NIL isn't the problem . . .

David1979

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 17, 2013
13,386
13,272
113
These guys are already getting paid with free school, free board, free food, free tutoring, free medical if they get injured and probably many more freebies. I call NIL part of the woke because it is, it's people feeling sorry for these guys because they are bringing in a lot of money and not getting paid when in all actuality they are (with the above mentioned) And it also takes a lot of money to to cover all expenses. But oh no, some bleeding hearts think these players are not getting enough even though no one is forcing them to do it and it's what they want to do.

Now look what is happening, it's an out of control mess. And it's all because some dips in control felt sorry for these guys thinking the players are being mistreated. So yeah, it realty it is part of the "woke movement"
You are a moron. No offense.
 

LaTavianGreenshaw24

HR All-State
May 13, 2020
627
461
63
With all the money in college sports, NIL is only fair and reasonable, and it should have come along much sooner. So the problem isn't NIL, it's that it has come without any regulation. There needs to be a national set of rules defining what is acceptable and what isn't. It's anarchy now, and that obviously isn't fair or reasonable. I know the NCAA has washed its hands of NIL, but somebody has to establish rules and have the ability to enforce them. And because NIL applies to all college students, not just athletes, perhaps college presidents should get together and establish the rules and be responsible for enforcement.

With media companies and advertisers and others making millions and billions off college sports, it's only fair that the athletes who make all that possible share in the revenue. But the NIL process now is severely flawed. The sooner that is rectified, the better.
Durrrrrrrrrrrrr 🙄
 
Feb 13, 2005
12,420
2,001
113
These guys are already getting paid with free school, free board, free food, free tutoring, free medical if they get injured and probably many more freebies. I call NIL part of the woke because it is, it's people feeling sorry for these guys because they are bringing in a lot of money and not getting paid when in all actuality they are (with the above mentioned) And it also takes a lot of money to to cover all expenses. But oh no, some bleeding hearts think these players are not getting enough even though no one is forcing them to do it and it's what they want to do.

Now look what is happening, it's an out of control mess. And it's all because some dips in control felt sorry for these guys thinking the players are being mistreated. So yeah, it realty it is part of the "woke movement"

Your criticism would make sense if the change in rules were to force schools or advertisers to provide additional compensation to athletes. In that sense, it would be similar to increasing the minimum wage. But that is fundamentally not what is happening.

Instead of raising a floor, the rule change is removing a ceiling. The Supreme Court (not a bunch of woke liberals) effectively said that a governing-body like the NCAA cannot suppress athletes' NIL compensation via regulations. The removal of such rules allows everyone more freedom to contract and provide free market compensation to athletes. Nobody is being forced to give any money to athletes.

Any argument that allowing free market compensation is either (i) woke, or (ii) indicative of an entitled generation is fundamentally flawed. Free market competition is not woke and it does not force money to be given to someone who does not deserve it.
 

littlez

HR Heisman
Jan 29, 2003
7,315
5,973
113
Your criticism would make sense if the change in rules were to force schools or advertisers to provide additional compensation to athletes. In that sense, it would be similar to increasing the minimum wage. But that is fundamentally not what is happening.

Instead of raising a floor, the rule change is removing a ceiling. The Supreme Court (not a bunch of woke liberals) effectively said that a governing-body like the NCAA cannot suppress athletes' NIL compensation via regulations. The removal of such rules allows everyone more freedom to contract and provide free market compensation to athletes. Nobody is being forced to give any money to athletes.

Any argument that allowing free market compensation is either (i) woke, or (ii) indicative of an entitled generation is fundamentally flawed. Free market competition is not woke and it does not force money to be given to someone who does not deserve it.
Turn out the lights. Perfectly said.
 

Kurt Warner

HR Heisman
Jan 12, 2010
6,628
8,483
113
Iowa
Your criticism would make sense if the change in rules were to force schools or advertisers to provide additional compensation to athletes. In that sense, it would be similar to increasing the minimum wage. But that is fundamentally not what is happening.

Instead of raising a floor, the rule change is removing a ceiling. The Supreme Court (not a bunch of woke liberals) effectively said that a governing-body like the NCAA cannot suppress athletes' NIL compensation via regulations. The removal of such rules allows everyone more freedom to contract and provide free market compensation to athletes. Nobody is being forced to give any money to athletes.

Any argument that allowing free market compensation is either (i) woke, or (ii) indicative of an entitled generation is fundamentally flawed. Free market competition is not woke and it does not force money to be given to someone who does not deserve it.

Why do athletes need the additional compensation in the first place? To me they are doing pretty well getting a free education and room and board while getting the free education. Plus many other incentives. It's up to them to take advantage of their degree when they are done..that's on them if they don't. Now look at the absolute mess we have. It should have been left alone in my opinion. It's been that way forever.
 
Feb 13, 2005
12,420
2,001
113
Why do athletes need the additional compensation in the first place? To me they are doing pretty well getting a free education and room and board while getting the free education. Plus many other incentives. It's up to them to take advantage of their degree when they are done..that's on them if they don't. Now look at the absolute mess we have. It should have been left alone in my opinion. It's been that way forever.

There are many people that would prefer a society in which regulators decide how much compensation every person deserves and thus imposes a ceiling so that goods and resources are distributed evenly and fairly. However, while such a system may sound good in theory, in America we have decided that communism is not preferred over capitalism. Thus, in a capitalistic society we generally do not enforce rules that impose a ceiling on how much money a person may earn.
 

Madhawk83

Team MVP
Gold Member
Jun 26, 2019
215
229
43
Given this was a supreme court decision I guess it must be fair to say that the conservative dominated court has now become "Woke". Did anyone tell Ginny Thomas that her husband is woke?
The court isn't dominated by Conservatives. It's funny that you believe it is.
 

Madhawk83

Team MVP
Gold Member
Jun 26, 2019
215
229
43
You realize there a bill in Congress to allow companies to decide if we are allowed to sell on their goods...goods we purchased and own!?!?

Ownership, not so fast ;)
So every bill in Congress isn't a good bill. I think we all know that. I also said people "should" be able to do what they want with what they own.
 

TopHawkeye

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Jan 13, 2002
9,756
7,132
113
Given this was a supreme court decision I guess it must be fair to say that the conservative dominated court has now become "Woke". Did anyone tell Ginny Thomas that her husband is woke?
Rather, conservative justices endeavor to objectively interpret & enforce the law - even if they don't like the result. This contrasts with many/most liberal justices who want to use the law to implement a liberal agenda. Hopefully that explanation helps.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: littlez

Madhawk83

Team MVP
Gold Member
Jun 26, 2019
215
229
43
So tell me which judges you find conservative vs liberal. Can’t wait.
There are 3 maybe 4 Conservative judges Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and to a lesser extent ACB. John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh are Centrists who are only considered "Conservative" because leftists want Judges to be political activists for leftist ideology and when they aren't they are "Conservative" So for people on the political left Centrists don't exist.
 

littlez

HR Heisman
Jan 29, 2003
7,315
5,973
113
There are 3 maybe 4 Conservative judges Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and to a lesser extent ACB. John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh are Centrists who are only considered "Conservative" because leftists want Judges to be political activists for leftist ideology and when they aren't they are "Conservative" So for people on the political left Centrists don't exist.
So your a bit of a conspiracy theory guy aren’t you? Love it when guys like you come out and call them “leftists.” Kavanaugh might be a centrist to you but he’s conservative, same with Roberts. However, they were right on NIL. They did the proper thing by the letter of the law.
 

