The Protect College Sports Act cleared the Senate this week, and DMoney and Mike Ryan broke down the one amendment Miami fought for and why they still want the whole thing dead.

DMoney: I want to talk about something that's going to impact the Canes very directly. The latest is the Protect College Sports Act, which passed the Senate. Not entirely surprising, although it was a pretty big bipartisan vote. Seventy-seven votes in a hundred-member chamber.

I'll note that a House staffer told Ross Dellenger, who's the main guy on this beat, that in his view the bill is dead. There are 435 members in the House. It's a lot more diverse and it looks like the House won't get to this until the lame-duck period.

Even assuming the House passes this, which is very much in question, the bill's been softened a little toward the Miami Hurricanes. Ashley Moody, Republican from Florida, introduced an amendment to raise the conference cap from 19 to 20.

There's a ton in this bill that impacts conference expansion: You have to be independent for three years if you change conferences, or wait six years for the whole thing to sunset. That six-year window was added later so teams like Miami can get out when the TV deals expire.

Mike Ryan: Miami's been very effective behind the scenes. They have plugged in people and they're doing their best to make this a little bit more palatable. But this is dead on arrival. Like you said, the House isn't back in session until after Election Day, and Election Day is widely expected to change the way the House looks.

I hate that the government is involved. There's a lot I don't like about it. Twenty teams is a bonus, and you'd like to think that after Notre Dame gets in, Miami is top of the heap. But it's still a decision to be made.

A brand like North Carolina is super appealing in terms of revenue, so Miami would have a fight on its hands. If this trajectory keeps going for Mario Cristobal's program, though, it's going to be hard to deny.

The main takeaway is that Miami is very effective behind the scenes at softening this and making sure its concerns are heard by the right people. But to me, this is much ado about nothing. I'm glad the template's there in case this thing ever does get through the House. At least we have the 20 in there. On the whole, though, I hate it all.

DMoney: I think this thing is fatally flawed.

Now it's in the House, which is more diverse. So many more people, more viewpoints, more unpredictable. The House Rules Committee has members from the Congressional Black Caucus who don't like this bill, and members of the House Freedom Caucus, on the other side of the spectrum, who don't like it either. So there are enemies on that committee, and that makes it harder to pass. A lot of people in the House supported the SCORE Act, their own bill, which failed. So it's territorial. You didn't support our bill, we're not passing yours.

I'm optimistic this fails. Ultimately, there has to be rules but this isn't it. There are some good things in there that are going to be popular: The five-for-five, the one-time transfer too.

The conference expansion piece, though? Who's screaming about conference expansion? The conferences already expanded. Now it's just a matter of trying to keep Miami out.

Mike Ryan: And we're already at a crazy number of conference games. You're going to have a lot of teams that never play each other.

Look, I'm very pro-labor, but I'm also pro-cap, and people get confused by that. Doesn't a cap limit wages? Aren't you against that? But if you have a seat at the table and things are collectively bargained, you get something in exchange for conceding a cap. The fatal flaw in all of this is that there isn't a seat at the table for the players. I hope that when it gets to the House, people grandstand and make a big issue of it.

This is a very interesting time in American politics. A lot of grandstanding happened on the front end to get it this far, so people can hold up their hands to important boosters and donors and say, look, I did my part. Then everything gets tabled until after Election Day, when a lot is going to be different, and behind the scenes you're leveraging different folks. So yeah, great to send a signal, keep people like Nick Saban a little bit happy, give them a small dub. But in reality, nothing's going to happen here until the United States has its election, and who knows what happens after that.

DMoney: We want it to fail. We have the NFL, the NBA and Major League Baseball, and baseball needs a cap majorly. You can see models of what a cap and a collective bargaining process look like. This is a half measure that mixes popular stuff with stuff that doesn't matter, like conference expansion, which is the part that hurts Miami the most.

The Big Ten and SEC are going to get the biggest rights deals when the next round gets signed. Miami wants to be part of that party. If there's a cap on the teams in those two conferences, really the only two that matter, Miami could get left out. That's why they wanted the Big Ten at 20. It leaves room for both Notre Dame and Miami.

Brett McMurphy, who covers this nationally and talks to a ton of people, thinks Miami is at the top of the list for the Big Ten for all the reasons we know. Ratings, brand, market, and the academic credentials. He thinks Miami is right at the front of the line, and we want to be in the Big Ten.

Mike Ryan: I agree, but I don't know what North Carolina has done behind the scenes, and when this becomes real, it's a decision to be made. The Big Ten, especially in basketball, really likes the North Carolina brand. I know that.

