Gophers - NIL & Dinkytown Athletes - $1million 👍🏻

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

I got an email from Dinkytown Athletes that their recent Million Dollar Match campaign ... was successful.

Apparently they picked up a ton of new members, and $1million in matching funds from Nepsis.

NIL competitiveness is very much one of those cloudy things where you hear a lot but aren't able to verify much. It's encouraging that it at least seems like the Gophers are doing well. PJ has been talking it up very positively (that's not a given considering some other programs coach's comments).

Dinkytown Athletes

OFFICIAL NIL COLLECTIVE OF GOPHER ATHLETICS Help empower our Gopher athletes to reach their potential in and out of the classroom. BECOME A MEMBER JOIN TODAY ONE TIME CONTRIBUTION CONTRIBUTE TODAY CHOOSE YOUR MEMBERSHIP LEVEL CLUB $10/month $110/year Access to exclusive interviews/videos Entry...

dinkytownathletes.com

Personally I'm of the opinion that amongst all the unverified dollar values and etc ... there might be a lot of surprises when it comes to NIL if we knew all the real numbers.

 

[GophersInIowa]

I'm convinced my $25 a month contribution is what tipped the scale to keep Darius Taylor around.

 

[gopherbadgerman]

NIL is an excuse for not doing well now.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Personally I'm of the opinion that amongst all the unverified dollar values and etc ... there might be a lot of surprises when it comes to NIL if we knew all the real numbers.

It would be fascinating to know what the actual totals were in terms of NIL/Pay for Play. Has been really interesting to see how Fleck's tune about NIL/Pay for Play has changed from one of despair to one of excitement about how well we are doing on that front.

Feels like maybe they found a way to tap into some of the resources the U of M should have on that front in a way that they were not able to before.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

remains to be seen how things change - or don't change - when the House settlement goes into effect. If the proposed settlement receives final approval, D1 schools will have the opportunity to provide roughly $21-million in direct revenue sharing to athletes.

still to be finalized: how the money is distributed, including whether Title IX is applied. If Title IX must be considered, then the money would likely be divied up fairly evenly between men and women. But - if Title IX is not applied, then the school will get to decide who gets what - and if the money is distributed based on revenue-generating sports, then Football and Men's Hoops will get the lion's share, with women's hoops and hockey getting a little.

BUT - athletes will still be able to get NIL in addition to the revenue-sharing. questions remain over whether the settlement will impose any limits or restrictions on outside NIL. that still needs to be determined by the Judge overseeing the case. But it appears that NIL will still be a thing.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

remains to be seen how things change - or don't change - when the House settlement goes into effect. If the proposed settlement receives final approval, D1 schools will have the opportunity to provide roughly $21-million in direct revenue sharing to athletes.

still to be finalized: how the money is distributed, including whether Title IX is applied. If Title IX must be considered, then the money would likely be divied up fairly evenly between men and women. But - if Title IX is not applied, then the school will get to decide who gets what - and if the money is distributed based on revenue-generating sports, then Football and Men's Hoops will get the lion's share, with women's hoops and hockey getting a little.

BUT - athletes will still be able to get NIL in addition to the revenue-sharing. questions remain over whether the settlement will impose any limits or restrictions on outside NIL. that still needs to be determined by the Judge overseeing the case. But it appears that NIL will still be a thing.

^ It’s honestly a little bewildering there is still no public comment about how revenue sharing would work. For a paradigm expected to go into effect in a few months that is absurd. Either they really don’t know or they are delaying an unveiling to suppress criticism and a player revolt until they (the schools, NCAA and most importantly the plaintiff attorneys) get this pig across the finish line.

The university advertising for a cap manager maybe points to a circus scenario…and for that the sports pundits will be happy. Plenty of talk content.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

It would be fascinating to know what the actual totals were in terms of NIL/Pay for Play. Has been really interesting to see how Fleck's tune about NIL/Pay for Play has changed from one of despair to one of excitement about how well we are doing on that front.

Feels like maybe they found a way to tap into some of the resources the U of M should have on that front in a way that they were not able to before.

I wonder if the old school cheating pay to play system benefited certain teams.

While other schools, with donors not interested in cheating may have actually had some pent-up interest in giving.

 

[MNVCGUY]

But it appears that NIL will still be a thing.

My hope is that eventually NIL actually becomes what it was intended to be all along but that is probably a pipe dream at this point.

That said.....not related to football.....but the NIL rules are a big part of why Gable Steveson is able to return to college wrestling at the U of M. Pre-NIL that would not have been an option for him.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

My hope is that eventually NIL actually becomes what it was intended to be all along but that is probably a pipe dream at this point.

That said.....not related to football.....but the NIL rules are a big part of why Gable Steveson is able to return to college wrestling at the U of M. Pre-NIL that would not have been an option for him.

in my reading about the House case, that seems to have been the original intention - that NIL would only be allowed for athletes to market their name, image and likeness - T-Shirts, posters, commercial endorsements, etc. under that proposal, there would be some kind of committee or organization to screen NIL deals to ensure that they were "reasonable." But, there was a lot of push-back on that issue from the Judge, who apparently perceived the idea as a restriction on athlete's rights to earn money.

so that is one of the remaining question marks - will any restrictions on outside NIL be allowed?

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

in my reading about the House case, that seems to have been the original intention - that NIL would only be allowed for athletes to market their name, image and likeness - T-Shirts, posters, commercial endorsements, etc. under that proposal, there would be some kind of committee or organization to screen NIL deals to ensure that they were "reasonable." But, there was a lot of push-back on that issue from the Judge, who apparently perceived the idea as a restriction on athlete's rights to earn money.

so that is one of the remaining question marks - will any restrictions on outside NIL be allowed?

Still early days but there have been a few rulings regarding eligibility and the courts have sided with the NCAA.

 

[nitramnaed]

Still early days but there have been a few rulings regarding eligibility and the courts have sided with the NCAA.

Judgement or not this whole thing is still a cluster F#%K!

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Judgement or not this whole thing is still a cluster F#%K!

The SCOTUS ruling was IMO irresponsibly … wishy washy.

NIL is fine but they left everything else a question mark.

 

[fmlizard]

The most predictable thing ever was how allowing prominent athletes to do the occasional ad or public appearance and get paid for it...turned into an online booster club for fans and alums to create a salary pool for free agency contracts.