|
Replies: 16
| visibility 2708
|
Orange Blooded [2560]
TigerPulse: 99%
32
|
NIL is not the problem
7
7
Oct 5, 2024, 8:45 AM
|
|
The unrestricted transfer portal is the real problem. Clamp down on the and NIL will smooth itself out.
|
|
|
|
 |
Valley Protector [1425]
TigerPulse: 100%
29
|
Just the opposite
4
Oct 5, 2024, 8:49 AM
|
|
Without salary caps, the transfer portal is fueled by NIL money. Not if, but when a salary cap is introduced, transfers will slow as well. It’s the “cause and effect” debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2141]
TigerPulse: 89%
32
|
It's the combination of the 2..
2
Oct 5, 2024, 9:06 AM
|
|
Together they exponentially power up their ability to influence, denature the original foundations, the key ingredients that formerly made college game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
The original, illegal, exploitative original foundation?
1
Oct 5, 2024, 10:13 AM
|
|
It appalling that anyone would be in favor of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2141]
TigerPulse: 89%
32
|
Just4U:counter w/an inarguable statement of fact
Oct 5, 2024, 11:38 AM
|
|
'If it ain't broke don't fix it'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
There is going to be a salary cap next year.
Oct 5, 2024, 10:18 AM
[ in reply to Just the opposite ] |
|
$20 million per team.
That won't affect NIL a whit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10378]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
Correct***
3
Oct 5, 2024, 8:51 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Eternal Icon [186592]
TigerPulse: 100%
70
Posts: 30137
Joined: 2012
|
I believe both are ruining college football. Recruiting is no longer
8
8
Oct 5, 2024, 8:55 AM
|
|
recruiting, it's a bidding war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
How, exactly, are you going to do that?
Oct 5, 2024, 10:11 AM
|
|
The federal courts ruled that the NCAA can't limit or interfere with transfers for athletes. ...Just like any other student.
The NCAA is powerless to change that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [21713]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: How, exactly, are you going to do that?
Oct 5, 2024, 10:49 AM
|
|
Blah blah blah blah...right on cue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
It's great to live rent free in your head.
Oct 5, 2024, 11:00 AM
|
|
Apparently you're one of the Clemson fans that hates reality and likes the bad old days of exploiting athletes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3243]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: How, exactly, are you going to do that?
Oct 5, 2024, 11:36 AM
[ in reply to How, exactly, are you going to do that? ] |
|
So, you also agree, that now that the athletes are employees, they can be fired for poor results? If they are employees, and can be fired, should they have to give back some part of the money? NFL players have non-guaranteed contract money.
I hate the whole thing. But, I'm a friggin dinosaur. Start a minor league nfl. Let the kids that actually want an education, go to school and play as amateurs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [143]
TigerPulse: 97%
11
|
Re: NIL is not the problem
Oct 5, 2024, 10:15 AM
|
|
If the NCAA hadn’t been so greedy and relentless in their enforcement of petty “violations”, we wouldn’t be in the mess imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22104]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: NIL is not the problem
2
Oct 5, 2024, 11:04 AM
|
|
That is what is happening in the ninth circuit court of California (liberal h311). The guidelines are being drawn up to make NIL a legitimate endorsement deal with a real company. They are going to have a clearinghouse that will approve or deny deals. Meaning that a collective won’t be able to buy players with donated money without an actual company or product being behind it. As it stands now, there are no restrictions. The NCAA has been told to stand down on tampering until the legal guidelines are set. Unless it’s egregious and blatant. I dare say Texas A&M boosters buying Stanford’s ace pitcher for $1mil is a prime case of tampering.
Message was edited by: OneJedi®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
That deal is off. Several factors.
Oct 5, 2024, 11:23 AM
|
|
1. The NCAA can't interfere in private NIL.
That violates the injunction in the Ohio vs. NCAA case and the Sherman Antitrust Act.
2. The athletes in that case don't like that settlement clause and are taking a out rejecting the entire settlement offer and restarting the trial.
3. The NCAA doesn't get to pick and choose what athletes get to be paid NIL money for.
There's no way that part of the settlement survived on appeal, given the Alston vs NCAA case ripple effect on illegal restraint of trade like what's proposed in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7305]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: NIL is not the problem
Oct 5, 2024, 11:39 AM
|
|
Agree. Make EVERYONE sit a year if they transfer. Problem solved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
That's a violation of federal law and federal court injunctions.
Oct 5, 2024, 11:55 AM
|
|
Not...gonna...happen.
It is baffling why do many Clemson fans advocate for lawbreaking. It's appalling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 16
| visibility 2708
|
|
|
50