DMoney: Regionally, it's a better fit. There's a lot of old money there.

Mike Ryan: But breaking North Carolina away from Duke, I just don't see it. Look at what happened with Texas and Oklahoma. They went out the door together. Duke is nowhere near as big an athletic brand as North Carolina, even with how prestigious the basketball team is. North Carolina is successful top-down, lacrosse, soccer, baseball. It's a really appealing brand.

But ultimately, the bill as it stands right now, crafted by the SEC, the Big Ten and Notre Dame, leaves Miami at a competitive disadvantage if it passes as written and the door closes before Miami can walk into either of those conferences. What we're worried about is the haves crafting the rules, getting things done under the table, shutting Miami out and enforcing things against Miami to keep it at bay. That strengthens a competitive disadvantage that already exists.

We'll stay on this as it moves to the House. Subscribe to the CanesInsight YouTube channel and turn on notifications so you don't miss the next update. The full conversation is below.

 

Dumb question:

What did Leonard + Clippers get in trouble for?

Could that tangentially apply to future NIL-ish stuff??

@TheOriginalCane @Pixelated bukake

Kawhi and his rep (his uncle), wanted more money than allowed under the salary cap. So they basically came to an agreement “under the table” for the Clippers to “introduce” Leonard to companies who would employ Leonard in a marketing manner. This is against the NBA salary cap rules because teams can’t introduce players to companies for this purpose.

But what appears to be the bigger issue is that the Clippers were providing the same companies with contracts with the Clippers in return for the companies paying Leonard as a spokesperson. And Leonard in turn did no actual work for the companies but was nonetheless paid millions of dollars. So it really looks like the Clippers were funneling money to Leonard through these private companies.

 

I’m not a legal expert but in a free market like our country is, earnings cannot be capped. Not without some form of bargaining and unionization. If you want to cap how much can go to a football roster from CFP earnings the other side of the table has to have a say.

What I think a lot of these anti NIL blowhards don’t realize or don’t want to allow, players can market themselves “independently” from the schools. Odds are the schools are orchestrating these deals, but I don’t think that’s an issue legally. Like pick whatever local pro team you want, the star players aren’t calling the local companies and doing these deals just themselves. Justin Jefferson and Dak Prescott probably negotiated their Lowe’s commercials independently, but the commercials of them in their team’s uniforms for the local grocery store or gas station or whatever is being orchestrated by the team. But it’s using that player’s likeness to prop up the team’s brand.

Bama and UGA or whoever can ***** and moan all they want. But if MasTech(or whoever) decides they want to sign Toney to a NIL deal with five teammates for five commercials, no governing body can prevent that. And the minute a salary cap is enacted that’s exactly what will happen with these boosters who own businesses. And as far as my legal novice self is aware, that can’t be stopped.

We still don’t want a CAP

 

I’m not a legal expert but in a free market like our country is, earnings cannot be capped. Not without some form of bargaining and unionization. If you want to cap how much can go to a football roster from CFP earnings the other side of the table has to have a say.

What I think a lot of these anti NIL blowhards don’t realize or don’t want to allow, players can market themselves “independently” from the schools. Odds are the schools are orchestrating these deals, but I don’t think that’s an issue legally. Like pick whatever local pro team you want, the star players aren’t calling the local companies and doing these deals just themselves. Justin Jefferson and Dak Prescott probably negotiated their Lowe’s commercials independently, but the commercials of them in their team’s uniforms for the local grocery store or gas station or whatever is being orchestrated by the team. But it’s using that player’s likeness to prop up the team’s brand.

Bama and UGA or whoever can ***** and moan all they want. But if MasTech(or whoever) decides they want to sign Toney to a NIL deal with five teammates for five commercials, no governing body can prevent that. And the minute a salary cap is enacted that’s exactly what will happen with these boosters who own businesses. And as far as my legal novice self is aware, that can’t be stopped.

This is 1000% correct which is why there will never again be a cap on NIL. It is unconstitutional
I say “again” because the old NC2A system did exactly this. It created a subset of people within America that was prevented from making money from their NIL.
Whenever someone complains about NIL, I always ask them why is it OK for a 16 year old tennis player to make money from a Nike deal, but not a 19 year old college athlete. And we know the answer. It is because the universitires preferred a system wherein the schools and coaches made and kept the millions (soon to be billions) of dollars, and the workers received a scholarship.

 

Our senators got us wiggle room for the B10, our congressional delegation needs to kill the whole conference cap if not the entire bill.

 

This is where I point out that EVERY single Senate Democrat voted against an insider stock trading ban. I truly loathe the political class across the board.