PORTAL KOMBAT

[catastrophe]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

[michigancat]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

[CNS]

Anyone heard of any other incoming folks?  I saw something yesterday that we offered the Knueppel and he declined to stay at Duke.  Not sure if real or fake. 

[wetwillie]

if I was a college coach, i’d be looking for a new line of work

A lot of other 4M per year basketball coaching gigs?

[wetwillie]

Anyone heard of any other incoming folks?  I saw something yesterday that we offered the Knueppel and he declined to stay at Duke.  Not sure if real or fake. 

We are getting two euro players  Gru and Rapieque and landed what I think is a backup post player from UNCW in McGriff.  They are trying to get the Smith guy from Memphis a waiver that came mid year to be able to play next year.

[Justwin]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

If you end up not being very good, you still get your money.

In my mind I am also thinking long-term contracts where players are paid directly by the school. It's where it's all headed.

[michigancat]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

If you end up not being very good, you still get your money.

In my mind I am also thinking long-term contracts where players are paid directly by the school. It's where it's all headed.

catastrophe specifically called out buyouts if you don't perform or leave early

[catastrophe]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

Guaranteed cash for multiple years, with the ability to renegotiate if you perform above expectations--same as coaches.

[michigancat]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

Guaranteed cash for multiple years, with the ability to renegotiate if you perform above expectations--same as coaches.

how is it guaranteed cash if you have to pay it back if you don't hit certain performance metrics?

[Justwin]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

Guaranteed cash for multiple years, with the ability to renegotiate if you perform above expectations--same as coaches.

how is it guaranteed cash if you have to pay it back if you don't hit certain performance metrics?

I don't think paying money back if you don't hit certain performance metrics will ever happen.

[catastrophe]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

Guaranteed cash for multiple years, with the ability to renegotiate if you perform above expectations--same as coaches.

how is it guaranteed cash if you have to pay it back if you don't hit certain performance metrics?

It's not that hard to use your imagination here. You can structure the contract however you want, and I'm sure it would end up looking similar to a professional coach or player contract. You earn some lower amount of guaranteed money, with a bunch of added performance based incentives.

The "pay it back" would largely come into play either on transferring or failing to adhere to code of conduct, whatever. You could also advance some of the incentives with the possibility of taking the balance off of other guaranteed money or deals if they failed to hit the requirement.

The details are all besides the point, though, because contracts are pretty much whatever both sides will agree to. My point is it's a no-brainer in any business model to try to lock up talent with long-term money incentives, so I'm curious whether it is technically illegal or whether major programs just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

[ChiComCat]

The main thing that needs to change is having long-term contracts.

Is there a prohibition against these? It seems like a no-brainer. At a minimum you tie up the NIL money to a 2-3 year commitment and they have to pay it back if they transfer early or don't hit certain performance metrics, etc. etc.

What's the advantage to the player in the scenario you describe?

Guaranteed cash for multiple years, with the ability to renegotiate if you perform above expectations--same as coaches.

how is it guaranteed cash if you have to pay it back if you don't hit certain performance metrics?

It's not that hard to use your imagination here. You can structure the contract however you want, and I'm sure it would end up looking similar to a professional coach or player contract. You earn some lower amount of guaranteed money, with a bunch of added performance based incentives.

The "pay it back" would largely come into play either on transferring or failing to adhere to code of conduct, whatever. You could also advance some of the incentives with the possibility of taking the balance off of other guaranteed money or deals if they failed to hit the requirement.

The details are all besides the point, though, because contracts are pretty much whatever both sides will agree to. My point is it's a no-brainer in any business model to try to lock up talent with long-term money incentives, so I'm curious whether it is technically illegal or whether major programs just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

I think when you have a hundred programs competing for the services of a player, it's hard to get a player to sign something potentially punitive.  Even if you get them to agree to it, the upside is the opportunity to sue a former player, all while trying to convince 10 others to come and play for you. 

[catastrophe]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

[Stevesie60]

What if we hadn't fought so hard to keep Tang when Arkansas came calling?

[BIG APPLE CAT]

If any professional team sport was structured such that literally every single player was an unrestricted free agent every year that would be incredibly unfun to watch (unless you just like watching that sport and don’t have any sorta emotional investment in any of the teams) but I’d bet that for like over 99% of sports fans, a large chunk of their fandom is derived from having a rooting interest.

I know this is incredibly obvious stuff but clearly the people in charge of rolling out NIL failed to think of it or they don’t understand what being a sports fan is.

[wetwillie]

They thought of it and have a solution for it. Just takes time to hit the milestones.

[pissclams]

if I was a college coach, i’d be looking for a new line of work

A lot of other 4M per year basketball coaching gigs?

traditional coaching isn’t worth $4M a year anymore. 

hire a $500k coach and increase NIL with the rest to assemble the best players you can afford.

[ChiComCat]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

The "pay it back" in your original post makes me think you're paying them and then trying to claw it back when they transfer, which I don't think would work.

