Boom! Miami Player Wong will enter transfer portal if NIL isn’t increased!

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
14,294
Reaction score
10,143
Points
113
Honestly, if someone could provide a good solid reasoning for regulation besides "this is unfair", "my team won't be able to compete", "these are amateur athletes", I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As far as I can tell these are agreements between consenting adults and nobody is being robbed or done any harm in the process. There is no "disorder" here that is causing anyone harm.
My only issue with NIL is when it is being used as a handout (which we all know it is in the high profile situations). That is not what NIL was intended to be but of course it was obvious that is what it was going to become in football and basketball.

Is what it is at this point.
 

Gophers1992

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
1,629
Points
113
My only issue with NIL is when it is being used as a handout (which we all know it is in the high profile situations). That is not what NIL was intended to be but of course it was obvious that is what it was going to become in football and basketball.

Is what it is at this point.
I don't so much mind that they are doing pay for play, but I wish they would just come out and say that players can be paid for whatever purpose the two parties desire (within the boundaries of the law of course), and just let it be.
 

ecoperson

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
1,953
Points
113
Honestly, if someone could provide a good solid reasoning for regulation besides "this is unfair", "my team won't be able to compete", "these are amateur athletes", I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As far as I can tell these are agreements between consenting adults and nobody is being robbed or done any harm in the process. There is no "disorder" here that is causing anyone harm.
My problem is that, coupled with unlimited transfers, it is essentially making a mockery of signing a letter of intent. The letter of intent was formerly a commitment between the student athlete and the school.

The student athletes who are not superstars are going to get the shaft as the players that the sign up to play 4 years with are going to be ping-ponging back and forth to the highest bidder. The non superstars need to have a solid team to increase their ability to demonstrate that they might be worthy of a future look overseas, etc. They will instead have to play with a new superstar each year who will demand the ball since that is why the booster paid them to play.

These marginal athletes won't get a chance to shine. Unfortunately, no one is going to pay them NIL so they are getting the shaft.
 

leib0039

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
982
Reaction score
1,381
Points
93
Honestly, if someone could provide a good solid reasoning for regulation besides "this is unfair", "my team won't be able to compete", "these are amateur athletes", I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As far as I can tell these are agreements between consenting adults and nobody is being robbed or done any harm in the process. There is no "disorder" here that is causing anyone harm.
My reason is essentially this, they are no longer amateurs, so why are we calling them that? And they want to get paid, I totally get it and understand why, their talents are worth potentially getting paid. However, when you are a pro athlete, many of the normal rules/regulations are out the window. You are no longer a plumber, accountant, banker etc. Pro athletes rightfully make a lot of money, but with that money comes stipulations. The Chiefs for example told Patrick Mahomes to stop playing pickup bball at the local YMCA because if he blows his knee out on a Tuesday morning vs Carl in Collections, that is going to cost the team millions. So as I have said over and over, good for the kids, get that money! But I think so as much money as these companies/boosters/schools are putting into a kid, there then has to be some give on the kids end, you are no longer just a college kid, you are a paid pro athlete, there are things that they should have to abide by now. If that means not being able to leave a school when they want, or if that means they can't do x y or z well then that is a part of it. They want their cake and to eat it too, that wont happen.
 

Gophers1992

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
1,629
Points
113
My reason is essentially this, they are no longer amateurs, so why are we calling them that? And they want to get paid, I totally get it and understand why, their talents are worth potentially getting paid. However, when you are a pro athlete, many of the normal rules/regulations are out the window. You are no longer a plumber, accountant, banker etc. Pro athletes rightfully make a lot of money, but with that money comes stipulations. The Chiefs for example told Patrick Mahomes to stop playing pickup bball at the local YMCA because if he blows his knee out on a Tuesday morning vs Carl in Collections, that is going to cost the team millions. So as I have said over and over, good for the kids, get that money! But I think so as much money as these companies/boosters/schools are putting into a kid, there then has to be some give on the kids end, you are no longer just a college kid, you are a paid pro athlete, there are things that they should have to abide by now. If that means not being able to leave a school when they want, or if that means they can't do x y or z well then that is a part of it. They want their cake and to eat it too, that wont happen.
I'm not sure what the rules allow for in these contracts, but I'd be totally on board with this idea. But then again if Booster A wants to put all these stipulations in his contract while Booster B doesn't, the second guy is going to win out, which is totally fine.
 


