Players earning from their likeness (the NIL thread)

[uagrad2007]

Assuming the paying players legislation passes, realistically, how many players per average Power5 school will be able to make much money from this?

If this was a law in 2000, what Hogs would have made decent money since then?

Football

• McFadden
• Jones
• Hillis
• Tyler Wilson
• Matt Jones
• Monk

Basketball

• Gafford
• Joe Johnson
• Portis
• Brewer

I don't think there are many, if any, from the other sports.  Maybe a couple from baseball. I'm sure I've missed some as these names were just off the top of my head, but I think the players think this is a huge power play and, when it passes, they will be disappointed in what they receive. 

[hoggadore]

I haven’t read any details, but by my uninformed estimation the most obvious effect of this will be to legitimize the bagmen. Suddenly that car for the star recruit is just in exchange for appearing in a local ad. I would guess a lot of players would get that level of benefit.


Also could open things up with the return of EA college games.

[uagrad2007]

I haven’t read any details, but by my uninformed estimation the most obvious effect of this will be to legitimize the bagmen. Suddenly that car for the star recruit is just in exchange for appearing in a local ad. I would guess a lot of players would get that level of benefit.

Also could open things up with the return of EA college games.

I can see the car situation...didn't think about that.

I'm not sure how the EA college games will work.  If they have to pay every player that's in the game, one of two things will have to happen.  Either, only a couple of players from each team will be on the game or the games will cost $1000 each.  Nobody's paying that.

[VegasHog]

this isn't a power play by the athletes. it's a hail mary by the schools and ncaa to try to delay outright payment for the players.

state governments passed these rules, this is the schools reaction to that.

[Extra Point]

I haven’t read any details, but by my uninformed estimation the most obvious effect of this will be to legitimize the bagmen. Suddenly that car for the star recruit is just in exchange for appearing in a local ad. I would guess a lot of players would get that level of benefit.

Going legitimate, the recruit/player gets a big IRS bill from Uncle Sam.  They would likely have to sell said car in order to pay the IRS.

[Animal]

They'll be schools that have teams of lawyers finding loopholes to exploit all of this shit. It's not going to be what you see on the surface...it will continue to be what you don't see that was always hiding in plain sight. It will just be a little more kinda legal now. For every highly marketable player such as a Hunter Henry, DMAC, Portis, <insert baseball/track stars here>...there will be loads of kids wanting that hand out and they'll be loads of schools finding ways to make it happen.

[Show-Me Hog]

They'll be schools that have teams of lawyers finding loopholes to exploit all of this shit. It's not going to be what you see on the surface...it will continue to be what you don't see that was always hiding in plain sight. It will just be a little more kinda legal now. For every highly marketable player such as a Hunter Henry, DMAC, Portis, <insert baseball/track stars here>...there will be loads of kids wanting that hand out and they'll be loads of schools finding ways to make it happen.

Lawyers must be having sleepless nights trying to figure out how to reconcile the upcoming "you must let athletes earn according to their ability" law with the already-existing "you must treat women athletes equally to male athletes, even if they don't earn the same" law. The irresistible force meets the immovable object.

[jdcatty]

I know this is inevitable, but I really question its long term effects.  What’s to stop a school like Alabama from having a list of available sponsors to show recruits?  Even if it is under the table initially. Is recruiting going to become an out and out bidding war?

How’s this going to work with Title IX, when the football players get real money and the lady softball players get nothing?

[VegasHog]

I know this is inevitable, but I really question its long term effects.  What’s to stop a school like Alabama from having a list of available sponsors to show recruits?  Even if it is under the table initially. Is recruiting going to become an out and out bidding war?

How’s this going to work with Title IX, when the football players get real money and the lady softball players get nothing?

recruiting is already an out and out bidding war. for the time being i'm sure the ncaa and conferences will try to cap amounts.

title ix has no provisions for monetary compensation. it's not there to guarantee equal pay, so i don't know why it gets brought up.

