are the twins (basketball rather than softball, my mistake), Paige Bueckers also is right there. What people seemed to be worried about is a thinly veiled attempt to work around amateur rules (which may be on there way out) baring paying college athletes. Like I said above, some of what Young makes is based on his social media following, as opposed to being (possibly) Alabama's future starting QB.

wifeisafurd said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Given this QB already has a million lined up, I am not so sure that many non-football athletes will surpass that. Alex Morgan was the 10th highest paid female athlete in the world in 2020.

AT&T, Nike, Coca Cola, and Volkswagen each paid her roughly 1 million.

I wonder how the dollar amounts on this list

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaab/ranking-top-20-college-athletes-favorites-capitalize-name-image-likeness-july-1

compare to the dollar amounts that are really just a circumventing way for a booster to pay players.

---

well if you look at the list, Young was already predicted to be number 3 and top football player because he has a big personality and has high social media ratings. And he is behind a gymnast, and right behind young are the twins (basketball rather than softball, my mistake), Paige Bueckers also is right there. What people seemed to be worried about is a thinly veiled attempt to work around amateur rules (which may be on there way out) baring paying college athletes. Like I said above, some of what Young makes is based on his social media following, as opposed to being (possibly) Alabama's future starting QB.

---

Fair, but do note that the person behind Young at #6 has 10x the social media following of Young.

Just like the person right behind OSU wr Olave has 10x the social media following of him.

There is a college football premium.

I am just amazed that really smart cal alumni believe that the majority of the $$ that is going to flow into NIL is related to tangible marketing value (Sidenote - VERY interesting econometric paper out that questions the efficacy of ad buy on sales and attributes the fact that companies still do it to agency problems).

THe VAST (like 80% plus) of NIL money that is going to flow is to buy recruits. A bunch of what used to occur is going to be now "above board" and, more importantly, by creating greater transparency in the market it will drive the "price" of talent higher since under the old system the "buyer" held significantly strategic advantage. If you don't think the Clemson QB recruits are now discussing the value they expect to recieve from THEIR NIL you are not paying attention.

Not sure how credible that list is, but doesn't look right to me

However,MBs point is right being a star player only sometimes is enough to get you into the social media royalty

Chet is an example on this list

Most are social media personality, who uses their college athletics as a part of their brand and to build exposure to add followers

bearchamp said:

---

The real culprit is Universities deciding to get into the entertainment business. If there were no scholarships, no huge stadiums, no multimillion dollar coaches, the "student athletes" would be independent of the schools and the schools wouldn't have a problem.

---

Yep. Hard to turn your back on truck loads and truck loads of money (the entertainment and the secondary, but more lucrative, university donation greaser) though.

When this gets really interesting is what some of the posters are joking about...players with the potential prospect of taking a pay cut going to the NFL. Right now they leave because their eligibility is done...but what if eligibility didn't expire after 4 years? If Chase Garbers were killing it, why not pay him to stick around? Who is it going to hurt if he does?

The NFL has a sweet, sweet deal right now. Sure there is some risk for the owners financially, but for the most part it's a license to print money. However, cloak that concept under a university system that has a much different agenda than Jerry Jones, Davis, et al and one might be looking at a real power house threat to the NFL.

Fantasy, yes. But some smart people are going to say why leave that NFL cash printing to 32 owners? And college football will be the horse that can get them there.

socaltownie said:

---

I am just amazed that really smart cal alumni believe that the majority of the $$ that is going to flow into NIL is related to tangible marketing value (Sidenote - VERY interesting econometric paper out that questions the efficacy of ad buy on sales and attributes the fact that companies still do it to agency problems).

THe VAST (like 80% plus) of NIL money that is going to flow is to buy recruits. A bunch of what used to occur is going to be now "above board" and, more importantly, by creating greater transparency in the market it will drive the "price" of talent higher since under the old system the "buyer" held significantly strategic advantage. If you don't think the Clemson QB recruits are now discussing the value they expect to recieve from THEIR NIL you are not paying attention.

---

What happens to coaches salaries in this scenario? There's an argument that they would go down (or not go up as much as they would've without NIL). There's limited donor money and if more of it now goes to buying players (which would have to be the case if the price of players goes up) then it seems like it may come out of coaches' salaries. Plus you no longer have to pay the Tosh type of coach who is reputed to be a great recruiter because you can openly outbid your competition for talent. I've never heard of a front office employee in pro sports (other than maybe Jerry West) be known as a good recruiter.

