We use the letters NIL without really considering how an individual’s name, image, and likeness is profitable. That sounds more like an employee (or at least an independent contractor).
NIL op ed
- Thread starter GoldCy
- Start date
They are independent contractors for the NIL. They get 1099's from the cooperatives and are not w-2 wage earners. At this point in time, they are a student athlete and that is their only legal relationship with the university.
As I was reading this thread, the independent contractor theme kept going through my mind. Think of the athlete as providing a service (athletic competition) similar to a lawn care company providing mowing and snow removal. We determine a value of that service based on the competitive landscape and sign a contract for the upcoming year to provide that service. At the end of that term, we again negotiate an agreeable amount to provide the next years required service. Sometimes the contractor will not perform to expectation and will be replaced or the contractor will determine they no longer want to provide that service for the price offered. This compares to an athlete getting recruited over or choosing to enter the transfer portal. This would be much cleaner than designating athletes as employees. If they become employees, it would also open the door for unions, agents, and attorneys to come in and grab their share of the money pot all in the name of "helping".
What NIL did was stop restricting an athletes ability to make money. The major winner was allowing athletes to profit off their social media accounts and secure brand deals.
Right. NIL has very little to do with “name, image and likeness” and it was apparent before it was approved that it was primarily going to be a way for rich donors to funnel cash directly to players under a legal guise. Miami is the best example, where mega donor John Ortiz is handing out big contracts to players. No one in Miami’s fanbase ever heard of Nigel Pack until Ortiz signed him to a 2 year, $800,000 deal.
All of us have-nots are one rich alum (or a few) away from being at the table. There would be a lot less concern on this board if we had even a mini-Ortiz bringing players in. Unfortunately I don’t see that ever happening at Iowa State.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,283
- 29,708
- 113
The NCAA's only hope is a federal law exempting them from anti trust laws, so the traditional model can live on (in some twisted form) for a little longer. But that just isn't the way the wind is blowing.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,283
- 29,708
- 113
Will be interesting to see if it goes anywhere. From the article, it looks like it's more about protecting the athlete's interest than it is about protecting the school's. I suspect the devil is in the details, though. Unless the NCAA comes out in opposition to this, I would expect that there's plenty of protection for them in the bill as well.
I guess out of all of this is the one thing I don’t want to hear is Lane Kiffin and other SEC coaches whining about how NIL and money in general is destroying college athletics. Whether it is or isn’t I don’t exactly want to hear the people benefiting the most from the system talk about it.
Lane whinning about NIL when he has chased the money his entire life is f’ing hilarious.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,283
- 29,708
- 113
Reese is one thing but “smoking hot blonde makes money on Instagram” isn’t exactly new news
Edit** and tiktok
Last edited:
