ADVERTISEMENT

Opting out in the NIL era

hawkedoff

HB Legend
Jul 25, 2013
12,810
10,137
113
Seems like the NIL contracts should have a provision about opting out if a bowl game. Significant financial penalties on what has been paid as well as punitive damages up to and including attachment to future earnings.

These are adults getting paid and if thatbis true the contracts should reflect that
 
Seems like the NIL contracts should have a provision about opting out if a bowl game. Significant financial penalties on what has been paid as well as punitive damages up to and including attachment to future earnings.

These are adults getting paid and if thatbis true the contracts should reflect that
100% agree, if you don't play in post season (barring injury), your contract is void. Not going to work for a month would be voluntary resignation for most of us.
 
100% agree, if you don't play in post season (barring injury), your contract is void. Not going to work for a month would be voluntary resignation for most of us.
One game pay penalty?? Probably not gonna change their mind. The ones sitting will be going to NFL next season or just plain transferring out.
 
re: players opting out of a bowl game

1. Entirely reasonable for players with pro football potential, especially regarding teams not involved in a CFB playoff game. Much more troublesome for players on a team competing for a championship.

2. A valuable development opportunity for backups and younger players with less experience - a positive byproduct of the opt-out. Really helps coaches better analyze sub roster progress and team build for next season.

3. For me, makes the minor bowl game more interesting because you can watch players perform in a larger role that you have high expectations for and have followed since recruiting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kceasthawk
NIL explicitly can not be contingent on playing time or starting status according to SC ruling. Don't know if that would include "opt out" refusals to play.
That seems restrictive toward the school and not the player, meaning that if the player doesn’t earn the roster spot, they still get the money. If the player chooses to not play, they shouldn’t get the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkedoff
“The brand” is the person, not the player or the team. Can’t tie NIL to the team, their performance, or playing time because they’re getting paid to just be them.
Yes and No. Their brand is a direct byproduct of their participation on the team. That said, I've always wondered the same thing about opting out when you're on athletic scholarship. Isn't the deal you get the scholarship for participating in said sport? if you choose to stop a portion of your scholly should go back. Clearly not including guys who get injured and are unable to participate.
 
They wouldnt be getting NIL deals if they weren't athletes. Tie NIL to play and see what happens.
You’re not wrong, and that’s why the NIL that we know is a shit show. There are kids out there who were rightfully screwed in the old system. I remember a kid that played WR for Colorado years ago who was also a world class downhill skier. He couldn’t accept any endorsements as a skier if he wanted to maintain his eligibility for football. That is the type of kid that should have been getting NIL endorsement deals...not a high school QB that has accomplished nothing of relevance. The current format is essentially a pay to play scheme now. Unfortunately, that’s not legal, so if the athlete backs out of the play part, the collective isn’t allowed to back out of the pay part since it can’t be tied to playing time. As long as he shows up for whatever autograph signing or photo shoots, he’s good.
 
Last edited:
Seems like the NIL contracts should have a provision about opting out if a bowl game. Significant financial penalties on what has been paid as well as punitive damages up to and including attachment to future earnings.

These are adults getting paid and if thatbis true the contracts should reflect that
Pay for play is illegal so good luck with that.
 
You’re not wrong, and that’s why the NIL that we know is a shit show. There are kids out there who were rightfully screwed in the old system. I remember a kid that played WR for Colorado years ago who was also a world class downhill skier. He couldn’t accept any endorsements as a skier if he wanted to maintain his eligibility for football. That is the type of kid that should have been getting NIL endorsement deals...not a high school QB that has accomplished nothing of relevance. The current format is essentially a pay to play scheme now. Unfortunately, that’s not legal, so if the athlete backs out of the play part, the collective isn’t allowed to back out of the pay part since it can’t be tied to playing time. As long as he shows up for whatever autograph signing or photo shoots, he’s good.
I recall the skiers conundrum, that was BS.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT