Adidas to Start Offering NIL Deals

[kryptonite]

B/c they jumped through ridiculous hoops to charge them with fraud. Ultimately they said that the middlemen defrauded the schools b/c by paying the recruits they made the kids ineligible which meant that the schools gave scholarships to players they shouldn't have.

“Here, as the jury could have reasonably found, Defendants deprived the Universities of property — athletic-based aid that they could have awarded to students who were eligible to play — by breaking NCAA rules and depriving the Universities of relevant information through fundamentally dishonest means,”

https://www.courthousenews.com/second-circuit-upholds-ncaa-linked-fraud-convictions/

All this even though it was representatives of the schools that wanted to shoe companies to pay the recruits in the first place.

Basically these schools and head coaches were like mob bosses putting the underlings at risk and making sure not to leave a paper trail.

I was about to say it's like getting Capone for tax evasion. Sometimes it's clear to everyone what's going on, but from a legal standpoint, you can't prove it. And we all know schools have decades of experience in hiding the fact they pay players, so it's not surprising it's so tough to prove.

 

[SWFLHurricane]

In before the Nike cult turns this thread into a royal rumble.

Hold my AirForce1's Beer.....

 

[kryptonite]

The question I have for Adidas and Nike is this...exactly what is required of the athletes? Will there be any cause for concern if literally they're signing their NIL over to a Nike, getting $750K, and then the company just sits on it. No concern for the athlete, but would that be a cause for the NCAA to step back in at some point in the future and say, "wait a minute, you're handing out money for no seemingly return. What is the return?"

That's possible, but I think it will be difficult to prove that the company gets nothing in return. As above, we may know they get nothing, but how can you prove it? Maybe just the fact the deal exists gives them some perceived value in some way.

 

[Hurracanes]

Hold my AirForce1's Beer.....

 

[Shogungts]

I was about to say it's like getting Capone for tax evasion. Sometimes it's clear to everyone what's going on, but from a legal standpoint, you can't prove it. And we all know schools have decades of experience in hiding the fact they pay players, so it's not surprising it's so tough to prove.

But the problem here isn't that they couldn't prove they were breaking one law, so they charged them with another; in this case what they were doing was not illegal (it broke NCAA rules, not Federal rules) so they came up with some bogus technicality.

Like if these guys were truly doing something bad to the kids or the schools (stealing money from them or something), then sure... get them on this technicality. But what they were doing was exactly what the schools, kids, and shoe companies wanted.

 

[JBCanes-NC]

U know, this is an interesting point. I’m wondering w/ this new revelation, would there be any appeals for those who were convicted of doing this very thing. That’s a cold game if these guys r doing bids for the company that’s about to do the same chit legally.

It’s a cold *** world

 

[kryptonite]

But the problem here isn't that they couldn't prove they were breaking one law, so they charged them with another; in this case what they were doing was not illegal (it broke NCAA rules, not Federal rules) so they came up with some bogus technicality.

Like if these guys were truly doing something bad to the kids or the schools (stealing money from them or something), then sure... get them on this technicality. But what they were doing was exactly what the schools, kids, and shoe companies wanted.

But that's kind of how these investigations go. You start with the premise that your subject is dirty and you see what you can get to stick. I imagine they knew the schools were in on it but couldn't make that stand up so they made the case that would work.

 

[Shogungts]

But that's kind of how these investigations go. You start with the premise that your subject is dirty and you see what you can get to stick. I imagine they knew the schools were in on it but couldn't make that stand up so they made the case that would work.

But Capone was doing illegal things.

I think what happened in this case (certainly I am not the only one with this opinion) was that they stumbled on it from another investigation (I forget how they got onto this, but I am pretty sure it was due to another investigation they were pursuing), starting pursuing it, realized it went much deeper than they initially thought and were told/decided to back off b/c if they really pursued it they might destroy NCAA basketball, but in order to save face they had to take out someone and decided to take out some low level guys.