NCAA set to allow direct payments to athletes
- Thread starter simply1
- Start date
There isn’t a salary cap on endorsements in college sports either
Good to see there are still some true believers out there thinking Deloitte is going to ride in here and stop the madness.
There is no reason the NCAA rules couldn't be collectively bargained and no one is limiting what college athletes can make on NIL deals, but the rules of their eligibility can also be collectively bargained.
But there is a requirement that any endorsements reflect market value. Every athlete has to submit their endorsements to the league for review, and if the league feels an endoresement is over market value it gets taken to arbitration for review. You think businesses that are friendly to NFL franchises won't give sweetheart deals to players to give the franchise more cap space wiggle room? Thats the case in the NFL anyways. I assume other pro sports have similar language in their collective bargaining.
The hell they aren't. If it's so easy, than why aren't publically traded companies just funnelling money to their friends and family today?
Exactly. There is obviously something stopping the NFL and NBA from paying players a minimum salary but giving them sweetheart endorsement deals.
All of the parties to the Settlement signed off on Deloitte’s application of FMV and it sure as hell isn’t going to be “whatever a booster is willing to pay”. And Deloitte will apply regional based comps for their FMV valuations but those won’t be so onerous where all the top athletes start flocking to USC and UCLA solely to get the best possible True NIL deals.
In the recent hearings for parties to voice objections to the Settlement, there was no significant resistance to the NIL Regulation language, the primary and sole remaining objection is grandfathering of the proposed roster limits.
Deloitte’s preso to the ACC cited in Dellenger’s tweet does conflict with Wilner’s reporting but the primary focus of Deloitte all along was going to be on booster entities. Given the registration of all NIL deals for IRS reporting, I am assuming high dollar deals will be red flagged regardless of the vendor.
Correct. It's a combination of a salary floor and strong player's unions. Neither exist currently in college sports
They're reaching a settlement that lays out the oversight, what are the going to sue about?
Correct. Their endorsements have to be validated so it isn’t some off shoot off ownership trying to get around the salary cap though. That’s exactly what college is trying to do.
Future players didn't agree to it. It's not collectively bargained.
Maybe the suit gets thrown out but that would be the first W for the NCAA in, well, forever.
You won't have to eat crow. Small pop and mid majors are going to get bent over and boned so deep their eyes are going to pop out.
The last NFL agreement was ratified in 2020. Can all of the players not in the NFL in 2020 sue since they didn't agree to it?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL have you been paying any attention to what is going on in Washington DC right now?????
I asked ChatGPT why this won’t immediately result in lawsuits and I thought the response was interesting. This is a bit long but does a good job laying out the pros and cons.
TLDR: a lawsuit is very likely, but not expected to be a slam dunk either way and will depend on how the courts interpret the case.
Excellent question—and it’s one that legal experts and critics of the NCAA’s NIL oversight have been actively debating.
Here’s why a lawsuit could happen, but why it’s also complicated:
1. Potential Legal Grounds for a Lawsuit
An athlete or booster could argue that:
2. Why It’s Not So Simple
However, several legal and practical hurdles make this a tough fight:
A. Settlement Buy-In
If this NIL framework is part of a court-approved settlement, and the athlete is part of a class that accepted the settlement terms, they may be bound by those terms. Suing later could be barred unless they opted out.
B. NCAA’s Defense: Competitive Integrity
The NCAA would argue that:
C. Courts May View It Differently Than Salary Caps
In professional leagues, courts often allow collectively bargained limits (like NFL salary caps), but the NCAA lacks collective bargaining with athletes. That distinction cuts both ways:
3. A Lawsuit Is Likely Eventually
Here’s what legal analysts expect:
Bottom Line
Let me know if you want a rundown of which courts or precedents might matter most in such a case.
TLDR: a lawsuit is very likely, but not expected to be a slam dunk either way and will depend on how the courts interpret the case.
Excellent question—and it’s one that legal experts and critics of the NCAA’s NIL oversight have been actively debating.
Here’s why a lawsuit could happen, but why it’s also complicated:
1. Potential Legal Grounds for a Lawsuit
An athlete or booster could argue that:
- Their economic freedom is being unlawfully restricted.
- The NCAA or its clearinghouse is violating antitrust law by colluding to cap or deny compensation that would otherwise be lawful in the open market.
- There is no federal law that prohibits someone from purchasing large volumes of memorabilia or offering a sponsorship deal at whatever rate they choose.
- O’Bannon v. NCAA, which challenged the NCAA’s control over athlete likeness.
- Alston v. NCAA, where the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that NCAA limits on education-related benefits violated antitrust law.
2. Why It’s Not So Simple
However, several legal and practical hurdles make this a tough fight:
A. Settlement Buy-In
If this NIL framework is part of a court-approved settlement, and the athlete is part of a class that accepted the settlement terms, they may be bound by those terms. Suing later could be barred unless they opted out.
B. NCAA’s Defense: Competitive Integrity
The NCAA would argue that:
- It’s not banning NIL deals.
- It’s regulating them to prevent disguised pay-for-play, which could destabilize college sports.
- The clearinghouse is a neutral evaluator, not acting as a price-fixer, but a market integrity monitor.
C. Courts May View It Differently Than Salary Caps
In professional leagues, courts often allow collectively bargained limits (like NFL salary caps), but the NCAA lacks collective bargaining with athletes. That distinction cuts both ways:
- It means athletes could more easily challenge limits.
- But the NCAA might argue it’s ensuring amateurism and preserving its nonprofit mission—a defense courts have historically accepted, though less so in recent years.
3. A Lawsuit Is Likely Eventually
Here’s what legal analysts expect:
- A high-profile lawsuit challenging FMV enforcement or NIL restrictions is very likely once the House settlement takes effect.
- It might involve a top earner (e.g. Olivia Dunne or Shedeur Sanders) or a deep-pocketed booster willing to test the limits.
Bottom Line
- Yes, an athlete or booster could sue if they feel NIL regulations unlawfully restrict income.
- But the outcome would depend on legal strategy, timing, whether the athlete opted out of the settlement, and how courts interpret the NCAA’s authority under antitrust law.
Let me know if you want a rundown of which courts or precedents might matter most in such a case.
