Finally hope for correcting the NIL mess?
- Thread starter RutgersNJ
- Start date
agree with this- you get the one free pass. Fixes most of the mess.
Yes and no. NIL deals are allowed only if they have a valid business purpose (that is, for a service that generates profit for whoever is paying the player) and offer compensation commensurate with what others would receive for the same work that the athlete is doing. Those requirements were established by the House settlement to prevent "pay for play" deals. The new College Sports Commission is in charge of enforcing them. The Commission has already rejected over 500 deals totaling nearly $15 million.https://www.espn.com/college-sports...ed-500-plus-nil-deals-worth-nearly-15-million
A discussion about NIL in which the leader (as President) is on record saying "health care reform is hard" is never going anywhere. All of these people have agendas, not real solutions.
John F. Kennedy’s famous quote about doing the hard thing comes from his September 12, 1962, speech at Rice University regarding the U.S. space program. He declared: "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard"
yes times are different of course.... but perhaps....who knows.
Talk about burying the lead.
You make it sound like the CSC has been productive.
That 500 deals and $15m only account for 2.9% of all deals and 10% of the NIL money.
So 97% of NIL deals have been approved and 90% of NIL $$ has been approved.
From your same article - you ignored the next sentence.
"The CSC released its latest statistics Monday, saying it did not clear 524 deals worth $14.94 million, while clearing 17,321 worth $127.21 million. All the data was current as of Jan. 1."
I would say disapproving $15 million worth of deals is productive. There is nothing to indicate that the other deals violate the rules against "pay-for-play" arrangements. The Commission is paying a bunch of lawyers six-figure salaries to make sure those deals are legitimate.
The goal of the CSC was to reign in the NIL environment.
Do you feel that has occurred?
Is the NIL situation "better" or getting better than a year ago?
Nearly everyone would say its not.
It doesnt matter if the rest of those deals don't violate "pay for play" according to the CSC.
I would imagine most fans would disagree and say "pay for play" is still occurring.
Note - I don't think NIL situation is necessarily as big a problem.
But I'm in the extreme minority.
Trump said that fixing health care would be easy and simple, and he discovered that it was hard. Kennedy knew that going to the Moon was hard, and that was the reason for doing it. The difference is that one person thinks that there are easy solutions to complex problems. The other person realizes that the solutions to complex problems are not easy.
Looks like Rutgers became an item of interest
>"It's grown into a major challenge that threatens the future of college sports," Trump said. “Many are going to go down the tubes. It was announced that Penn State, their athletic division lost $535 million this past year. Florida State, $440 million loss. It was just announced that Rutgers lost $95 million and they’re doing all sorts of things to try and save the ship."<
Notre Dame's AD isn;t too happy wiyth the mess Collrge sports is now
>Formerly CEO of the PGA of America (2012-18) and chairman and president of NBC Sports (2018-23), Bevacqua proposed athletic programs set aside “some sort of percentage” of their annual outlays toward football and men’s and women’s basketball as a way to “reinvest into your own Olympic movement” at each school.
He lamented the growing imbalance placing sports over academics for those eager to bounce from school to school via the transfer portal solely “to make a few more hundred thousand dollars on each stop.”<
>"It's grown into a major challenge that threatens the future of college sports," Trump said. “Many are going to go down the tubes. It was announced that Penn State, their athletic division lost $535 million this past year. Florida State, $440 million loss. It was just announced that Rutgers lost $95 million and they’re doing all sorts of things to try and save the ship."<
Notre Dame's AD isn;t too happy wiyth the mess Collrge sports is now
>Formerly CEO of the PGA of America (2012-18) and chairman and president of NBC Sports (2018-23), Bevacqua proposed athletic programs set aside “some sort of percentage” of their annual outlays toward football and men’s and women’s basketball as a way to “reinvest into your own Olympic movement” at each school.
He lamented the growing imbalance placing sports over academics for those eager to bounce from school to school via the transfer portal solely “to make a few more hundred thousand dollars on each stop.”<
But that doesn't mean that they can't. The can. They are allowed to by current law. They have chosen not to.
