An interesting article about the lawyer who won the Alston case against the NCAA, which found that athletes could be compensated for their name, image, and likeness. He has another case coming to trial in less than a year where he is attempting to get compensation to athletes who participated in revenue producing sports before NIL was created.
This is his answer as to what he thinks the options are as to what’s likely in the future for college athletics:
1. Conferences: NCAA economic regulations around compensation are eliminated and the individual conferences compete with each other by setting their own regulations and rules, creating “one marketplace standard” for athlete compensation. 2. Employment: Athletes are made employees or, at the very least, they unionize in an effort to collectively bargain with their school or conference. 3. Revenue sharing: A settlement from the House case produces a revenue-sharing model for athletes. 4. Congress: The federal government takes action with legislation that grants legal protection to the NCAA and potentially creates a carve-out for college athletes to earn compensation in a more regulated way. “I think that is the least likely way,” Kessler said. “Until Congress can agree on anything else, I’m not sure they’re going to agree on anything that would be good for college sports.” There is, of course, another option: The NCAA and college conferences do nothing, continue to get litigated in court and eventually find themselves bankrupt. That choice, though, is well past its expiration date.
Some speculation that the NCAA and the plaintiffs in the House case might be close to reaching some sort of settlement that’d bring some order to the existing NIL situation.
… A settlement would provide some legal relief for a college sports industry that's been peppered by lawsuits. It could also serve as a keystone piece to formulating a more stable future. With the settlement expected to cost billions in back pay for former athletes, it would likely also require the NCAA and conferences to agree to a system for sharing more revenue with some of the players moving forward. Sources indicated the top-end revenue share number per school -- once it's determined -- would be in the neighborhood of $20 million annually, although that's yet to be settled. Whatever number is set by the settlement, individual schools will be able to opt in to share revenue up to that number with their student athletes at their discretion. (They could choose to share less, but not more.)…
… What's uncertain, for now, are the mechanics of how this could work. Do the schools buy the NIL of their athletes? How would Title IX be impacted?…
Interesting that what is being discussed is basically the revenue sharing option in the post above which Jeffrey Kessler, lead attorney in the Alston and House cases against the NCAA, listed as a possible option for college athletics in the future.
I am not sure what is the best model going forward. However, all of these collectives developing NIL opportunities are essentially w/o any real transparency. How much of the funds from NIL opportunities are really getting to the athletes? What kind of “ cut” are the people running the collectives actually getting?They ain’t doing it for nothing!
Post by alsostagparty on Apr 30, 2024 9:10:37 GMT -5
In a sane world, a free education would be compensation enough with some community service thrown in. This is a new bureaucracy being built. Unless all schools get the same NIL money, there’s more abuses waiting ahead. Lawyers know how to find and encourage “victims” and create more and more laws and regulations.
In a sane world, a free education would be compensation enough with some community service thrown in. This is a new bureaucracy being built. Unless all schools get the same NIL money, there’s more abuses waiting ahead. Lawyers know how to find and encourage “victims” and create more and more laws and regulations.
I don’t know if there’s ever been a time in D1 men’s basketball where there has truly been a level playing field. Prior to NIL, Kentucky and Louisville to name two schools were put on probation for outright getting money to recruits. Don’t know that he was ever put on probation but everyone seemed to think Jerry Tarkanian at UNLV wasn’t operating within the rules. While all schools can offer athletic scholarships, there’s probably always been a handful of schools that attempted to tilt the scales in their favor in order to ensure their team was successful. At least there’s some hint that perhaps there’ll be a settlement where NIL comes back under NCAA control instead of collectives outside the school’s control. From there, perhaps some transparency can be established. I have a hunch that we’re going to end up with tiers within D1. Hopefully, schools from each tier will be able to participate in March Madness. I can’t think of any way the NCAA would be able to level the playing field in men’s basketball between say Kentucky and Maine. For as long as I can remember Kentucky has always had more talented men’s basketball teams than Maine, long before NIL was initiated. Before NIL, the NCAA could punish schools for recruiting violations. Presently, with the NIL collectives outside of a school’s control and with the Supreme Court decision going 9-0 against the NCAA in the Alston case which led to the creation of NIL collectives — the NCAA is powerless in reining in the NIL$ currently being offered. Right now, there’s no way of knowing what the end result of a potential settlement might be, but I think if it ends up with the NIL$ coming under a school’s control —- it would be an improvement over the current situation. If nothing else, we’d be back to the situation where the NCAA can put schools on probation for violating NIL and recruiting rules; something which with the proliferation of state laws and collectives being outside a school’s control is not the case now.