This would also mean that coaches who are good at the tactics and team building and etc become more valued and coaches who were winning by out recruiting the competition become less valuable. Mike Montgomery types have their stock go up. Or a new position emerges, basically a GM type for player acquisition separate from the head coach.

Lomiton said:

---

bearchamp said:

---

The real culprit is Universities deciding to get into the entertainment business. If there were no scholarships, no huge stadiums, no multimillion dollar coaches, the "student athletes" would be independent of the schools and the schools wouldn't have a problem.

---

Yep. Hard to turn your back on truck loads and truck loads of money (the entertainment and the secondary, but more lucrative, university donation greaser) though.

When this gets really interesting is what some of the posters are joking about...players with the potential prospect of taking a pay cut going to the NFL. Right now they leave because their eligibility is done...but what if eligibility didn't expire after 4 years? If Chase Garbers were killing it, why not pay him to stick around? Who is it going to hurt if he does?

The NFL has a sweet, sweet deal right now. Sure there is some risk for the owners financially, but for the most part it's a license to print money. However, cloak that concept under a university system that has a much different agenda than Jerry Jones, Davis, et al and one might be looking at a real power house threat to the NFL.

Fantasy, yes. But some smart people are going to say why leave that NFL cash printing to 32 owners? And college football will be the horse that can get them there.

---

Effectively, what you're saying is that college football will become a second professional league for places like Alabama that don't have a pro team of their own. Ergo, this is going to be the demise of most college programs, like Cal and Stanford, that already are in markets with pro teams. Why would I watch Cal, if the players are just pros, with no real loyalty to the school, when I could watch the 49ers instead. I don't see the point.

oski003 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Given this QB already has a million lined up, I am not so sure that many non-football athletes will surpass that. Alex Morgan was the 10th highest paid female athlete in the world in 2020.

AT&T, Nike, Coca Cola, and Volkswagen each paid her roughly 1 million.

I wonder how the dollar amounts on this list

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaab/ranking-top-20-college-athletes-favorites-capitalize-name-image-likeness-july-1

compare to the dollar amounts that are really just a circumventing way for a booster to pay players.

---

well if you look at the list, Young was already predicted to be number 3 and top football player because he has a big personality and has high social media ratings. And he is behind a gymnast, and right behind young are the twins (basketball rather than softball, my mistake), Paige Bueckers also is right there. What people seemed to be worried about is a thinly veiled attempt to work around amateur rules (which may be on there way out) baring paying college athletes. Like I said above, some of what Young makes is based on his social media following, as opposed to being (possibly) Alabama's future starting QB.

---

Fair, but do note that the person behind Young at #6 has 10x the social media following of Young.

Just like the person right behind OSU wr Olave has 10x the social media following of him.

There is a college football premium.

---

fair enough there is a college football premium, which everyone should expect. But he still is behind a freaking gymnast and Fresno State women's basketball players. (Young is expected to be number 5 because his social media while nice, will grow).

wifeisafurd said:

---

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

I don't see NLI (or NIL) as the straw that breaks the camel's back. As much as this one touchdown career QB is making, the top money earners are expected to be certain gymnasts and twin softball players due to their absurdly large social media followings. A lot of this is about the individual athlete's media skills and looks.

For those who didn't read Justice Kavanaugh's recent unanimous decision, he said (some of it admittedly in dictum) the NCAA rules have been designed to preclude athletes from being recognized as workers and make money, and expressly prohibit athletes from having agents or other representatives to negotiate on their behalf. This was what he called an anti-trust violation. But what is forgotten is the same rules apply at the conference levels. Conferences and their members now control every aspect of their cash-making lives, including ticket prices and TV coverage, in conjunction with ESPN or other partners. Works the same way with bowl alignment. The point Justice Kavanaugh made is the body of rules from these organizations prevent this money flow from going to the players (never mind SCOTUS also screwed the athletes in measuring their damages). But if the conferences are going to get a pass on keeping all this money, they need a model that can withstand legal challenge and that means a professional team model and let's face it -paying players.The pro model places restraints on individual NFL player conduct and salary that are negotiated under a collective bargaining agreement. This ensures that the profitability of their employers is not adversely affected by the players individual actions, whether bad conduct, or anti-competitive conduct (thus limits on when a player can change teams) or compensation.

Btu a professional model is one that many Power 5 colleges will not adopt in a race to the bottom, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they don't view themselves in the professional sports business. I can't help thinking that many fans will say if I want to watch pro sports, I might as well watch the NFL - it provides a superior product.

