'23 CA QB Nico Iamaleava (Tennessee Verbal)

[Cackalacky2.0]

You can disagree with it, but he is drawing attention to the gulf between the intended purpose of getting players paid pre-NIL and the reality post-NIL.

Personally, I think it's a pill you have to swallow when you abandon amateurism, and it doesn't bother me that Nico etc. is paid so much and does this behavior. It would bother me if I was his teammate and he did this interfered with his commitment to the team, but as an observer of the sport I am not offended.

Describe to me the intended purpose and who determined what that was because to my knowledge the NCAA was proven in court to have zero teeth and then abdicated responsibility and turned over the rules and regulations to the states and here we are. Its the wild west. Its truly a new, developing and unfettered free market. This is what people want everywhere else in the economy but for some reason this isn't the way its supposed to be when it comes to semi-professional NFL league that is the Unites States university system.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Disruption is not degradation it’s simply change.

A change that’s landed ND in the NCG and upped the APR 40%+ over the BK era.

WTF is anybody but LSUguy complaining about? And how can he be complaining with JBureaux’s natty so fresh in his mind and having multiple Natty’s broadcast in HD tv… hell, color tv for that matter.

Change is good. Diversity is key. Adapt and survive. Free market is ideal. Greed is Good.

Its truly weird to me.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Honestly, I don't see this happening again for player who aren't at the very top. There will always be the risk of a "Caleb Williams/Arch Manning" level star to sit out. But for a guy who wasn't in the top 3 of the QB's of his conference, I don't see a path for this happening again.

The great thing about football is you have the built in team mentality and the lack of truly proven elite QB's, so it's a limiting factor for truly selfish people getting their way.

Truly selfish people will get 1 chance and then maybe other team will take a risk but not many. On the flip side the universities, 3rd parties, and boosters will make a name for themselves rather quickly in the market if they engage in deals and dont honor them... like Florida and Rashada.

 

[NDhoosier]

Describe to me the intended purpose and who determined what that was because to my knowledge the NCAA was proven in court to have zero teeth and then abdicated responsibility and turned over the rules and regulations to the states and here we are. Its the wild west. Its truly a new, developing and unfetter free market. This is what people want everywhere else in the economy but for some reason this isnt the way its suppoed to be when it comes to semi-professional NFL legaue that is the Unites States univeristy system.

The intended purpose was to pay them for their Name, Image, Likeness. Such as being used in a video game, signing autographs, jersey sales, etc. Not pay to play or pay to come to my university. In fact, it initially said "not pay to play" in the NIL policy.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

The intended purpose was to pay them for their Name, Image, Likeness. Such as being used in a video game, signing autographs, jersey sales, etc. Not pay to play or pay to come to my university. In fact, it initially said "not pay to play" in the NIL policy.

Who determined what this purpose was you speak of? Where were the limitation specified in this intent?

Where was any of this regulated or legislated or otherwise codified?

You cant deviate from something that never legally existed in the first place.

In my state, thi sis the entirety of the laws and regulations on the books currently:

South Carolina Code of Laws​

Unannotated​

Title 59 - Education
CHAPTER 158
Intercollegiate Athletes' Compensation for Name, Image, or Likeness
Editor's Note

2022 Act No. 239, Section 117.172, provides as follows:

"117.172. (GP: Name Image Likeness) For Fiscal Year 2022-23, Act 35 of 2021 in its entirety pertaining to intercollegiate athlete (NIL) name, image, or likeness is suspended."

SECTION 59-158-10.Definitions.

For the purposes of this chapter:

(1) "Athlete agent" means a person who is registered with the Department of Consumer Affairs pursuant to Section 59-102-60 or Section 59-102-80. If an athlete agent is an attorney, then he must also be a member in good standing of a state bar association.

(2) "Compensation" means any remuneration, in cash or in kind, whether provided at the time or at any subsequent date, to an intercollegiate athlete. "Compensation" does not mean any grant, scholarship, fellowship, tuition assistance, or other form of financial aid provided to a student for pursuing a post-secondary education.

(3) "Institution of higher learning" means any post-secondary educational institution, including a technical or comprehensive educational institution.

(4) "Intercollegiate athlete" means an individual who has graduated from high school that engages in, is eligible to engage in, or may be eligible in the future to engage in an intercollegiate sport. If an individual is permanently ineligible to participate in a particular intercollegiate sport, then the individual is not an intercollegiate athlete for the purposes of that sport.

(5) "Intercollegiate sport" means a sport played at the collegiate level for which eligibility requirements for participation by an intercollegiate athlete are established by a national association that promotes or regulates collegiate athletics.

(6) "Name, image, or likeness activities", "name, image, or likeness contract", "NIL activities", or "NIL contract" means an agreement in which an intercollegiate athlete participating in intercollegiate sports authorizes a person to use his name, image, or likeness and, in return, receives consideration. This term shall include, but is not limited to, endorsement contracts.

(7) "Third party" means, with respect to an intercollegiate athlete, any entity other than the institution of higher learning in which the intercollegiate athlete is enrolled.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 1, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 1, deleted (2), which related to the definition of "Athletic booster", and redesignated former (3) to (7) as (2) to (6); in (2), in the first sentence, substituted "an intercollegiate athlete" for "a student athlete"; in (4), in the first sentence, inserted "has graduated from high school that"; deleted (8) and (9), which related to the definitions of "Recruit or solicit" and "Team contract", and redesignated former (10) as (7); and deleted (11), which related to the definition of "Third-party endorsement".

SECTION 59-158-20.Compensation for use of intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness; prohibited acts.

(A) An institution of higher learning or any officer, trustee, director, or employee may directly or through an agreement with a third party, identify, create, solicit, facilitate, and otherwise enable opportunities for a currently enrolled intercollegiate athlete to earn compensation for the use of the intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness. An institution of higher learning may grant permission to intercollegiate athletes to use its trademarks and facilities.

(B) An institution of higher learning may not receive compensation or fees directly from an intercollegiate athlete related to the facilitation of NIL.

(C) No appropriated funds of an institution of higher learning may be used to pay an intercollegiate athlete compensation for the use of their name, image, and likeness.

(D) Compensation earned by an intercollegiate athlete for the use of his name, image, or likeness must represent payment for the use of his name, image, or likeness, independent of, rather than as payment for, his athletic participation or performance unless otherwise permitted or authorized by a collegiate athletic association and institution of higher learning policy, a court order, or a settlement agreement.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 2, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 2, rewrote the section.

SECTION 59-158-30.Extension of agreements beyond participation eligibility prohibited.

A name, image, or likeness contract with an intercollegiate athlete may not extend beyond their eligibility to participate in an intercollegiate athletics program at an institution of higher learning.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 3, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 3, rewrote the section.

SECTION 59-158-40.Institutional liability protections; athletic associations and conferences.

(A)(1) An institution of higher learning may prohibit an intercollegiate athlete from using his name, image, or likeness for compensation if the proposed use of his name, image, or likeness conflicts with institutional values as defined by the institution of higher learning.

(2) An intercollegiate athlete may not earn compensation for the use of his name, image, or likeness for the endorsement of tobacco, alcohol, illegal substances or activities, banned athletic substances, or gambling including, but not limited to, sports betting.

(B) An institution of higher learning or any officers, trustees, directors, employees, including athletics coaching staff, may not be liable for any damages to an intercollegiate athlete's ability to earn compensation for the use of the intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness resulting from decisions or actions routinely taken in the course of intercollegiate athletics. However, nothing in this section should be construed to bar any common law claims by intercollegiate athletes of fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, or intentional misrepresentation.

(C) An athletic association, an athletic conference, or any other group or organization with authority over an intercollegiate athletic program at an institution of higher learning to which this chapter applies may not:

(1) enforce a contract term, a rule, a regulation, a standard, a bylaw, guidance, or any other requirement that prohibits the institution from participating in intercollegiate sports or otherwise penalizes the institution, the institution's intercollegiate athletic program, or intercollegiate athletes for performing, participating in, or allowing an activity required or authorized by this chapter; or

(2) prevent an institution of higher learning from establishing agreements with a third-party entity to act on the institution's behalf to identify, facilitate, enable, or support an intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness activities.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 4, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 4, rewrote the section.

