Really, because last I checked NIL is part of the law and anything that goes against that will get destroyed in court because it’s against the law. So, since you know everything why don’t you try to educate me on that? Please explain to me how they are going to break the law and won’t get challenged in court? I would love to hear your answer on this?
I won't give you too hard of a time here.
There's no such thing as "NIL is part of the law". And you are really overlooking what is about to happen under the House settlement. In part because the LEGALIZED direct payments to players (the revenue-sharing piece) is going to lead to a substantial decline in big-money boosters funding collectives to pay FAKE NIL. And in part because there are other perfectly valid (for now) regulations that will impact "real NIL" deals.
Just pay attention to what happened with Xavier Lucas at Wisconsin. There is absolutely a desire among universities and alums/boosters alike to reduce the reliance on "hey, boosters, can you kick in $40M a year to pay our football roster, and that's before we hit you up for basketball and all the other sports?".
I don't give a **** about "challenged in court". Anyone can file a lawsuit for anything. READ the Supreme Court holding (which wasn't even about NIL, it was about academic achievement awards). Outside of "I Like Beer"s one-man diatribe, the Court was pretty clear that you needed to have a better rationale if they were going to tolerate a limitation. Amateur attorneys such as yourself have (incorrectly) come to the conclusion that there can be absolutely no limits on NIL whatsover. That's not true.
The types of limits contemplated in the House settlement are the product of a significant and large lawsuit. There is much more contemplation and justification for any NIL limits arising from House than there were in the prior Supreme Court case (which, again, wasn't even an NIL case).
There may still be some twists and turns. Certainly the Title IX objections merit some close observation.
But generalizing things to "NIL is part of the law" and "anything that goes against that will get destroyed in court because it's against the law" are some massively oversimplified and incorrect conclusions.
Not to mention, we are talking about of 18 year old kids who want to get paid now and do not have the legal acumen to be able to determine how long the uncertanty will last and how it will ultimately be decided. So you take the "old-fashioned NIL" bird-in-hand now, rather than the Xavier Lucas Wisconsin deal.