Madhawk83

Team MVP
Gold Member
Jun 26, 2019
215
229
43
So your a bit of a conspiracy theory guy aren’t you? Love it when guys like you come out and call them “leftists.” Kavanaugh might be a centrist to you but he’s conservative, same with Roberts. However, they were right on NIL. They did the proper thing by the letter of the law.
I'm not a conspiracy guy at all but think you for proving my point. Even Axios rates them as barely Conservative and they aren't exactly an unbiased source. Leftist is merely a term to define someone who is further to the political left than classic liberals. I'm neither Qanon or Blueanon so its weird to me to that you would label me a conspiracy guy simply because I disagreed with your take.
 

littlez

HR Heisman
Jan 29, 2003
7,315
5,973
113
I'm not a conspiracy guy at all but think you for proving my point. Even Axios rates them as barely Conservative and they aren't exactly an unbiased source. Leftist is merely a term to define someone who is further to the political left than classic liberals. I'm neither Qanon or Blueanon so its weird to me to that you would label me a conspiracy guy simply because I disagreed with your take.
Barely conservative is still conservative. Not sure why you’re arguing it’s a right leaning Supreme Court. I’m not complaining about it. Is what it is.
 

Madhawk83

Team MVP
Gold Member
Jun 26, 2019
215
229
43
Barely conservative is still conservative. Not sure why you’re arguing it’s a right leaning Supreme Court. I’m not complaining about it. Is what it is.
When Axios says someone is barely Conservative than they aren't in fact Conservative. The political spectrum over probably the past 10-15 years has moved very much to the left. Both John Roberts and Kavanaugh and honestly one can make the argument that ACB are all classically liberal.
 

Tfxchawk

HR MVP
Jun 22, 2021
2,166
1,972
113
Why do athletes need the additional compensation in the first place? To me they are doing pretty well getting a free education and room and board while getting the free education. Plus many other incentives. It's up to them to take advantage of their degree when they are done..that's on them if they don't. Now look at the absolute mess we have. It should have been left alone in my opinion. It's been that way forever.
Why do you?
 

Tfxchawk

HR MVP
Jun 22, 2021
2,166
1,972
113
This will settle out like most things. An NIL deal isn't going to change the scales in any direction. The biggest programs will get the best players the same as they always have. Some players will transfer for a better deal just like regular adults that change jobs for a better deal. The risk in changing for money will be the same as it is for anyone that switches jobs and moves for that new opportunity. Some.kids will get rich but they were likely to go to the NFL anyway and most will not. Kids in sports not named football and basketball may be able to pick up some extra cash for books. Lots of money to recruit a women's basketball player? Lots of money for baseball in college? Yeah it might happen but probably not.

What I see as usual is a bunch of people that don't think a young person should be able to represent their own best interests. That others should be able to cap or limit those interests while coaches make millions and millions of dollars and produce generational wealth for themselves. Where even the assistant coaches in football male more than doctors by a lot all the while screaming that these kids should be content.
 

Mccusk34

Scout Team
Gold Member
Jul 25, 2019
78
122
33
I'm not buying or selling.. The woke part of this discussion is the sports media positioning the players as victims of the schools and the NCAA making all the money. I'm not saying the players are or are not victims, but that's what is perceived as the woke part. The idea that a player agrees to the terms of the scholarship but is still being victimized in the transaction he willing chose to participate.
 
Feb 13, 2005
12,420
2,001
113
I'm not buying or selling.. The woke part of this discussion is the sports media positioning the players as victims of the schools and the NCAA making all the money. I'm not saying the players are or are not victims, but that's what is perceived as the woke part. The idea that a player agrees to the terms of the scholarship but is still being victimized in the transaction he willing chose to participate.

I fully understand why people might equate this with the woke agenda - but that is fundamentally a lazy and incorrect view. It might make sense to attribute this to a woke agenda if new rules forced an increased amount of benefits to go to players. But as I said above, the change we're seeing is not increasing a floor. The change is to remove the ceiling. Any increased money going to players is a product of a free market. Nobody is being forced to give athletes anything more than before.