SECTION 59-158-50.Disclosure of agreement terms; limitations.

(A) If an institution of higher learning collects, retains, or maintains copies or summaries of the terms of an intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness contract or proposed contract detailing compensation to the intercollegiate athlete for the use of the intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness or athletic reputation, the documentation may not be considered a public record under Section 30-4-20(C) unless they are a party.

(B) An institution of higher learning may not be compelled to disclose the information to a collegiate athletic association, athletic conference, or other group or organization with authority over an intercollegiate athletic program at an institution of higher learning.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 5, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 5, rewrote the section.

SECTION 59-158-60.Interpretation of chapter; athlete agent compliance with federal law.

(A) If there is a conflict between the provisions of this chapter and those of Chapter 102, then the provisions of this chapter govern. An athlete agent representing an intercollegiate athlete in a transaction authorized pursuant to this chapter also shall comply with all provisions contained in Chapter 102 that do not conflict with the provisions of this chapter.

(B) An athlete agent shall comply with the federal "Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act", 15 U.S.C. Sections 7801-7807.

HISTORY: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021; 2024 Act No. 207 (H.4957), Section 6, eff May 21, 2024.

Editor's Note

2021 Act No. 35, Section 7, provides as follows:

"SECTION 7. This act takes effect for each institution of higher learning in this State upon the earlier of July 1, 2022, or certification by the Attorney General to the Governor of the enactment of rules consistent with the provisions contained in this act by the institution of higher learning's collegiate governing body [July 1, 2021]. Upon certification by the Attorney General, the provisions of this act are suspended until the General Assembly takes further action."

Effect of Amendment

2024 Act No. 207, Section 6, rewrote the section.

SECTION 59-158-70.Repealed.

HISTORY: Former Section, titled Prominent disclosures requiring separate acknowledgement in name, image, or likeness contracts; ten-day revocation period; additional disclosures and limitations, had the following history: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021. Repealed by 2024 Act No. 207, Section 9, eff May 21, 2024.

SECTION 59-158-80.Repealed.

HISTORY: Former Section, titled Governing law; compliance with federal Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act, had the following history: 2021 Act No. 35 (S.685), Section 1, eff July 1, 2021. Repealed by 2024 Act No. 207, Section 9, eff May 21, 2024.

"NIL Contract" is simply defined as an agreement. Also the school is not required to maintain any records of these agreements but if so here are the "rules' lol governing them:

(A) If an institution of higher learning collects, retains, or maintains copies or summaries of the terms of an intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness contract or proposed contract detailing compensation to the intercollegiate athlete for the use of the intercollegiate athlete's name, image, or likeness or athletic reputation, the documentation may not be considered a public record under Section 30-4-20(C) unless they are a party.

(B) An institution of higher learning may not be compelled to disclose the information to a collegiate athletic association, athletic conference, or other group or organization with authority over an intercollegiate athletic program at an institution of higher learning

 

[Irish du Nord]

Describe to me the intended purpose and who determined what that was because to my knowledge the NCAA was proven in court to have zero teeth and then abdicated responsibility and turned over the rules and regulations to the states and here we are. Its the wild west. Its truly a new, developing and unfettered free market. This is what people want everywhere else in the economy but for some reason this isn't the way its supposed to be when it comes to semi-professional NFL league that is the Unites States university system.

I agree with you that any failings of the current system are the result of the NCAA abdicating responsibility. I don't entirely blame them, though, as their horrendous PR cost them multiple court challenges. It didn't use to be without teeth, and maybe that was bound to change anyways with all the money going around in the sport, but losing in court definitely played a role.

I reject the idea that "people" want this everywhere else in the economy, as if that is a majority opinion. Markets have regulations and regulators and properly so, any system that is truly a wild west is a failing of our political economy.

There were rules adopted when the NCAA allowed NIL, rules that wouldn't have prevented anything in Nico's case (except maybe his upfront acquisition fee in the first place). The problem, as you pointed out, is that the NCAA has zero interest in enforcing those rules.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

My dislike of NBA is the result of a massive change in the way the game is played versus what it was in the 90s when I was growing up. Its hardly anything to do with what they get paid or contracts.