[TexZilla]

I think some of you are way over the top with sky is falling direness.  Right now a Razorback golf team can’t do long drives and putts for the Elkins Lions Club golf tournament and make anything.   But if you’re a badass drummer doing the hey Jude thing on scholly you can make coin giving drum lessons or playing in a jazz combo.  School should never prevent a student from working in or out of their field.  There is no title IX because the school ain’t involved; it’s the free market for your likeness and brand. 

I could give a shit if a booster wanted to buy mama a new double wide; it doesnt translate to the field.  But that’s a different discussion.   Here if I want to pay the local goober that’s the 3rd string left tackle to make lattes at my dairy Queen in Oil Trough good for him.  I ain’t giving him a ride
And if the next DMAc gets a Corvette for exclusive promo considerations while in school that’s great; and he’s got to pay taxes.  1099’s can lose their appeal
Real fast.

[Animal]

Preface: I've done zero research into the nuts and bolts of this entire subject.


I think it's just going to come down to how many hands are in the cookie jar. How much of this will be controlled by the NCAA, the universities, and each state. It's a lot of moving parts and at it's core this is simply a likeness situation where certainly each year there are a number of NCAA athletes that cannot make anything off their likeness and yet nearly everyone else involved profits. You can easily make the argument that women in collegiate sports are not nearly as marketable and thus Title 12 doesn't apply. That being said we all know that there are some sexy womens that will end up on a Landers commercial or what not. Why the hell not? Now I don't know where it stands in terms of paid summer internships (real or fake), cars, xboxes, double wides. Is it truly an open market? I kinda doubt it will be and if that's the case I fully expect more legal challenges.

At some point this is going to be an IRS shit show and player hold outs, college free agency...this whole fuckin thing could implode.

[VegasHog]

I think some of you are way over the top with sky is falling direness.  Right now a Razorback golf team can’t do long drives and putts for the Elkins Lions Club golf tournament and make anything.   But if you’re a badass drummer doing the hey Jude thing on scholly you can make coin giving drum lessons or playing in a jazz combo.  School should never prevent a student from working in or out of their field.  There is no title IX because the school ain’t involved; it’s the free market for your likeness and brand. 

I could give a shit if a booster wanted to buy mama a new double wide; it doesnt translate to the field.  But that’s a different discussion.   Here if I want to pay the local goober that’s the 3rd string left tackle to make lattes at my dairy Queen in Oil Trough good for him.  I ain’t giving him a ride
And if the next DMAc gets a Corvette for exclusive promo considerations while in school that’s great; and he’s got to pay taxes.  1099’s can lose their appeal
Real fast.

all of this. the players will not be able to promote the school, just their likeness. for the vast majority of athletes this is going to be some local promo and and a little extra cash to supplement the meals, gas, etc., and maybe a new game console. and the way transfer rules are going, those big money boosters aren't going to be handing out huge deals only to have their guy not be as good as advertised or get in trouble and end up playing for their rival.

[Show-Me Hog]

title ix has no provisions for monetary compensation. it's not there to guarantee equal pay, so i don't know why it gets brought up.

If you think it's not going to be used in that way, Rob Halford has a song for ya....lawyers can make words mean anything, and many judges go along with it.

[VegasHog]

If you think it's not going to be used in that way, Rob Halford has a song for ya....lawyers can make words mean anything, and many judges go along with it.

it's a federal law. are there cases before the scotus that state a women ceo has to be paid as much her man counterpart?

there will be no provision that says mens golfers should be paid as much as a basketball player, so what's the difference.

[Show-Me Hog]

it's a federal law. are there cases before the scotus that state a women ceo has to be paid as much her man counterpart?

there will be no provision that says mens golfers should be paid as much as a basketball player, so what's the difference.

Have you not been paying attention to the weight room controversy this week?

It's beyond law or logic at this point.  If women aren't equal to men, there's gonna be problems.

[TexZilla]

The likeness issue is about individual use without use of marks or school IP.  If a woman pole vaulter can make $ from hot pics and a male Cant that’s his problems. No diff if you’re a French horn player vs a sax player; one gets gigs, the other don’t. 

