forums

NIL / House Settlement / Canes Connection

J

JCL73

Joined
Aug 22, 2024
Messages
13
I was trying to understand how the House settlement changes the current NIL landscape. Read through some of the existing threads and recent articles and am still really confused. Is there an article someone can suggest that best explains?

If I do understand, there will be an attempt to differentiate legit NIL (say Cam signing with ADIDAS) vs school sponsored (i.e., Canes Connection) with the latter being prohibited. If that is right - does this go back to the Ruiz Life Wallet model that requires business owners doing NIL direct again instead of through the collectives? Any sense how we stack up in that environment?

If the collectives go away and schools have a $20.5m cap for the upcoming season- does anyone have a sense whether our current allocation for this year is above that number? If so - does the House settlement force a renegotiation to get us under the new cap for the current season.

With these new rules possibly getting approved soon - looking to understand. Thanks
 
Advertisement
JCL73 said:
I was trying to understand how the House settlement changes the current NIL landscape. Read through some of the existing threads and recent articles and am still really confused. Is there an article someone can suggest that best explains?

If I do understand, there will be an attempt to differentiate legit NIL (say Cam signing with ADIDAS) vs school sponsored (i.e., Canes Connection) with the latter being prohibited. If that is right - does this go back to the Ruiz Life Wallet model that requires business owners doing NIL direct again instead of through the collectives? Any sense how we stack up in that environment?

If the collectives go away and schools have a $20.5m cap for the upcoming season- does anyone have a sense whether our current allocation for this year is above that number? If so - does the House settlement force a renegotiation to get us under the new cap for the current season.

With these new rules possibly getting approved soon - looking to understand. Thanks
Click to expand...
The collectives are never going to go away, I don’t understand why people can’t understand this? It is illegal to limit NIL for a player. Let me repeat that, it is illegal! Just because the schools can now pay the players doesn’t mean the player can’t also get extra money for NIL and anything that says otherwise is again illegal!
 
NicKane said:
The collectives are never going to go away, I don’t understand why people can’t understand this? It is illegal to limit NIL for a player. Let me repeat that, it is illegal! Just because the schools can now pay the players doesn’t mean the player can’t also get extra money for NIL and anything that says otherwise is again illegal!
Click to expand...
People are very confused because things are very confusing.

The schools are paying revenue sharing for the first time now in theory starting july 1 – revenue sharing means the money they get as a program from things like media rights deals, ticket sales, merch, etc.

Then there are name, image, likeness deals, which can come through a number of ways.

Some schools may choose to move their currently out of house collective internally to have more control. That would still not prevent Adidas from going directly to Cam Ward to cut a deal, and that kind of deal will likely be one of the first lawsuits questioning why they need to go to the clearing house.

Some schools may not bring the collective in and keep doing it outside and hope, but there is an issue around associated entities like boosters

It’s entirely possible a school could be doing revenue sharing, have an in-house collective or NIL administration team, have an external collective, and of course, have players with deals directly brought to their agent by a major brand

I think a lot of people get confused that revenue sharing money and the 20.5 million is also NIL when they are two distinct things

revenue sharing with the revenue cap is going to be one of the first things that is attacked unless Congress passes a bill because it is not at all settled by the house v NCAA settlement
 
Last edited:
Ispyin said:
People are very confused because things are very confusing.

The schools are paying revenue sharing first now in theory – revenue sharing means the money they get as a program from things like meteorite, steals, ticket, sales, merch, etc.

Then there are name image likeness deals, which can come through a number of ways.

Some schools may choose to move their currently out of house collective internal to have more control. That would still not prevent Adidas from going directly to Cam Ward to cut a deal and that kind of deal will likely be one of the first lawsuits questioning why they need to go to the clearing house.

Some schools may not bring the collective in and keep doing it outside and hope, but there is an issue around associated and entities like boosters

It’s entirely possible a school could be doing revenue sharing have an in-house collective or NIL administration team, have an external collective, and of course, have players with deals directly brought to their agent by a major brand

I think a lot of people get confused that revenue sharing money and the 20.5 million is also named Imogen like this when they are two distinct things

In revenue sharing with that revenue cap is going to be one of the first things that is attacked unless Congress passes a bill because it is not at all settled by the house v NCAA settlement
Click to expand...
That was a nice long statement, but in the end of the day, limiting NIL is illegal and everybody knows that. So you better believe, if anyone tried to challenge it in court, they would lose because limiting NIL is illegal. That’s the part people need to start getting in their heads and then they will know, collectives are not going nowhere.
 
NicKane said:
That was a nice long statement, but in the end of the day, limiting NIL is illegal and everybody knows that. So you better believe, if anyone tried to challenge it in court, they would lose because limiting and NIL is illegal. That’s the part people need to start getting in their heads and then they will know, collectives are not going nowhere.
Click to expand...
What part of what I said had anything to do with saying that you could limit NIL because I never said that. I said the entire thing is confusing to people, but thank you for not reading a word I said, and comprehending what I said or did not.
 
Ispyin said:
What part of what I said had anything to do with saying that you could limit NIL because I never said that. I said the entire thing is confusing to people, but thank you for not reading a word I said, and comprehending what I said or did not.
Click to expand...
It’s only confusing for people who don’t know the law. All you have to know is, limiting NIL is illegal. Once you know that, any confusion goes away.
 
Advertisement
“We’re going to be at just about $18 million.-LSU coach Brian Kelly on cost of his new roster for 2025. That is about 2-years salary for him."

They're looking at it all wrong. The HC is making more in one season than what 80% of his roster makes COMBINED. They're the guys doing all the work. He's just an ******* faking a southern accent.
 
Once the market implodes, billionaires, via NIL payments, will run college football unless and until there is Congressional action. The future of college football will turn on the stock price of NVDA.
 
SCarolina Ibis said:
“We’re going to be at just about $18 million.-LSU coach Brian Kelly on cost of his new roster for 2025. That is about 2-years salary for him."

They're looking at it all wrong. The HC is making more in one season than what 80% of his roster makes COMBINED. They're the guys doing all the work. He's just an ******* faking a southern accent.
Click to expand...
U1aN4HTfJ2SmgB2BBK.gif
 
dycane said:
Once the market implodes, billionaires, via NIL payments, will run college football unless and until there is Congressional action. The future of college football will turn on the stock price of NVDA.
Click to expand...
I’ve been asking the question since NIL started a few years ago. How long until these big money whales start realizing that the ROI is next to 0 for all of this money they are putting into football programs. If they are ok making it a pet project then no problem but at some point I think some are going to start questioning what they are really doing.
 
Advertisement


I've seen a couple videos like this. These coupled with Canes Connection organizing meet & greets & interviews with independent media outlets, I think UM handles NIL appropriately the way NIL was intended. As gullible as it sounds, I would be surprised if it was proven UM wasn't 100% compliant with the law & NCAA rules specifically regarding NIL.
 
Back
Top