Your final sentiment that athletes must not be getting a bad deal if they are still agreeing to play for scholarships is also a lazy view, and one that was specifically addressed in the Supreme Court ruling. Think of it this way:
  • What if Congress passed a law that nobody could earn a salary over $80,000? If you could otherwise earn $150,000, would you like that law? Obviously not.
  • Would it be convincing to you to hear these arguments in support of the ceiling on salary?:
    • "$80,000 is more than a lot of people make, you should be happy."
    • "The limit is only on salary - if you want to earn more you could just own your own business, or you could move to another country and earn a salary there."
    • "The idea that an employee agrees to the terms of an $80,000 salary but is still being victimized in the transaction he is willing to chose to participate is bogus."
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlez

Ronman

HR Heisman
Jan 4, 2004
9,482
7,980
113
Planet Iowa
Let's just say there's few "not so bright" conservatives...I know, hard to believe 😟
Your people have gone way past "conservative." They seem to be having a contest as to whom can be the farthest right lunatic possible. You can only imagine some of the laws they will pass if allowed to proceed unchecked, claiming to get government out of our lives while doing just the opposite.
 

Ronman

HR Heisman
Jan 4, 2004
9,482
7,980
113
Planet Iowa
I agree with the theory that this will not change much in the ultimate hierarchy of college basketball, because as we've seen in the past, the NCAA was extremely reticent about pursuing rules violations against a certain tier of teams. Now those very same teams will be "cheating" in plain sight and will skew the scales to the point that it will take an extreme fluke for teams outside of that particular bubble to actually contend for what will still be called the National Championship. College football has already achieved this status with the SEC, and Alabama and Georgia, in particular, proving to rule the wild west of the sport.
 

IsaacHarrison

HR All-American
May 9, 2005
2,511
760
113
I agree with the theory that this will not change much in the ultimate hierarchy of college basketball, because as we've seen in the past, the NCAA was extremely reticent about pursuing rules violations against a certain tier of teams. Now those very same teams will be "cheating" in plain sight and will skew the scales to the point that it will take an extreme fluke for teams outside of that particular bubble to actually contend for what will still be called the National Championship. College football has already achieved this status with the SEC, and Alabama and Georgia, in particular, proving to rule the wild west of the sport.

Im gonna disagree with your first sentence. This will change things dramatically for basketball, not as much football. Schools like Villanova, Marquette, VCU, Loyola, Georgetown etc that don't have D1 football programs (or bad programs, Div 2 etc) can ignore football and put all NIL towards basketball. Just think if Villanova pooled together 5 mil a year to pay players. They would have a NBA roster every year. Whereas Iowa would have to divided that up amongst about 20-25 football players as well. Look at Kansas. They are going to kill it with NIL. They will say the hell with football and just have a NBA roster every year. How do you compete with that?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: littlez

NCHawkeye24

All-Conference
Apr 19, 2021
414
1,078
93
I posted this on the football board but maybe it should have been posted here.

While I am no fan of NIL, I have also not been a fan of all the corruption and cheating that has gone on in college sports either. So I do think something had to be done although it sure seems like the wild west right now.

I think if Iowa's athletic department is going to be dependent on big donors and the private sector to keep up with the competition with regards to NIL is just lazy. It does kind of seem like the department has kind of thrown its hands up and said, "hey kids, if you want to go make some money you are free to do it, but we really don't want anything to do with it". But on the flip side, the University has no problem licensing the tigerhawk logo out to whoever is willing to pay a royalty.

So if I was the AD, this is what I would do:

1. First thing would be to re-structure the athletic department top to bottom. Just brainstorming here, but I think it would be necessary to place marketing/merchandising, licensing and recruiting under the same umbrella. These endeavors all have to work hand-in-hand, and from the very beginning of recruitment there needs to be a team consisting of the recruiting coordinator, coach(es), and marketing involved.
2. The next thing is for the university to develop a merchandising agreement with each player (standard as an athlete), implement strategies to not only offer but promote individual merchandising opportunities. There should be no reason that only a few football or basketball jerseys are offered for sale. Every player needs to have at minimum their jersey offered for sale, but on top of that, merchandise that is specific for a particular sport, i.e. football, should have a percentage of the proceeds go to the general football NIL fund that would be split evenly among the players. The biggie biggie biggie here is whether or not the university is going to allow the athlete the usage of the Iowa trademarks including the tigerhawk.
3. I would also implement a "branding" department that would be available to help the players do exactly how it is named, build their brand. A lot of interns could be utilized here. This would consist of so many things: licensing and trademarking (like Tory Taylor's slogan), building and maintaining websites and online stores, legal agreements, merchandising contacts, etc. There is so much money to be made here by the athlete and the university of it is done right. It is not even that far away from providing representation of the athlete, because, if you think about it, why give all of that money away to Klutch Sports or some other agent when the school had a relationship with the player for much longer. Lets say that Old Spice wants to do a commercial with Keegan Murray? Instead of just allowing it to happen and let the Murray's try to fumble through the complexities of contractual agreements and negotiations, instead either Old Spice contacts the university or the university promotes the athlete through one of their partners and the university handles all of the business end of things and Keegan does the commercial and cashes his check. Why, again, allow all of that opportunity to be wasted and not taken advantage of.
4. One more thing I would do within the athletic department would be to have an outside sales team that actively procured marketing opportunities for the athletes, as well as providing a central location for fans or businesses to go to in order to request an athlete ambassador. This would be everything from TV and radio ads, personal appearances, birthday parties, camps, autograph signings, etc. This would then not just be available to those that have the contacts of knowing someone that knows someone, but a real professional way for the public to utilize these resources. I want to have a Hawkeye football player or two come to by 8 year old kids' birthday party for 2 hours and I am willing to spend 800-1000 bucks, this should be easy. I have a small business and I want to have them come to a grand opening? Call the number.

There are a whole host of other ideas, but these are just a few. The bottomline is that as long as there are fans that are willing to spend money then there is opportunity for everyone involved. Luka could have made a billion dollars because he was so good and such a great ambassador for the program, but hell, who wouldn't still buy a "Little Lick" jersey as a gag gift? I think there are so so so many opportunities for all of the athletes as well as the athletic department. And it goes much much further than what we are seeing right now which is the lazy way of doing things like "if you come to this school you will get a new Range Rover". In some instances that athlete will be cutting his own throat by taking that deal instead of a percentage of merchandise. If I was the athlete, I would bet on my myself, take the percentage without a cap and then play my ass off.
 

Kurt Warner

HR Heisman
Jan 12, 2010
6,628
8,483
113
Iowa
Your people have gone way past "conservative." They seem to be having a contest as to whom can be the farthest right lunatic possible. You can only imagine some of the laws they will pass if allowed to proceed unchecked, claiming to get government out of our lives while doing just the opposite.

OMG!!!! Are you being serious?!? That is the most excellent example of of the pot called the kettle black! The left is so out of control and they are nuts. Just look at what is going on, my God you guys are crazy as crazy can be.
 

NCHawkeye24

All-Conference
Apr 19, 2021
414
1,078
93
OMG!!!! Are you being serious?!? That is the most excellent example of of the pot called the kettle black! The left is so out of control and they are nuts. Just look at what is going on, my God you guys are crazy as crazy can be.
Not to get too political here, but I think that everyone needs to look at politics visually as a circle rather than a linear line. I think that is where so much confusion is that when a person thinks about politics on a linear scale as either left or right that one assumes that the discrepency in views from opposing parties gets greater the further the positions are with each party on that scale. However, if one thinks visually about it as more of a circle, you will see that the effects of each parties' extreme views are not altogether that much different than the other party. For example, socially speaking, if one party has complete control, and it doesn't matter which one it is, they will think that their viewpoint is right and they will attempt to remove some of our rights. Economically speaking, if either party has complete control what you will end up with is a few haves and a whole bunch of have-nots. This is true for pure capitalism, communism, socialism, fascism, monarchy or even if there was no government at all. It is the middle ground where our freedom, and the middle class, lies.