MadBird
Well-known member
Two things come to my mind right off the top:that is the big conflict Quinn...how do we pay kids/players their "share of the money" (your words) via NIL while restricting their ability to transfer? Players need to be able to travel where ever needed to go to work and get paid their market value. that is not the ncaa driving that approach that is our restraint of trade laws and the courts have ruled several times that restricting player transfer is restraining their ability to earn. the ncaa has tried to implement transfer rules and they are being struct down by the courts when the transfer rules are challenged
"Restraint of trade" - pro sports seems to get around that "effectively", free agent rules, you just can't go from team to team, right? So, why can't the NCAA come up with some kind of "contract" or something to fix it?
What happens to the "non-revenue" sports/athletes? Is NIL only for "revenue generating" sports - if you dedicate your time and effort to tennis or volleyball or baseball or what have you, you don't get paid?
I don't know what the answers are, it is one huge mess. And I have no problem with the term, or the reality, of "student/athlete". At all levels. I'm against college sports being the minor leagues, so to speak. Even right now, today. But especially if they disconnect student from paid athlete.