I'm not sure if you've watched much of the Pistons this year considering your distaste for today's NBA, but they're pretty much bringing back a lot of that grit and "Bad Boys/Going to Work" eras of the 90s and 00s. They're a fun team to watch.

To keep this on topic, before the thread police come and get me: I think Nico's actions were questionable. That is all.

 

[dublinirish]

 

[Jimmy3Putt]

He might end up with less money?

 

[dublinirish]

He might end up with less money?

yes lol and probably at a worse team with a worse OL

 

[NorthDakota]

He might end up with less money?

Hes absolutely ending up with less money

 

[Irish#1]

Any idea what his asking price is?

 

[Irish#1]

He might end up with less money?

yes lol and probably at a worse team with a worse OL

Lesson learned?

 

[greyhammer90]

yes lol and probably at a worse team with a worse OL

But on the bright side, it'll be with an offense that he has no familiarity with in his last year.

Oh damn that's another negative isn't it?

 

[NDPhilly]

His handlers totally fucked him. Unless he’s a franchise NFL qb, this spat is his legacy.

 

[Irish#1]

Honestly, I don't see this happening again for player who aren't at the very top. There will always be the risk of a "Caleb Williams/Arch Manning" level star to sit out. But for a guy who wasn't in the top 3 of the QB's of his conference, I don't see a path for this happening again.

The great thing about football is you have the built in team mentality and the lack of truly proven elite QB's, so it's a limiting factor for truly selfish people getting their way.

You could be right, but keep in mind he was a top guy coming out of HS and that moniker has so far stayed with him. Except of course on IE where we have guys willing to dig into the facts and show his performance against top teams is no where near good let alone elite.

 

[greyhammer90]

His handlers totally fucked him. Unless he’s a franchise NFL qb, this spat is his legacy.

He'll still be starting his adult life with an insane amount of money (though I'd advise him to watch his dad based on this whole situation), but yeah this was pretty bone headed.

Honestly even if he was going to make an additional million at another school I'd say that miiight just be breaking even in the long run. Being a star QB at a place like Tennessee opens its own doors, and those doors will now be firmly shut.

 

[GreenGemsOmally]

Any idea what his asking price is?

Rumors were that he was getting $2m at UT, wanted to go up to $4m when they cut him. My guess is to transfer he's asking for at least that $2m amount now.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

His handlers totally fucked him. Unless he’s a franchise NFL qb, this spat is his legacy.

Completely agree.

I have zero issue with NIL. But for people to defend a teenager holding out like he's Tee Higgins negotiating a critical second contract is bonkers. He has $2M in the bank, and got greedy, and hung his teammates out to dry. Not to mention this is a major demerit on his character, as far as the eye test is concerned. You quit on your teammates over $$ when you've already made two mil, and probably could've gotten loads more from endorsements after a playoff berth.

Free market is one thing, greed is another. They may overlap but it doesn't make being greedy correct. Kid saw green and is getting burned, so far. Serves him (&/or his camp) right.

 

[forkbeard3777]

Boy, in the past 6 years you had two Heisman's, a NC, and WR's like Nabers/Chase/Thomas. If anyone has had a good decade it's LSU fans.

You can't tell me for the "average" fan it isn't better to have multiple teams with legit shots at the title each year. Sure, a school like Virginia Tech went from 0.5% to 0.1% in winning the title but for the legit contenders they are all in play in each year. Development still matters (see Michigan/ND), schools that buy players still suffer (TAMU), and talent generally wins out (OSU).

This isn't some false parity like the NHL. Players who are selfish will get burned (Nico/Bear Alex).

Trust me, I'm all for parity. I believe I've said it here before, but my favorite time for NCAA football was the 90s...it was loaded with parity all across the map. Simply off the top of my head, you essentially had the following competing every year: Florida, FSU, Miami, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, Alabama, Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas State, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame, Arizona State, USC, Oregon, Washington...the Big 12, Pac 10, Big 10, SEC, ACC, and Big East were all in play. The nearly two-decade SEC reign wasn't great for the sport. I agree. But what's happened now (i.e., a two conference system, "pay-for-play," unrestricted transfers, opt outs, conferences are dissolved (Pac 12) or hanging on for dear life (ACC), schools are without a conference (Oregon State, Washington State), bowl games are entirely meaningless, the regular season is watered down due to Playoff expansion, out-of-conference play is now largely threatened, and on and on...) isn't great for the the health or longevity of the sport.