[DrMongoose]

It will likely end up like those who makes $ on social media where only 1-3% are actually making anything.
Cameo might be one platform they could rake it in.
Supply and demand.
Also, you know Uncle Sam is gonna want his share.

[jdcatty]

recruiting is already an out and out bidding war. for the time being i'm sure the ncaa and conferences will try to cap amounts.

title ix has no provisions for monetary compensation. it's not there to guarantee equal pay, so i don't know why it gets brought up.

If you don’t think some smart lawyers will make Title IX, or just equal pay, an issue I just think you are wrong.  Look what the US Women’s Soccer team did last year and is doing.

[Son_of_Spam]

I think it will make smaller schools less competitive.

[Cerdo]

It will make schools like Arkansas more competitive though.

Right now our booster network isn't really smart enough to work the fringe and find "flexibility" in the rules to compete with someone like Alabama, who is probably two decades ahead of Arkansas.   If we make it easier to just spread some money in to top player's pockets, a school like Arkansas can compete more quickly with a traditional SEC power. 

Yeah, for the small poor schools it's a problem... but I don't care.   

[VegasHog]

If you don’t think some smart lawyers will make Title IX, or just equal pay, an issue I just think you are wrong.  Look what the US Women’s Soccer team did last year and is doing.

have you read or even googled title ix? it is a federal civil rights law. it guarantees the OPORTUNITY for women are the same as men. there are zero provisions in it that address compensation. it is not an anti trust measure. the us women's soccer team is a non sequitur because they are a professional league that has nothing to do with title ix.

as already mentioned, the subject of athletes being compensated for their likeness is not connected to the schools (indeed use of uniforms, mention of the university, etc. is not allowed) or the ncaa. it is a private contract between individuals. when the universities themselves start paying athletes directly, then interpretations of title ix could very well come into play.

[jdcatty]

have you read or even googled title ix? it is a federal civil rights law. it guarantees the OPORTUNITY for women are the same as men. there are zero provisions in it that address compensation. it is not an anti trust measure. the us women's soccer team is a non sequitur because they are a professional league that has nothing to do with title ix.

as already mentioned, the subject of athletes being compensated for their likeness is not connected to the schools (indeed use of uniforms, mention of the university, etc. is not allowed) or the ncaa. it is a private contract between individuals. when the universities themselves start paying athletes directly, then interpretations of title ix could very well come into play.

As I said above, maybe it isn’t Title IX (although I think that will be an issue some way or another, perhaps through an amendment), maybe just the subject of “equal pay” will become a hot button topic.  And litigation is not at all out of the question.  I am sorry if you don’t agree.  I never thought tobacco litigation would be a big deal either.  Everyone makes mistakes.

[SteveJ]

Also could open things up with the return of EA college games.

You might not have seen this.  College football is coming back.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30820886/everything-need-know-return-ea-sports-college-football-video-game

And every single person on the default in-game roster should make a little money from it.

[Sus-Scrofa]

You're offered a scholly, room and board, extra tutors, and a crap-ton of other benefits in exchange for playing football/baseball/basketball/golf etc. 

Life has strings attached, more strings for athletes than students in the band.  If you don't like those terms, don't take the scholarship and sign up.  If it's not still a net benefit, don't sign up to play in the first place.

The band analogy people are using isn't a good one.  That bad-ass drummer would still be able to make that money in a jazz trio or in lessons even if he wasn't playing along to Hey Jude at basketball games.  And let's not pretend the drummer is getting the same financial benefit from being in band that the athletes are getting.

All that said, I do think athletes should get a stipend every semester for some walking around money.  They're working plenty in addition to going to school.  It's not like they really have the time to flip burgers or work a campus job.

[Law_Hawg]

recruiting is already an out and out bidding war. for the time being i'm sure the ncaa and conferences will try to cap amounts.

title ix has no provisions for monetary compensation. it's not there to guarantee equal pay, so i don't know why it gets brought up.

I don't think the NCAA can unilaterally cap amounts without violating federal anti-trust law.

Unless the players have a union and a cap is negotiated through collective bargaining (like in the professional leagues).