There's NIL and there's NIL, if I may put it that way. The whole point of the efforts to let the players earn NIL money was that their NIL was valuable (say, to the makers of sports video games) and that the schools/conferences/NCAA were getting all of that value and the players were not. The result of the House settlement is that players can get compensated for their NIL. So, for instance, Red Bull wants to use Arch Manning's name, image, or likeness to promote a product, they have to pay him. (Manning is making so much money that he is taking a reduced portion of Texas's revenue-sharing funds to help them attract other players.) If Crocs wants to use Livvy Dunne's NIL to sell shoes, they have to do the same.The vast majority of NIL deals are of this type.
The only problem comes when NIL is being used by schools and their boosters to attract and retain players ("pay for play") Those are the deals that the House settlement bans, and those are the deals that the College Sports Commission is supposed to be stopping. The fact that they are stopping deals (and, I understand, holding up deals between players and so-called collectives) indicates that the Commission is doing what it's supposed to.
We're in a transition period right now because schools like LSU made lots of NIL deals before the restrictions in the House settlement took effect. We will see what happens when the House settlement fully takes effect.
Sorry for the length of this!
Its actually the opposite of everything you said.
If the CSC was working then there would be no more complaints about NIL or the need for this Roundtable.
Most of the deals are pay to play.
Dylan/Ace/Archie are the outliers.
Lets take Rutgers basketball.
Rutgers will reportedly have $8m to spend.
That should be about $3m in RevShare and $5m in NIL.
If Rutgers offers Francis $1m - that is only if he plays for Rutgers.
That $5m in NIL going to Francis, Transfers (Center/Forawrd), Grant, Davis, Mark, Powers, Zrno is all "pay for play".
That $1 million comes from revenue-sharing. The money that comes from the school is often called NIL because, under the House settlement, that is what the school is paying for -- the right to use the kid's NIL to market itself. The revenue-sharing money is pay-to-play, but it is limited by the cap.
In other words, we really need to distinguish between not two (as I suggested above), but three kinds of NIL:
1. NIL payments by the schools to attract and retain players. (These are also called revenue-sharing, but it amounts to the same thing.) These payments are limited by the cap. They don't have to go to the CSC for approval because they are inherently limited by the cap;
2. NIL payments by third parties, such as Crocs' deal with Livvy Dunne. These are unlimited and they are fine so long as there is a valid business purpose and compensation commensurate with what the athlete is doing in return. (BTW, schools are free to help their athletes find these deals and many schools are doing that -- I hope Rutgers is.)
3. NIL payments by third parties that lack a valid business purpose or compensate a player excessively, but rather are designed to attract or retain players. Those are the payments banned by the House settlement and that the College Sports Commission is supposed to be preventing. We'll see if it succeeds.
There is a huge amount of confusion in this area. The fact that, as I've said above, the House settlement hasn't fully taken hold adds to it.
I understand all of that.
Rutgers (internally and externally) will be spending approximately $8m on the 2026-2027 roster.
1. Approximately $3m will be Revenue Sharing from Rutgers (Internal NIL)
2. Approximately $5(+) will be NIL from 3rd parties (External NIL)
Coincidentally, that $5m in bucket #2 will only go to players at Rutgers.
Buchannon isn't getting a national Crocs deal regardless of his school.
He's getting a Rutgets related NIL deal that isn't available if he transfers to Fairfield.
Lino Mark isn't getting a 750k Fanatics deal.
He's getting a 750k NIL deal specific to attending Rutgers.
There actually isn't much confusion at all in this area.
It should be pretty easy to understand.
Interesting . . what are your sources of information about Buchannan and Mark's NIL deals? Do you know if they have been submitted to and approved by the College Sports Commission? Or were their deals reached before the House settlement took effect last 7/1?
BTW, here's a quote from something called the Connextions Foundation about Mark's decision to come to Rutgers:
"Rutgers University, a powerhouse in collegiate basketball, offers Lino a strong platform to excel academically and athletically. The program is known for its rich basketball history, competitive play in the Big Ten Conference, and a coaching staff that is deeply committed to developing student-athletes both on and off the court. For Lino, Rutgers was a perfect fit, providing him the opportunity to compete at a high level while continuing his education.