---

IMO, the sticking point to a collective bargaining agreement is the acceptance of athletes as employees of the institutions. This will give many schools the impetus to reduce programs to non-scholarship club status or drop sports altogether.

There isn't a moral or objective argument worth any salt that a college QB who has yet to play deserves or needs a million dollars based solely on his "likeness." The whole NIL idea is terrible.

touchdownbears43 said:

---

There isn't a moral or objective argument worth any salt that a college QB who has yet to play deserves or needs a million dollars based solely on his "likeness." The whole NIL idea is terrible.

---

Actually, Young played in a number of games last year.

This is why NIL is a great idea:

An guy in Alabama created hundreds of copies of a painting showing Najee Harris leaping over a would-be tackler. He sold them at $1,000 a pop and reaped $72,000. How much did Harris receive? Nada.

That is wrong. Harris deserved a share of the profit.. It is all about fairness. You make a buck from my image. You owe me a cut of the action.

IMO, NIL is the best thing to happen to college athletics in recent memory

Is it's morally right that. Pro basketball player can earn $5M/year while a top doctor earns only a fraction of that?

What we have here is marketing power in the new age

The HS junior will make a huge NIL haul with sponsorships and share of ad revenues because he has 5M followers

That represents a big draw to advertisers and even to the social media company (Instagram, TikTok, etc)

We are not talking about Toyota of Berkeley

Social media is a game changer. Many don't understand it and it's impact

touchdownbears43 said:

---

There isn't a moral or objective argument worth any salt that a college QB who has yet to play deserves or needs a million dollars based solely on his "likeness." The whole NIL idea is terrible.

---

boredom said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

I am just amazed that really smart cal alumni believe that the majority of the $$ that is going to flow into NIL is related to tangible marketing value (Sidenote - VERY interesting econometric paper out that questions the efficacy of ad buy on sales and attributes the fact that companies still do it to agency problems).

THe VAST (like 80% plus) of NIL money that is going to flow is to buy recruits. A bunch of what used to occur is going to be now "above board" and, more importantly, by creating greater transparency in the market it will drive the "price" of talent higher since under the old system the "buyer" held significantly strategic advantage. If you don't think the Clemson QB recruits are now discussing the value they expect to recieve from THEIR NIL you are not paying attention.

---

What happens to coaches salaries in this scenario? There's an argument that they would go down (or not go up as much as they would've without NIL). There's limited donor money and if more of it now goes to buying players (which would have to be the case if the price of players goes up) then it seems like it may come out of coaches' salaries. Plus you no longer have to pay the Tosh type of coach who is reputed to be a great recruiter because you can openly outbid your competition for talent. I've never heard of a front office employee in pro sports (other than maybe Jerry West) be known as a good recruiter.

This would also mean that coaches who are good at the tactics and team building and etc become more valued and coaches who were winning by out recruiting the competition become less valuable. Mike Montgomery types have their stock go up. Or a new position emerges, basically a GM type for player acquisition separate from the head coach.

---

I doubt it will have any impact on the mega-salaries of the top coaches. Legacy programs were built by coaches:Rockne and Leahy at ND; Bryant and Saban at AL; Wilkinson at OU; Royal at Texas; Paterno at PSU; Howard Jones, McKay at USC; Hayes and Meyer at tOSU; Bowden at FSU. Program builders will continue to command big money for the simple reason that they are rare and the potential rewards are huge.I suspect a lot of the money flowing to the athletes will be "new" money (e.g., through social media) from sources not now contributing to athletic departments in any significant way.

HoopDreams said:

---

Is it's morally right that. Pro basketball player can earn $5M/year while a top doctor earns only a fraction of that?

What we have here is marketing power in the new age

The HS junior will make a huge NIL haul with sponsorships and share of ad revenues because he has 5M followers

That represents a big draw to advertisers and even to the social media company (Instagram, TikTok, etc)

We are not talking about Toyota of Berkeley

Social media is a game changer. Many don't understand it and it's impact

touchdownbears43 said:

---

There isn't a moral or objective argument worth any salt that a college QB who has yet to play deserves or needs a million dollars based solely on his "likeness." The whole NIL idea is terrible.

---

---

Millions watch hoops stars ply their trade. Only a handful of MD's and nurses watch a surgeon ply his/her trade.

And that's the way it is.

