forums

Tears Gator Tears

Highline17 said:
There is a lot to fix, mostly the collectives. NIL is meant to be for players getting paid for marketing purposes by real companies, not services with no business outside of one fanbase.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I thought you meant in terms of what the gator was discussing, some type of cap would be ludicrous and go against every reason the NIL law was passed.
 
Advertisement
This will never stop being funny to me. Legitimate businessmen like Ruiz using a player's name, image and likeness to promote said legimate business is not how NIL was intended... but a bunch of rednecks in Gainesville scrounging for change between their couch cushions to donate to a collective for pay for play is...
 

Attachments

  • 6E6EBA38-B7B8-4038-9743-A7CF8F950BC3.jpeg
    6E6EBA38-B7B8-4038-9743-A7CF8F950BC3.jpeg
    284.2 KB · Views: 176
I've always said since Raymond was hired over there that he'd be gone after one year. Dude is the only coach over there that can go toe to toe in big boy recruiting and he's the best coach on staff. He's surrounded by amateurs.
 
RVACane said:
Yeah, the view here is different. Sticking with Life Wallet as an example, we have a supporter of UM who compensates players for NIL work/usage as part of promoting his business enterprise. The gator Collective is not a traditional business enterprise. From what I can see, they also often spend less earlier on and at less optimum times than Life Wallet.

That board is crying for limiting spending amounts and timing because that’s killing them. We now, also can compete with schools we previously had no shot against in the bag game, including the gator.

A lot of us also understand that these are supposed to be based on marketability as determined by what the market will pay so there’s no cap the NCAA can institute and congressional involvement would also bring in to question why the law targets one group (young athletes) differently than the rest of society. To that end - and I’ll defer to @TheOriginalCane - given that the majority of the beneficiaries are young black men, I think that would call into question a constitutionally protected class being effectively discriminated against more than the majority - with a higher level of protections that some Supreme courts would find issue with were such a law to be passed.
Click to expand...
Good thought but it’s a conservative court so anything about racial discrimination has no shot at succeeding.

The PR nightmare it would create is the biggest concern for any proponent of restricting NIL

Imagine Billy winning a title largely on the back of a transcendent black five star freshman QB and that freshman is capped at say $350k when his true value is double.

Then in that same off season Billy strong arms UF into giving him a contract extension that gets paid top ten in football…. Not a good look.
 
They don’t understand what NIL is…still. It’s not a payment for playing football. It’s a payment for NAME IMAGE and LIKENESS. There is no salary cap on how much endorsement money NFL players can make.

It’s funny how they want some type of socialist system governing NIL money but are perfectly OK with accepting the HUGE SEC television contract money. How about you get the same TV deal as teams in the Mountain West? I mean, íts unfair that SEC teams get such a huge payout when other teams get a tiny TV contract payout.
 
RVACane said:
Yeah, the view here is different. Sticking with Life Wallet as an example, we have a supporter of UM who compensates players for NIL work/usage as part of promoting his business enterprise. The gator Collective is not a traditional business enterprise. From what I can see, they also often spend less earlier on and at less optimum times than Life Wallet.

That board is crying for limiting spending amounts and timing because that’s killing them. We now, also can compete with schools we previously had no shot against in the bag game, including the gator.

A lot of us also understand that these are supposed to be based on marketability as determined by what the market will pay so there’s no cap the NCAA can institute and congressional involvement would also bring in to question why the law targets one group (young athletes) differently than the rest of society. To that end - and I’ll defer to @TheOriginalCane - given that the majority of the beneficiaries are young black men, I think that would call into question a constitutionally protected class being effectively discriminated against more than the majority - with a higher level of protections that some Supreme courts would find issue with were such a law to be passed.
Click to expand...
These are the same types of people that complain that pro athletes make “too much money” while ignoring the fact that the team owners can literally buy and sell every single player. It’s OK for some people to have an ungodly amount of wealth but if someone they deem “undeserving” gets a little bit of coin, the world is going to ****.
 
Advertisement
DTP said:
They don’t understand what NIL is…still. It’s not a payment for playing football. It’s a payment for NAME IMAGE and LIKENESS. There is no salary cap on how much endorsement money NFL players can make.

It’s funny how they want some type of socialist system governing NIL money but are perfectly OK with accepting the HUGE SEC television contract money. How about you get the same TV deal as teams in the Mountain West? I mean, íts unfair that SEC teams get such a huge payout when other teams get a tiny TV contract payout.
Click to expand...
Don't you dare try to explain to them that NIL is an acronym
 
Clipse said:
This will never stop being funny to me. Legitimate businessmen like Ruiz using a player's name, image and likeness to promote said legimate business is not how NIL was intended... but a bunch of rednecks in Gainesville scrounging for change between their couch cushions to donate to a collective for pay for play is...
Click to expand...
The best part is Ruiz is being mentioned with other head coaches. As if he’s the one doing the recruiting and not our head coach who’s best talent is recruiting
 
Canesq said:
Good thought but it’s a conservative court so anything about racial discrimination has no shot at succeeding.

The PR nightmare it would create is the biggest concern for any proponent of restricting NIL

Imagine Billy winning a title largely on the back of a transcendent black five star freshman QB and that freshman is capped at say $350k when his true value is double.

Then in that same off season Billy strong arms UF into giving him a contract extension that gets paid top ten in football…. Not a good look.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I was careful to say that “some Supreme courts would find issue” because of the court we have today.
 
RVACane said:
View attachment 223607View attachment 223608View attachment 223609View attachment 223610View attachment 223611View attachment 223612View attachment 223613View attachment 223614View attachment 223615View attachment 223616View attachment 223617View attachment 223618
Click to expand...
Sure.

All you need to do is unionize ALL of college football.

Then collectively bargain with said players…who will want actual revenue sharing from schools, in addition to endorsement.

And THEN you can have your salary cap.

Or you can try to get national legislation passed making it illegal for any college student (player or otherwise) to be earn money while attending college.
 
I think Ruiz is doing the right thing with NIL giving contracts to women athletes as well as players in other sports other than Football players.

There’s gonna be a time when some schools come under fire for only paying football and BB players and not any of the stars of other sports especially women sports.

Guarantee you there’s ambulance chasing lawyers out there just waiting to see how this plays out for a season or two who will put a class action suit together with all the other athletes who haven’t gotten a dime.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top