Honestly, taking into account the above (e.g., the transfers, NIL, conference realignment, unrestricted transfer rules, etc...) does anyone prefer today's college football over what we've had in the past? It's okay if you do...it's entirely a personal preference, I'm just curious.

 

[PolishDomer]

Nico may no longer be rico? His FICO might be loco

 

[forkbeard3777]

Disruption is not degradation it’s simply change.

A change that’s landed ND in the NCG and upped the APR 40%+ over the BK era.

WTF is anybody but LSUguy complaining about? And how can he be complaining with JBureaux’s natty so fresh in his mind and having multiple Natty’s broadcast in HD tv… hell, color tv for that matter.

See my post, above. In my opinion, college football, collectively, isn't what it used to be. Maybe it has evolved and adapted and I haven't. I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, it's just how I personally perceive it and take it in.

 

[dublinirish]

Completely agree.

I have zero issue with NIL. But for people to defend a teenager holding out like he's Tee Higgins negotiating a critical second contract is bonkers. He has $2M in the bank, and got greedy, and hung his teammates out to dry. Not to mention this is a major demerit on his character, as far as the eye test is concerned. You quit on your teammates over $$ when you've already made two mil, and probably could've gotten loads more from endorsements after a playoff berth.

Free market is one thing, greed is another. They may overlap but it doesn't make being greedy correct. Kid saw green and is getting burned, so far. Serves him (&/or his camp) right.

this is all his pops. No poly kid is going to go against their father, it's their culture. Pops fucked the whole thing up. I get that they are not a family of means but man just be patient.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

this is all his pops. No poly kid is going to go against their father, it's their culture. Pops fucked the whole thing up. I get that they are not a family of means but man just be patient.

I don't doubt it; that's why I said &/or his camp; someone was probably pulling strings, but at the end of the day it's his "name/image/likeness" at risk, and it reflects poorly on him.

Maybe it pans out, maybe he balls out and still locks up a first round draft grade, but man, football is the ultimate team sport. This type of action is 100% anti-team.

 

[sfk324]

this is all his pops. No poly kid is going to go against their father, it's their culture. Pops fucked the whole thing up. I get that they are not a family of means but man just be patient.

I think this went out the window when the first year's money came through. Most people in this country will never see $2m+ in their lives, let alone in a year. If they pissed the money away to the point they are still that hard-off, then it will never matter how much he makes, they will just keep flushing it.

 

[TorontoGold]

You could be right, but keep in mind he was a top guy coming out of HS and that moniker has so far stayed with him. Except of course on IE where we have guys willing to dig into the facts and show his performance against top teams is no where near good let alone elite.

Yes, he was compensated for his "market value" coming out of HS. Sports teams will always have imperfect analysis of a player's true value. I think he should be raked over the coals for completely misjudging his value AND ghosting his team like a giant pissbaby.

My point is that this is not symptomatic of the entire NIL landscape. Look at Love, he chose ND leaving some money on table from other schools. He came to ND and balled out, got rewarded for it by getting an elevated NIL package and handled these discussions behind the scenes. IMO he went to ND and got his comp bumped up and had this all dealt with quietly and behind the scenes. That is how NIL revisions should be dealt with.

Trust me, I'm all for parity. I believe I've said it here before, but my favorite time for NCAA football was the 90s...it was loaded with parity all across the map. Simply off the top of my head, you essentially had the following competing every year: Florida, FSU, Miami, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, Alabama, Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas State, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame, Arizona State, USC, Oregon, Washington...the Big 12, Pac 10, Big 10, SEC, ACC, and Big East were all in play. The nearly two-decade SEC reign wasn't great for the sport. I agree. But what's happened now (i.e., a two conference system, "pay-for-play," unrestricted transfers, opt outs, conferences are dissolved (Pac 12) or hanging on for dear life (ACC), schools are without a conference (Oregon State, Washington State), bowl games are entirely meaningless, the regular season is watered down due to Playoff expansion, out-of-conference play is now largely threatened, and on and on...) isn't great for the the health or longevity of the sport.