DarthGopher

Active member
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
94
Reaction score
158
Points
33
...

BTW - the earlier Supreme Court decision dealt with "education-related benefits" only. It did not address any type of compensation for athletic services. So a national NIL bill passed by Congress would have to be able to withstand any court challenges. Go back and read Kavanaugh's opinion on the earlier case. He ripped the NCAA a new bung-hole. (and he likes beer.....)
The NIL kind of resembles Cornholio looking for TP for said bung-hole. The NCAA done did eat like 27 candy bars and drank a six pack of root beer...
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
49,672
Reaction score
10,270
Points
113
My reason is essentially this, they are no longer amateurs, so why are we calling them that? And they want to get paid, I totally get it and understand why, their talents are worth potentially getting paid. However, when you are a pro athlete, many of the normal rules/regulations are out the window. You are no longer a plumber, accountant, banker etc. Pro athletes rightfully make a lot of money, but with that money comes stipulations. The Chiefs for example told Patrick Mahomes to stop playing pickup bball at the local YMCA because if he blows his knee out on a Tuesday morning vs Carl in Collections, that is going to cost the team millions. So as I have said over and over, good for the kids, get that money! But I think so as much money as these companies/boosters/schools are putting into a kid, there then has to be some give on the kids end, you are no longer just a college kid, you are a paid pro athlete, there are things that they should have to abide by now. If that means not being able to leave a school when they want, or if that means they can't do x y or z well then that is a part of it. They want their cake and to eat it too, that wont happen.
Yep. Personally, I would love it if the kids that want to play for a scholarship and the education would just do that and the kids that want to make money playing basketball would move on and go play in a league for money. I don't think it would be too long before the college model started being the winner again for more and more kids. The college game builds their fame a whole lot more than playing in a G league or lower to make money.

The NCAA had built a brand that helped these kids make a name for themselves, even the ones that didn't make it in the NBA have a better chance at a good career than they would have without basketball. The idea that the college is getting all of the benefit and the kid none, is not correct.
 

leib0039

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
982
Reaction score
1,381
Points
93
I'm not sure what the rules allow for in these contracts, but I'd be totally on board with this idea. But then again if Booster A wants to put all these stipulations in his contract while Booster B doesn't, the second guy is going to win out, which is totally fine.
This would take the NCAA to do something smart/useful and well that would be a radical change for them ha.

To me there should be a basic contract and then you can build/add from there. These are generally business men/women so they know the song and dance. Ok you want $1m, fine but then its a 4yr deal and you cant do x y z. Hey you arent as good, its only $50k we wont have near the restrictions. Then it will be on the kid, $1m where you can do x y and z or maybe someone offers $500k but without restrictions.

Either way we are no longer talking about amateurs so I think its fair the kids get paid, but also fair their expectations for performance and outside life will also change in kind.
 

alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,473
Reaction score
1,996
Points
113
Honestly, if someone could provide a good solid reasoning for regulation besides "this is unfair", "my team won't be able to compete", "these are amateur athletes", I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As far as I can tell these are agreements between consenting adults and nobody is being robbed or done any harm in the process. There is no "disorder" here that is causing anyone harm.
You make it seems like it is just a simple transaction of paying the value of the player between the booster and the player. It is not such a simple and isolate issue.

Why do all professional sports have rules that regulated salaries, player movements, compensation for losing players, draft orders on selection of players, etc...?

You do not see how a booster giving huge amounts of money for players to come to a school could harm the coaches ability to control who plays on the team, affect player moral, team unity, culture? Or affect how the coach can discipline players, who does the player answer to? The guy who pays them $800K or the coach? The player has no accountability. If the player gets pissed off at the coach and gets benched, he still gets paid by the booster. It is all disorder and several others are harmed besides just the two consenting adults that made the initial agreement.
 



SanDiegoGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
1,786
Reaction score
1,411
Points
113
A possible solution would be to take away any pro draft requirements other than you have to be 18.

If the kids want to go pro, go pro. Im sure some will get drafted and put in a 1-2 year development plan.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
9,350
Reaction score
1,340
Points
113
My problem is that, coupled with unlimited transfers, it is essentially making a mockery of signing a letter of intent. The letter of intent was formerly a commitment between the student athlete and the school.