" Rutgers has a storied basketball program that prides itself on resilience, teamwork, and a deep-rooted sense of family. As a member of the Big Ten Conference, Rutgers faces top-tier competition, giving Lino the chance to showcase his skills on one of the largest stages in college basketball. Under the leadership of Head Coach Steve Pikiell, Rutgers continues to build a program that prioritizes both athletic and academic excellence. For Lino, this environment will help shape him into not only a better player but also a well-rounded individual."
Just a little hype there, don't you think?https://www.connextions.pro/connext...a-bright-future-in-the-scarlet-knights-family
I'm taking about the deals coming up in a month.
In about a month, this offseason, Rutgers is going to arrange for approximately $8m for their 2026-2027 players.
Over half of that will be 3rd party "NIL".
So yes, all of these deals will go through the CSC.
All will be approved.
And all be "pay to play" - "if you stay at/transfer to Rutgers, here is what we can offer you".
We will see what the CSC does with the 3rd party NIL deals; again, the keys will be whether there is a valid business purpose and compensation commensurate with what the athlete is doing in return.
Edit: note that whether a kid is attending a particular school can be important in judging whether there is a valid business purpose. Able Autos in Asbury Park (I made that up) gets value from having Joe Shmo, a Rutgers player, make marketing appearances for it ("he's a Rutgers player!") ; it gets no value from having Joe Shmo do it if Joe plays for GW. All the same, this is different from a booster simply handing money to a kid in exchange for his attending a particular institution.
Last edited:
I don’t even think his motivation is trying to fix the problem. It’s trying to see how much he can grift while saying he is trying to fix the problem. Only motivation is money to be grifted.
Didn't realize so many people disliked capitalism and freedom, lol.
Nothing brings out "for the good of all" like a discussion about sports and a level playing field.
Big 10 can sign their own media deals and their teams can spend much more than competitors? Of course!! We earned so we should get the monetary advantage. Screw everyone else.
Individual schools can spend much more than competitors? Well hold on now.....we need a level playing field. Rules have to be put in place so everyone can operate evenly.
Did anyone see beloved Rutgers "legend" Tim Perneti proposed pooling media rights?
Does he not realize we only want to fix the rules that DON'T benefit Rutgers.
Rules that benefit Rutgers shouldn't be touched.
We only want to bring the top teams down to Rutgers.
We don't want to bring the lower schools up to Rutgers.
Its like he doesn't understand "level playing field" means "playing field that benefits Rutgers".
Does he not realize we only want to fix the rules that DON'T benefit Rutgers.
Rules that benefit Rutgers shouldn't be touched.
We only want to bring the top teams down to Rutgers.
We don't want to bring the lower schools up to Rutgers.
Its like he doesn't understand "level playing field" means "playing field that benefits Rutgers".
Correct, but it restrains boosters by limiting their deals to those that have a valid business purpose and offer commensurate compensation (in other words, no sweetheart deals). Those limits curb the Wild West of the past few years in which the idea of NIL was used by boosters and collectives to give money just to attract or retain a player. These restrictions make it difficult for schools to escape the cap through deals between boosters and athletics.
Last edited:
This is performative and will lead to nothing or almost nothing. Even if they lock up every income stream except for paid modeling the athletes will take a photo and get paid to “model”.
I just saw some revenue sharing and NIL numbers posted above equaling about $8 mil? Is that for BB? I thought Keli had raised $10 NIL for football and we expected almost $14m of the RS to go to football. Did that change?
the 500 deals and $15m that got denied by the NIL committee- ends up being an average of $30k each. So they are really only stopping the small fish and small players.
the 500 deals and $15m that got denied by the NIL committee- ends up being an average of $30k each. So they are really only stopping the small fish and small players.
The NIL that @NickRU714 is talking about is only partly from Rutgers. The rest is from third-party NIL deals that Nick thinks will pass the College Sports Commission's review.
The average approved deal is $7344 (using the figures in the ESPN article I posted). So it's not as though only the small fry are caught; the average deal, approved or not, is small.
They were certainly storied in NJ. The 1976 team had an undefeated regular season and went to the Final Four.
The teams even before 1976 were damn good too. Bob Greacen, Bob Lloyd, Gene Armstead, Doug Brittelle, Jim Valvano.