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

The peril I see is that a handful of elite programs may use NIL and "free agency" to widen the gap between themselves and the rest of the pack. The pro leagues have collective bargaining agreements that allow salary caps and a common draft to help maintain competitive balance. Will anything like that ever exist at the collegiate level? The much maligned NCAA has played a role, however imperfectly, to maintain some degree of competitive balance through scholarship limitations and limiting outright payment for services. Absent those constraints, are we not likely to see a further concentration of assets in the top dozen or so programs?

HoopDreams said:

---

Is it's morally right that. Pro basketball player can earn $5M/year while a top doctor earns only a fraction of that?

What we have here is marketing power in the new age

The HS junior will make a huge NIL haul with sponsorships and share of ad revenues because he has 5M followers

That represents a big draw to advertisers and even to the social media company (Instagram, TikTok, etc)

We are not talking about Toyota of Berkeley

Social media is a game changer. Many don't understand it and it's impact

touchdownbears43 said:

---

There isn't a moral or objective argument worth any salt that a college QB who has yet to play deserves or needs a million dollars based solely on his "likeness." The whole NIL idea is terrible.

---

---

I have to admit, people I'm around (including youngings) don't have that much time to spend on social media. While there will be a few athletes that make big numbers, when the initial reaction dies down, most college athletes are predicted to not make much money on this. More like a fringe benefit, and '71 provided a perfect the example of the kind of money involved (query if news outlets will be required to provide money for likeness?). , a NLI probably is not as offensive concept if given an opportunity to play out.. But if the courts follow the honorable Justice Kavanaugh, we eventually are talking about paying college athletes, and that is a very different level of money with competitive, social and legal consequences that could dramatically change the college sports landscape.

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

59bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Nice job NCAA. Nice job

---

LOL! It was the state legislature of California that started the ball rolling. Later other states joined the party. In the meantime, every court level in the Federal system ruled against the NCAA despite their best efforts to fight NIL compensation.

The decisions made by the states and courts was correct. Players should be paid for the use of their NIL. I applaud Bryce Young for taking full advantage of his opportunity to be fairly compensated for his NIL.

---

A conundrum...what's good for the individual athlete may not be good for the sport as a whole.

---

IMO, what is good for the individual athlete is good for the sport.

As I said in a post a while back, in a couple of years, we will look back and wonder what all the anxiety was about. This is not a big deal. It is just the first step on a journey that will see significant changes to college athletics. Quite frankly, these changes are long overdue. I look forward to seeing where we end up.

---

The peril I see is that a handful of elite programs may use NIL and "free agency" to widen the gap between themselves and the rest of the pack. The pro leagues have collective bargaining agreements that allow salary caps and a common draft to help maintain competitive balance. Will anything like that ever exist at the collegiate level? The much maligned NCAA has played a role, however imperfectly, to maintain some degree of competitive balance through scholarship limitations and limiting outright payment for services. Absent those constraints, are we not likely to see a further concentration of assets in the top dozen or so programs?

---

It's going to take some leadership from the various institutions to start being proactive with a plan that will protect the "good of the game" for all parties. That means making players partners in the enterprise - period.

Sometimes I think that the people at the controls either a) are still waiting for a government mandated "hail Mary" that will put the genie back in the bottle or b) have decided to let the good ship U.S. College Football crash on the rocks so they can say "I told you so" and can use that to get government to step in and make things right again.

As 71 says, change is coming. Institutions, like Cal and the P12 can either float around and whine or they can get their oars in the water and get to some place that's better off for everyone.

Lomiton said:

---

As 71 says, change is coming. Institutions, like Cal and the P12 can either float around and whine or they can get their oars in the water and get to some place that's better off for everyone.

---

clueless, i looked up the definition of NIL this morning. one of several matches, dateline June 24th...

>https://247sports.com/college/ucla/Article/UCLA-Football-California-Student-Athletes-Could-Get-Benefit-from-NIL-By-Sept-1-166932768

Quote:

---

This week, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the NCAA in regards to compensation to student-athletes. In a landmark 9-0 decision, the court voted in favor of Division I student-athletes stating that the NCAA was violating antitrust laws by limiting compensation.

This decision will allow student-athletes the opportunity to profit from their name, image, and likeness as it relates to education, a stance the NCAA was against as it claimed it was preserving amateurism.

Fortunately for the student-athletes, the court ruled that the organization was not exempt from anti-trust laws.

So what does this mean for Division I athletes in the state of California? Student-athletes within the state could profit from their name, image, and likeness as soon as Sept. 1, 2021 especially if a state senate urgency bill is signed prior to that date.

---