An incentive-laden contract would be a better alternative, but I still struggle to think it will work. With the money coming from anywhere, some car-dealing booster somewhere will guarantee the kid dough.

[Sandstone Outcropping]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

The "pay it back" in your original post makes me think you're paying them and then trying to claw it back when they transfer, which I don't think would work.

An incentive-laden contract would be a better alternative, but I still struggle to think it will work. With the money coming from anywhere, some car-dealing booster somewhere will guarantee the kid dough.

None of the money has to be accounted for by the athletic department, correct? I mean Purple Wave auctions could just pay a player $1,000,000 to appear in some adds with no strings attached, right?

[CNS]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

The "pay it back" in your original post makes me think you're paying them and then trying to claw it back when they transfer, which I don't think would work.

An incentive-laden contract would be a better alternative, but I still struggle to think it will work. With the money coming from anywhere, some car-dealing booster somewhere will guarantee the kid dough.

None of the money has to be accounted for by the athletic department, correct? I mean Purple Wave auctions could just pay a player $1,000,000 to appear in some adds with no strings attached, right?

For this reason, I don't think it possible for schools to regulate at this point.

[Kid In the Hall]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

The "pay it back" in your original post makes me think you're paying them and then trying to claw it back when they transfer, which I don't think would work.

An incentive-laden contract would be a better alternative, but I still struggle to think it will work. With the money coming from anywhere, some car-dealing booster somewhere will guarantee the kid dough.

None of the money has to be accounted for by the athletic department, correct? I mean Purple Wave auctions could just pay a player $1,000,000 to appear in some adds with no strings attached, right?

For this reason, I don't think it possible for schools to regulate at this point.

Under the proposed House settlement, there would be a clearinghouse for all NIL that would be managed by Deloitte. The bean counters would determine if any NIL agreements would meet fair market value and would have the authority to nullify any agreements that they deem unreasonable ($1 million to appear in a 30 second ad for Purple Wave auctions, etc.).

That's all fine and good, but the big schools can't help themselves and so somebody like Tennessee - which already sued the NCAA over this kind of thing - will just do it again when they're denied and the house of cards will crumble again.

The NCAA can be blamed for loads of things (including not trying to get ahead of this 20 years ago), but it's not their fault member schools/boosters/athletes only care about themselves and will file as many lawsuits as it takes to get what they want regardless of the wider implications.

[sonofdaxjones]

There's nothing punitive about it. Surely you have heard people distinguishing between guaranteed and unguaranteed money in a contract valued at $X.

The "pay it back" in your original post makes me think you're paying them and then trying to claw it back when they transfer, which I don't think would work.

An incentive-laden contract would be a better alternative, but I still struggle to think it will work. With the money coming from anywhere, some car-dealing booster somewhere will guarantee the kid dough.

None of the money has to be accounted for by the athletic department, correct? I mean Purple Wave auctions could just pay a player $1,000,000 to appear in some adds with no strings attached, right?

For this reason, I don't think it possible for schools to regulate at this point.

Under the proposed House settlement, there would be a clearinghouse for all NIL that would be managed by Deloitte. The bean counters would determine if any NIL agreements would meet fair market value and would have the authority to nullify any agreements that they deem unreasonable ($1 million to appear in a 30 second ad for Purple Wave auctions, etc.).

That's all fine and good, but the big schools can't help themselves and so somebody like Tennessee - which already sued the NCAA over this kind of thing - will just do it again when they're denied and the house of cards will crumble again.

The NCAA can be blamed for loads of things (including not trying to get ahead of this 20 years ago), but it's not their fault member schools/boosters/athletes only care about themselves and will file as many lawsuits as it takes to get what they want regardless of the wider implications.

That's it right there.  The school presidents and the AD's need to be completely taken out of the equation in terms of setting numerous rules in the oversight domain of college athletics. A college sports czar needs to be named and he/she needs a capable legal team to navigate this so the organization - in whatever form, can fend off any legal challenges to limitations on NIL.  I don't pretend to know all the nuances, but from what I've heard the fastest path to reigning this in is employment/collective bargaining. 

[Spaces]

HS commit Ashton Magee is reopening his recruitment.

Current roster:

Exavier Wilson (Fr.)

David Castillo (So.)

Abdi Bashir Jr. (Jr.)
Taj Manning (Jr.)
Mobi Ikegwuruka (Jr.)

C.J. Jones (Sr.)
Khamari McGriff (Sr.)

*Max Jones (Gr.) - waiting on waiver, status unclear
*Tyreek Smith (Gr.) - waiting on waiver, status unclear

[michigancat]

NOT GREAT

[Stevesie60]

So who do you guys think our next coach will be? Are we going to be out of money to reach out to Brad again? Maybe we reach out to Coach K and tell him he could really prove his greatness by coming to a place where the cupboards are bare and winning an NC. Does Frank want to run it back? Is Shane close to being a HC yet?