Jon Joseph Moderator No. 1 Share Posted January 7 College's from their presidents to athletic directors on down are preparing for a new recruiting and NIL model if the House settlement is approved. But as noted plaintiff's attorney Thomas Mars (appropriate name, eh?) notes, House will not end litigation. In particular, if The Clearing House (seven employees of Deloitte will determine if NIL deals $600 and over are 'fair' when using a Fair Market Value test) gives a deal a thumbs down, a player's attorney will not take this lying down. Anyone who believes the Clearing House can cap NIL deals without pushback has not been paying attention. The House settlement will not bar existing, outside of the House class of plaintiffs, and future antitrust litigation. IMHO, the NCAA would be better off filing bankruptcy and as part of a plan of reorganization doing an end run on Congress by getting a federal bankruptcy to approve the plan of reorganization including protection from litigation, antitrust, Title IX, etc., that would likely be challenged to the Supreme Court level of review. If the Supremes sign off, college sports would have de facto federal and state protection from antitrust and other litigation. If the House settlement is approved, I think that it will be SSDD. With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval? SPORTS.YAHOO.COM College football’s more professionalized era arrives in July, and historic powerhouses like Ohio State and Texas could lose both their inherent recruiting advantage and their financial edge. It is no surprise that Ohio State athletics are used as an example. How many FBS programs, especially at the G5 level, will be able to come up with $20M a year in direct payment to their athletes? If approved, I believe the settlement will lead to further conference consolidation and a Super Conference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanLduck No. 2 Share Posted January 7 Wow. We thought NIL was bad now! It appears the future will be even more chaotic. Without limitation and enforcement there could be no end to athelete compensation. If it was a a true open, fair market you could expect a leveling out at some point. But schools with larger donor base have the clear advantage. I'm not against athelete compensation. But what's fair market value? Who decides? And without a cap, someone with too much $$ and too big of an ego will pay way too much. In the end, we the consumer will suffer. Higher seat costs, higher costs for gear, even higher stadium concession costs. Probably higher streaming and cable too. Think too about the pressure on a family with a kid playing qb now in junior high or hi-school. Pay big bucks for extra coaching cuz he could get a D1 schollie and $1M deal. Demanding playing time. Oy vey. The times, they are a-changin. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solar No. 3 Share Posted January 7 This is a mess. I agree their should have been a clean break, but as I've said before, the NCAA seems clueless they hired lawyers who only interest is to generate more in the future. With such a mess I don't think we get to a new model anytime soon. 2032 may be too soon. Until then capitalism will have free reign on an increasingly uneven playing field, with the haves decimating the have nots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Moderator No. 4 Share Posted January 7 The NCAA of course is totally responsible for this mess. While they were busy sending out the hounds for recruiting violations and a kid working at a car lot, violations like the UNC scandal of players getting grades for classes they didn't even attend was not in their purview. But the "Student Athlete" was front & center. This antiquated view that let coaches & the schools make millions, coaches got raises, left to coach somewhere else, but the Student-Athlete got a scholarship. This could have been addressed 50 years ago. If it had, things would be a lot better now. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph Author Moderator No. 5 Share Posted January 7 Solar, great comment. The lawyers they hired were hired to preserve a status quo that began to disappear when the NCAA lost its CFB broadcast monopoly. What I don't get in today's world is counsel not exploring alternatives beyond a settlement that settles Nothing but a suit brought by a defined class of plaintiffs. Is my idea of filing BK worth a whip? Perhaps not but there has to be better ways to go than this House settlement. NO POLITICS INTENDED. There will be a new Congress sworn in and perhaps, the NCAA should see if it can get relief from this Congress before handing over $2 Billion to the House plaintiffs. I Do Not Get How and Why all of these learned folks can agree to drop their load with the Pac-2 and another group of super-intellects can settle with a specific and not all-inclusive group of plaintiffs. I mean, TWO BILLION DOLLARS and you're not in the clear? Three entities are suing your company. Let's give a huge settlement to one litigant while ignoring the other two. INSANE! INNANE! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