The student athletes who are not superstars are going to get the shaft as the players that the sign up to play 4 years with are going to be ping-ponging back and forth to the highest bidder. The non superstars need to have a solid team to increase their ability to demonstrate that they might be worthy of a future look overseas, etc. They will instead have to play with a new superstar each year who will demand the ball since that is why the booster paid them to play.

These marginal athletes won't get a chance to shine. Unfortunately, no one is going to pay them NIL so they are getting the shaft.
Bolded is one of the worst parts about this new system.

In the league, even neverminding that rookie deals are purposefully cheaper, the team paying the player can make the decision to bring him along slowly, if that is the right move.


"Hey man, do you want me to pay out big again for recruits in the future?? Then you better get my guy the damn ball! I sure as hell didn't pay out the a__ for him to come here and ace a biology test!!"
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
49,672
Reaction score
10,270
Points
113
A possible solution would be to take away any pro draft requirements other than you have to be 18.

If the kids want to go pro, go pro. Im sure some will get drafted and put in a 1-2 year development plan.
Oddly, most of them are worth less as a pro in professional sports than as a pro in amateur sports. The NCAA provides notoriety and boosters not available in the bush leagues.
 

Gophers1992

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
1,629
Points
113
You make it seems like it is just a simple transaction of paying the value of the player between the booster and the player. It is not such a simple and isolate issue.

Why do all professional sports have rules that regulated salaries, player movements, compensation for losing players, draft orders on selection of players, etc...?

You do not see how a booster giving huge amounts of money for players to come to a school could harm the coaches ability to control who plays on the team, affect player moral, team unity, culture? Or affect how the coach can discipline players, who does the player answer to? The guy who pays them $800K or the coach? The player has no accountability. If the player gets pissed off at the coach and gets benched, he still gets paid by the booster. It is all disorder and several others are harmed besides just the two consenting adults that made the initial agreement.
I do see all of that. It's still not a reason to restrict someone's earnings.
 



JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
11,177
Reaction score
3,076
Points
113
This NIL already seems out of hand. College basketball has always been my first love. I don't know anymore
 


short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
14,600
Reaction score
6,924
Points
113
well, there is another option.

if you are a D1 scholarship athlete at a major college, you are an employee of the school, and are paid a salary, with the possibility of a performance-based bonus - just like a 'real' job. benefits would also be spelled out, such as room and board - or a payment in lieu of, if a player wanted to have his own crib.

Instead of a scholarship, players sign a contract of employment. as a legally-binding contract, it can include stipulations on outside income, activities, etc, and spell out reasons for termination.

there could also potentially be a "player's union." (depending on whether the school is in a right-to-work state....)

players who want to attend class and work toward an academic degree could do so, but it would not be required.

that brings a new level of control to the process.

the NIL piece would still require federal legislation, but one step at a time.
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,315
Points
113
It just seems interesting that the people suggesting these kids are far better off not making money - are the ones making money on it. ...or the ones wanting to see kids play for free for a "purer" college basketball fan experience.

Its the wild west right now which probably is the worst way to approach it. Find a way or lower my tickets back down to $5.
They have not played for free. They have played for free college, great facilities and coaching, and a big stage to showcase talent in pursuit of professional career.

More than fair.
 

Emil

International Guide
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
446
Reaction score
11
Points
18
Did Wong enter transfer portal?
 

alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,473
Reaction score
1,996
Points
113
well, there is another option.

if you are a D1 scholarship athlete at a major college, you are an employee of the school, and are paid a salary, with the possibility of a performance-based bonus - just like a 'real' job. benefits would also be spelled out, such as room and board - or a payment in lieu of, if a player wanted to have his own crib.

Instead of a scholarship, players sign a contract of employment. as a legally-binding contract, it can include stipulations on outside income, activities, etc, and spell out reasons for termination.

there could also potentially be a "player's union." (depending on whether the school is in a right-to-work state....)

players who want to attend class and work toward an academic degree could do so, but it would not be required.

that brings a new level of control to the process.

the NIL piece would still require federal legislation, but one step at a time.
I think it could have been handled like stipends for grad students. Reasonable amounts that allow them to make some money to live off and are consistent with each team. They would still have to attend class and be working on a degree. It has too be an extension of the school, not just some minor league with paid players. Let the local car dealer run the “Saint’s”. Colleges will not absorb the financial risk of running the teams if they are not linked to the mission of education.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
9,350
Reaction score
1,340
Points
113
Did Wong enter transfer portal?
There was a Tweet some posts back where he did a complete 180, accused everyone of lying about what he actually wanted/said, and announced he always had intended to accept the deal and play at Miami.

