Save College Sports Act

[Jordan91]

Restricting NIL will immediately be challenged in court. 

[HelloThere]

49 minutes ago, Jordan91 said:

Restricting NIL will immediately be challenged in court. 

Yep, and the only way it survives is some sort of antitrust exemption. Since I don't believe the legislation has any chance of passing, I have not read what antitrust exemptions they would include.  If they have those then it could pass the courts.

I have no problem with there being debate in Washington about this, especially considering local (school picked) judges are currently running college football.   My issue, like others have stated, is that government involvement never works out.  It just doesn't. 

That said, the nature of the courts involvement right now is never going to work out either. 

[TTown]

From Dellenger- 25 million retention pool $ + 5 mil for women. So 51 mil overall.But the kicker is they want to close loopholes on Associated Entities /MMR/ Sponsors etc. Worried about circumventing the Cap. Seems that will be a Court challenge for sure from athletes .

But the bill isn't finalized yet so the devil is in the  details. And even if the stars align in the Senate, good luck in the House. That's a whole different game with time ticking away .

[Bobby Burton]

3 hours ago, CutaneousHorn said:

Why is the president of the Yankees involved?

Exactly!

[Bobby Burton]

3 hours ago, Lnghrn said:

Bobby - any idea what is captured in the restrictive NIL language?  Not sure how you can restrict legit nil.   Generally UT is going to be in a good position with legit nil due to size of Austin, UT brand in Texas and nationally.  Hopefully this would get rid of schools that are calling crap nil that is really pay for play.  

Language is not finalized is my understanding. 

[MBHORNSFAN]

Hope it dies. 

[TTown]

2 minutes ago, Bobby Burton said:

Language is not finalized is my understanding. 

Agree . Seems Learfield has gotten all their deals for UT  through the Clearinghouse. I read that when they responded to Kessler trying to get Associated Entities more leeway.  Believe he didn't get that yet, but is still trying with the original judge on House Settlement.   Assume Nike and others we use have gotten deals through. 

So Texas should be in a good place, but still see litigation coming on that issue , again depending on what is in the Bill.

[TTown]

Dellenger just tweeted the Majority Leader sounding more optimistic. Thune Said  headed in right direction. Which can only mean headed in Big 10/ SEC demands  haha. Maria Cantwell oh never mind not worth it😂

[GoHorns1]

3 hours ago, Hal Kemp said:

Totally agree with you! Not a federal issue, nor a federal problem.

I hope it doesn’t pass.

Who is going to enforce the rules with punishment with tough consequences for violating the rules?

[BobInHouston]

4 hours ago, Steamboat Willie said:

I'm not against a bill. NIL, the portal, enforcement, that stuff needs a federal fix. You can't run college sports under 50 different state laws with nobody able to actually enforce anything.

But we started out trying to fix that, and now Congress is setting spending caps, deciding who's allowed to expand, and rewriting how TV rights can be pooled. That's not cleanup anymore. At that point they're writing the operating manual for the whole sport, with everybody in the room lobbying for their own piece.

And the funny part is the SEC and Big Ten opposed the committee bill and now look like they're getting a lot of what they wanted anyway. Not exactly shocking. Those two conferences cover 26 states, that's 52 senators, and you need 60.

If a compromise ends the chaos, fine, I'll take it. I just can't shake the feeling that we're not fixing college sports so much as creating the next mess we'll all be back here arguing about in five years.

If you're not seriously considering athletes' rights when you say you're going to cap, and collectively bargain, you're not seriously working on the problem.

I'm not saying that's easy. It's extraordinarily hard. But the schools are acting as though they can solve this problem without the athletes, and they can't.

[Steamboat Willie]

1 hour ago, BobInHouston said:

If you're not seriously considering athletes' rights when you say you're going to cap, and collectively bargain, you're not seriously working on the problem.

I'm not saying that's easy. It's extraordinarily hard. But the schools are acting as though they can solve this problem without the athletes, and they can't.

I agree. If you're going to put a cap on what players can make, the players have to be part of that conversation. You can't have Congress, the conferences and the schools decide among themselves what athletes are allowed to earn and expect that to be the end of it.

If college sports wants the stability of the NFL model: spending limits, enforceable rules, etc.;  eventually they're going to have to accept the other side of that model too. The players get a seat at the table.

[mmdaytontexas]

The NCAA, or a new organization, can legally cap pay-for-play since that wording is not in any piece of NIL legislation anywhere. In fact, in most NIL legislation, pay-for-play is forbidden. What you cannot cap is the NIL. However, you can legally take the schools out of offering and paying players with conference and national association rules. 

Players have a right through their agents to sell their NIL for any amount they want, but that's between them and the markets, not the schools. The schools and conferences should be able to form their own organization and set their own portal rules and base-level cost-of-living requirements for each player who cannot earn NIL dollars. 

If this nonsense continues as is, then the Universities should tell the NFL to form G Leagues and draft all these players straight out of high school for those teams. It's hypocritical to call this a university sport and these players student athletes.

[Hal Kemp]

2 hours ago, GoHorns1 said:

Who is going to enforce the rules with punishment with tough consequences for violating the rules?

I understand why you ask this as history and past actions show its ineptness, but in theory it should be the governing body…NCAA. It’s the universities’ association, and they should govern themselves.

[GoHorns1]

5 minutes ago, Hal Kemp said:

I understand why you ask this as history and past actions show its ineptness, but in theory it should be the governing body…NCAA. It’s the universities’ association, and they should govern themselves.

True, but will the universities will give the governing authority power to enforce the rules with powerful consequences? The governing authority must have subpoena power to investigate but with a window of time. No more waiting a couple of years.

Edited 18 minutes ago by GoHorns1

[Hal Kemp]

2 minutes ago, GoHorns1 said:

True, but will the universities will give the governing authority power to enforce the rules with powerful consequences?

That’s the $64,000 question! 
That is what is needed, but I realize it is easier said than done! One can hope!