Honestly, taking into account the above (e.g., the transfers, NIL, conference realignment, unrestricted transfer rules, etc...) does anyone prefer today's college football over what we've had in the past? It's okay if you do...it's entirely a personal preference, I'm just curious.

It's just there isn't wool being pulled over everyone's eyes that there was some sort of honor in the institutions prior to NIL. I'd much rather have it all out in the open so I know that Nico is pissbaby.

I don't carry the same smoke for 16-24 year old players because they've traditionally not received anywhere near the value they've generated for these schools and conferences. Kind of like saying "kids these days!" when it's the dog shit parent's who raised those very kids. So, TBH I think a bunch of people kind of tune out the "the sport is ending!" when it's centered on NIL. But, someone like Nico should be roasted to a crisp for his behavior.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I agree with you that any failings of the current system are the result of the NCAA abdicating responsibility. I don't entirely blame them, though, as their horrendous PR cost them multiple court challenges. It didn't use to be without teeth, and maybe that was bound to change anyways with all the money going around in the sport, but losing in court definitely played a role.

I reject the idea that "people" want this everywhere else in the economy, as if that is a majority opinion. Markets have regulations and regulators and properly so, any system that is truly a wild west is a failing of our political economy.

There were rules adopted when the NCAA allowed NIL, rules that wouldn't have prevented anything in Nico's case (except maybe his upfront acquisition fee in the first place). The problem, as you pointed out, is that the NCAA has zero interest in enforcing those rules.

See I dont think the NCAA ever HAD authority at all. It was literally a cabal that went unchallenged until recently. I think the court cases have shown this IMO. I think they assumed power and held onto it as long as they could until legitimately challenged and then lost it in court. Any regulations were created and imposed by themselves. Essentially it was a self-regulating monopoly. Once their lack of teeth was proven, they abdicated and here we are. A wild west of free marketeering.

While Im being a bit hyperbolic and cynical, I have been told repeatedly for decades by many, many business people that regulations and regulators kill free markets and the less fettered a business is the better. We are literally watching a new market develop in real time and there are MINIMAL rules in place at the state level with each state, if at all, having different rules. I posted South Carolinas above and its a fucking joke. lol

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I'm not sure if you've watched much of the Pistons this year considering your distaste for today's NBA, but they're pretty much bringing back a lot of that grit and "Bad Boys/Going to Work" eras of the 90s and 00s. They're a fun team to watch.

To keep this on topic, before the thread police come and get me: I think Nico's actions were questionable. That is all.

I grew up watching the mid 1980s-mid 1990s Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, Jazz and Pistons. Best period of basketball IMO of course I was too young to remember anything before.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

He might end up with less money?

He will end up with the deal both sides agree to. lol

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Completely agree.

I have zero issue with NIL. But for people to defend a teenager holding out like he's Tee Higgins negotiating a critical second contract is bonkers. He has $2M in the bank, and got greedy, and hung his teammates out to dry. Not to mention this is a major demerit on his character, as far as the eye test is concerned. You quit on your teammates over $$ when you've already made two mil, and probably could've gotten loads more from endorsements after a playoff berth.

Free market is one thing, greed is another. They may overlap but it doesn't make being greedy correct. Kid saw green and is getting burned, so far. Serves him (&/or his camp) right.

I don't care how much they make. I can't make that any clearer. My point isn't about getting as much as they can. That isn't even the impetus of the discussion. It's about him quitting on the team in the middle of spring practice. I would have no problem with this if he would have done this right after their playoff game.

No I haven't seen a contract, but nobody hands out millions of dollars without signing a contract.

No one knows what was agreed to or if it was enforceable or if he got all of or only partially what was agreed upon. You are judging him off of what you only assume is the case. You dont know anything. None of us do. The NCAA does keep track. The schools arent allowed to disclose or report any of this. WE DO NOT KNOW!

If it is known what he has been paid and the nature and terms of his agreement with all parties then please provide a source.