:rolleyes:
 

CPTMidnight

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
545
Reaction score
431
Points
63
They have not played for free. They have played for free college, great facilities and coaching, and a big stage to showcase talent in pursuit of professional career.

More than fair.
Why not a few bucks on top of that? Does that suddenly tip the balance? Now it is unfair for the colleges, coaches, and TV networks?
 


CPTMidnight

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
545
Reaction score
431
Points
63
Might work or a legal challenge might topple the entire current monopoly that IS the NCAA.

Perhaps a good middle ground is to allow each league to pay players through the school equally and based on their own details, timing, and amounts. For example, football, basketball, and perhaps some other revenue generating players get a cut of the $770 million dollars they earn for the Big 10.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
9,350
Reaction score
1,340
Points
113
Might work or a legal challenge might topple the entire current monopoly that IS the NCAA.

Perhaps a good middle ground is to allow each league to pay players through the school equally and based on their own details, timing, and amounts. For example, football, basketball, and perhaps some other revenue generating players get a cut of the $770 million dollars they earn for the Big 10.
Something like this does need to be worked out, if they want their good product to survive.

And the players will have to play a huge part of that. Any kind of "cap" is going to have to need to be collectively agreed to/bargained by the players.

Whatever level it is, the entire P5 (including Gophers) or a new CFA (possibly excluding Gophers and other lower-end P5), they need that player's union.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
9,350
Reaction score
1,340
Points
113
Also (since this is in the bball forum), I only think these drastic measures, to the level of schools forming a new association with new rules, etc., are needed in football.

Even in basketball, if you had completely unregulated NIL/defacto pay-for-play ..... you can still have a St Peter's come out of nowhere, with a bunch of no-name guys, and have a nice run in March Madness.

You can still do that in basketball.


That said, I'm still of course fine with some NIL restrictions across the board by the NCAA.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
14,600
Reaction score
6,924
Points
113
If the NCAA says that "boosters" cannot be involved with making direct NIL inducements to recruits, that is going to cover a lot of people.

If I recall, at MN, the definition of "booster" includes anyone who makes a donation to the school - including the 'seat donations' that come with season tickets. so any season-ticket holder at MN is a booster under that definition. and what if that booster owns a business? he can't do an NIL deal with a player to endorse his business?

assuming this survives a court challenge, the real question is enforcement. the NCAA doesn't have enough investigators to deal with the regular rules violations. how in the bleep are they going to investigate and enforce potential NIL violations?
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,315
Points
113
Yep. Personally, I would love it if the kids that want to play for a scholarship and the education would just do that and the kids that want to make money playing basketball would move on and go play in a league for money. I don't think it would be too long before the college model started being the winner again for more and more kids. The college game builds their fame a whole lot more than playing in a G league or lower to make money.

The NCAA had built a brand that helped these kids make a name for themselves, even the ones that didn't make it in the NBA have a better chance at a good career than they would have without basketball. The idea that the college is getting all of the benefit and the kid none, is not correct.
Your idea will have merit when someone legally challenges how a public university can provide facilities, equipment, travel, and living accommodations for professional athletes.
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,315
Points
113
A possible solution would be to take away any pro draft requirements other than you have to be 18.

If the kids want to go pro, go pro. Im sure some will get drafted and put in a 1-2 year development plan.
Pro leagues are happy to have a college development / feeder system.
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,315
Points
113
I do see all of that. It's still not a reason to restrict someone's earnings.
Nobody is restricting earnings. Kids have a choice of playing professionally (not on amateur teams) or amateur level.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
67,255
Reaction score
22,465
Points
113
If the NCAA says that "boosters" cannot be involved with making direct NIL inducements to recruits, that is going to cover a lot of people.

If I recall, at MN, the definition of "booster" includes anyone who makes a donation to the school - including the 'seat donations' that come with season tickets. so any season-ticket holder at MN is a booster under that definition. and what if that booster owns a business? he can't do an NIL deal with a player to endorse his business?

assuming this survives a court challenge, the real question is enforcement. the NCAA doesn't have enough investigators to deal with the regular rules violations. how in the bleep are they going to investigate and enforce potential NIL violations?
Seems pretty easy to get around anyway. Set up an LLC to do your "NIL's" and don't do them under your own name/business name.
 




Top Bottom