forums

Proposed House settlement and NIL

Ok so can someone break this down for me? Is this going to mean the end of collectives? Meaning we would be back to donating funds directly to the University for payment of players? Or would the Canes collective remain separate for NIL while also having opportunity for payment of players directly from the University through revenue share?
 
Advertisement
canesbaby said:
Ok so can someone break this down for me? Is this going to mean the end of collectives? Meaning we would be back to donating funds directly to the University for payment of players? Or would the Canes collective remain separate for NIL while also having opportunity for payment of players directly from the University through revenue share?
Click to expand...
I believe collectives will be finished but it is tough to keep up so who tf knows
 
1747349076839.png


This is an interesting thing to keep track of with NIL spending as Programs begin paying Players out of actual revenue.
A chart like this becomes much more significant. Sure you can maybe get boosters to donate money for firing and hiring coaches, but for the most part you have a pool of money $X large, and spending >$25M like A&M on paying a coach severance or even $5M like Auburn, Texas, MSU, LSU, etc is pretty impactful. If we say the top NIL budgets are around $30M this year, $5M is $16.6%. Imagine having an immediate 16% boost on your NIL just because you're not firing your coaches constantly.

This is an area given Marios high job security that I'm sure will benefit us over the long-term. For instance UF+FSU are likely going to have to face this issue in the next year or so....
 
Last edited:
CANESCANES said:
Click to expand...

The Deloitte clearinghouse not approving the NIL deal (like if they determine it's above market rate) in the settlement doesn't even actually stop the player/school from going through with the NIL agreement, it just makes it so there is no guarantee the NCAA won't target your eligibility. And that obviously would just lead to more court battles, where the NCAA would continue their Losing streak in court. Because no court is going to prohibit players from collecting money for their work WITHOUT having Collectively Bargained. It is ultimately that simple. ANY agreement that doesn't involve a Unionized agreement is worthless. The NCAA can maybe put some guardrails in regarding Years eligible, Contract length, and Transfering again, but they will not be able to put a cap on the money, period imo.
Also there is basically zero looking into any NIL deals with public companies. So you could funnell NIL money through a public company with absolutely zero issue, which is why people have been Saying Oregon would be cool with the backing of Nike. Of course as a public company they have to operate in the interest of shareholders. Maybe Lifewallet will be back lol....
 
Tony4Canes said:
I believe collectives will be finished but it is tough to keep up so who tf knows
Click to expand...
Here’s the problem with people answering questions they know nothing about, collectives aren’t going anywhere. It is against the law to limit a players NIL. How many freaking times do we have to say that on here for people to get it through their head?! Yes the universities can start paying the players once the settlement goes through, but those same players can still get separate NIL money and anything that says otherwise is against the law! Fvck! Smh
 
Advertisement
Canes Legacy said:
NIL Clearinghouse sounds like it will be sued into oblivion.
Click to expand...
It will because you cannot limit a players, NIL value, anything that tries to limit it, is against the law! All this settlement and commission BS is exactly that, BS because none of it will hold up in court. The only way they are ever going to get something that will stick, is if it’s collective bargained. Maybe one day they’ll get there. Until then, anything that limits NIL is against the law and they will lose that in court every time.
 
One minor detail. It’s not against the law, only Congress can write laws, or a state legislature.
Right now it’s a court ruling. Court rulings are not law and are subject to appeal to a higher court or Congress writing a law that is completely different, which is then in turn subject to judicial review. Nothing is carved in stone at this point.

A perfect example is the Affordable Care Act, written almost entirely by lobbyists for the insurance industry.
Physicians can only charge (wage suppression) what the insurance companies dictate and/or Medicare/Medicaid. Sure you can pay out of pocket and physicians can then charge what they want, but that’s a minuscule portion of the medical market.
 
NicKane said:
Here’s the problem with people answering questions they know nothing about, collectives aren’t going anywhere. It is against the law to limit a players NIL. How many freaking times do we have to say that on here for people to get it through their head?! Yes the universities can start paying the players once the settlement goes through, but those same players can still get separate NIL money and anything that says otherwise is against the law! Fvck! Smh
Click to expand...

Then why are several collectives ending? ****! SMH

I said it is tough to keep up so who tf knows
 
Tony4Canes said:
Then why are several collectives ending? ****! SMH

I said it is tough to keep up so who tf knows
Click to expand...
I don’t know why other collectives are ending, I haven’t heard of that but at the end of the day, is canes collective ending? No it’s not, because I donate to it every month and there’s a reason why it will never go away because anything that limits of players NIL is against the law.
 
RF-4CCane said:
One minor detail. It’s not against the law, only Congress can write laws, or a state legislature.
Right now it’s a court ruling. Court rulings are not law and are subject to appeal to a higher court or Congress writing a law that is completely different, which is then in turn subject to judicial review. Nothing is carved in stone at this point.

A perfect example is the Affordable Care Act, written almost entirely by lobbyists for the insurance industry.
Physicians can only charge (wage suppression) what the insurance companies dictate and/or Medicare/Medicaid. Sure you can pay out of pocket and physicians can then charge what they want, but that’s a minuscule portion of the medical market.
Click to expand...
That’s not completely right because physicians can charge more than the insurance company will pay out. That’s why you get the extra bill from the physician’s medical group trying to collect the remaining balance.
 
Imukat said:
That’s not completely right because physicians can charge more than the insurance company will pay out. That’s why you get the extra bill from the physician’s medical group trying to collect the remaining balance.
Click to expand...
No. A physician can only charge X as dictated by insurance company Y.
The bill you get for the remaining balance is the portion of the allowed charge by the insurance company, that they didn’t pay because of your deductible and copay.

Edit: Of course if you go out of network or have a procedure done not approved by the insurance company I.e., elective or cosmetic surgery, all bets are off.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
RF-4CCane said:
No. A physician can only charge X as dictated by insurance company Y.
The bill you get for the remaining balance is the portion of the allowed charge by the insurance company, that they didn’t pay because of your deductible and copay.

Edit: Of course if you go out of network or have a procedure done not approved by the insurance company I.e., elective or cosmetic surgery, all bets are off.
Click to expand...
yes. If a physician accepts the insurance than they accept to be paid at those rates.
 
NicKane said:
It will because you cannot limit a players, NIL value, anything that tries to limit it, is against the law! All this settlement and commission BS is exactly that, BS because none of it will hold up in court. The only way they are ever going to get something that will stick, is if it’s collective bargained. Maybe one day they’ll get there. Until then, anything that limits NIL is against the law and they will lose that in court every time.
Click to expand...
That's what seems correct to this non-lawyer. If anybody wants to pay a college athlete X dollars and if the athlete is willing to accept it then who in the **** has the legal right to stop that?
 
NicKane said:
It will because you cannot limit a players, NIL value, anything that tries to limit it, is against the law! All this settlement and commission BS is exactly that, BS because none of it will hold up in court. The only way they are ever going to get something that will stick, is if it’s collective bargained. Maybe one day they’ll get there. Until then, anything that limits NIL is against the law and they will lose that in court every time.
Click to expand...
Especially when the players are not involved in the bargaining discussions. It is like the NCAA likes losing lawsuits.
 
Back
Top