Connect with us
https://yoursportsnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/call-to-1.png

NIL

Wisconsin files suit against Miami for poaching Xavier Lucas while he was under contract with school

In a landmark moment in college athletics, one university has filed suit against another for the poaching of a college football player under contract. The University of Wisconsin and its NIL collective filed a complaint in state circuit court on Friday against the University of Miami over alleged tortious interference, according to documents obtained by […]

Published

on


In a landmark moment in college athletics, one university has filed suit against another for the poaching of a college football player under contract.

The University of Wisconsin and its NIL collective filed a complaint in state circuit court on Friday against the University of Miami over alleged tortious interference, according to documents obtained by Yahoo Sports.

Advertisement

In a first-of-its-kind and, perhaps, a precedent-setting move, Wisconsin is seeking unspecified damages, transparency and accountability from Miami for allegedly interfering with a binding revenue-share contract between Wisconsin and Xavier Lucas, a former defensive back who left the program in January to compete at Miami. It was a groundbreaking decision in which Lucas transferred without entering the portal (it had already closed) and after signing the contract with the Badgers.

The lawsuit details what transpired in the winter among the three parties: Wisconsin, Miami and Lucas. Wisconsin claims that Miami communicated with Lucas despite knowing he had entered a contract with the school, something it terms as “intentional” interference that “was not justified or privileged” and caused Lucas to “breach” his contract.

“Miami interfered with UW-Madison’s relationship with Student-Athlete A (Lucas) by making impermissible contact with him and engaging in tampering,” the suit says.

Wisconsin released a statement to Yahoo Sports on Friday, saying that it “reluctantly” filed the suit and that it is “committed to ensuring integrity and fundamental fairness in the evolving landscape of college athletics.” The university is not bringing legal action against Lucas.

Advertisement

The Big Ten Conference is supporting the suit against Miami.

“We stand by our position that respecting and enforcing contractual obligations is essential to maintaining a level playing field,” the statement said. “In addition to our legal acton, we will continue to be proactive to protect the interests of our student-athletes, our program and the broader collegiate athletics community.”

The case is poised to set precedent in the ability for schools to enforce tampering clauses within revenue-sharing agreements that were contingent on the House settlement’s passage. The settlement, the mechanism introducing athlete revenue sharing, was approved June 6.

Over the last several months, dozens of schools have signed players to revenue-share deals contingent on the settlement’s approval. Universities are intending these rev-share contracts to be binding documents that eliminate tampering and slow transfer movement.

Advertisement

The suit strikes at the heart of one of the festering issues within the industry: schools tampering and, ultimately, poaching athletes from other programs. While against NCAA rules, the enforcement of tampering has drawn little to no action from NCAA investigators who are hamstrung by court orders.

However, inside this new world of college sports, contracts stand to prevent such behavior by including specific clauses. Tortious interference describes the act of interfering with a person or entity that signed a binding agreement.

Wisconsin and Lucas struck a two-year revenue-share agreement that, like all of them, was set to begin July 1, the first date that schools can begin directly compensating athletes. Because of the agreement, Wisconsin refused to enter Lucas’ name into the portal after he requested a transfer.

A freshman last season, Lucas withdrew from classes and enrolled academically at Miami in January — a move to skirt NCAA rules requiring athletes to enter the portal to communicate with another school. Lucas enrolled for the Fall 2025 semester but was reclassified to Spring 2025.

Advertisement

Lucas’ attorney, Darren Heitner, told Yahoo Sports in January that he planned to file an antitrust lawsuit against Wisconsin if Lucas was unable to complete his move to Miami. He accused Wisconsin of blatantly violating NCAA rules by not inserting Lucas’ name into the portal as he requested and questioning the legality of the NCAA’s transfer portal in general.

The revenue-share agreement, a Big Ten-issued template form, binds Lucas — and all players who sign — to that specific school and grants that school a player’s non-exclusive rights to use and market their name, image and likeness. The agreement prohibits the player’s rights to be used by any other school while permitting him or her to sign outside marking agreements, according to those familiar with the template.

Lucas, who signed last year as a four star-rated high school prospect from South Florida, played in 11 games with 18 tackles in 2024. He requested a transfer after learning while home over the holidays that his father suffered a “serious, life-threatening illness,” Heitner told Yahoo Sports in January.

Lucas’ move, though not a first, shined a more public light on the enforceability of the transfer portal. In a statement to Yahoo Sports in January, the NCAA said, “NCAA rules do not prevent a student-athlete from unenrolling from an institution, enrolling at a new institution and competing immediately” — an expected but jarring statement for those within the industry.

Advertisement

In order to transfer, a player is required to submit a transfer request inside the designated transfer portal window for his or her sport. Entering the portal is necessary as it then permits schools to contact and communicate with players. Schools are prohibited from communicating with those not in the portal as they risk violating NCAA rules related to tampering.

At the time, this was the first known public dispute between a player and school related to a revenue-share contract. As part of the NCAA and power conferences’ landmark settlement of the House antitrust case, schools are permitted to share millions in revenue with their athletes starting July 1. The revenue-share agreements are contingent on the settlement’s approval — a key clause that could make the contract unenforceable, some legal experts claim.

Advertisement

The NCAA’s transfer rules have been in the crosshairs for years now.

The association, a voluntary membership group where school leaders make the rules, has made significant changes over the years to provide athletes with more freedom of movement, some of them a result of court decisions.

For instance, a judge in the case “Ohio v. NCAA” prohibited the NCAA from enforcing a long-standing rule that required athletes to sit a year before playing at their new school.

All of this unfolds against the backdrop of possible portal changes ahead. A group of power conference administrators are exploring ways to eliminate one of the two portal windows.



Link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NIL

Nick Saban’s response to latest twist in NIL should surprise no one

President Donald Trump inserted himself into the chaos of college athletics and NIL. He signed an executive order that banned third-party payments to athletes without “fair-market” contracts. Legendary broadcaster Tim Brando has already praised the new executive order, but now also from arguably college football’s greatest coach, Nick Saban, who has been desperate for this […]

Published

on


President Donald Trump inserted himself into the chaos of college athletics and NIL. He signed an executive order that banned third-party payments to athletes without “fair-market” contracts. Legendary broadcaster Tim Brando has already praised the new executive order, but now also from arguably college football’s greatest coach, Nick Saban, who has been desperate for this sort of reform for a long time.

It’s not surprising to see Saban support this new executive order from the President, as he’s been one of the strongest advocates of keeping the educational aspect of college athletics as the primary focus.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

July 28, 2025 – Bulldawg Illustrated

Jump To Top of Page The Pitch That Wins: “Get Paid Now, Get Rich Later” In the high-stakes world of college athletics, the University of Georgia is selling more than just a scholarship. Its pitch: “Get paid now, get rich later.” Behind the slogan lies a deliberate, long-game NIL strategy that blends smart financial allocation, culture-driven recruiting and athlete […]

Published

on


Jump To Top of Page

The Pitch That Wins: “Get Paid Now, Get Rich Later”

In the high-stakes world of college athletics, the University of Georgia is selling more than just a scholarship. Its pitch: “Get paid now, get rich later.” Behind the slogan lies a deliberate, long-game NIL strategy that blends smart financial allocation, culture-driven recruiting and athlete branding infrastructure.

In June 2025, Georgia Athletics teamed with Learfield Impact to launch an independent, full-service NIL agency, integrated with Georgia Bulldogs Sports Marketing. The partnership provides UGA athletes with an elite toolkit for building brands, securing endorsements, and accessing long-term income—all while remaining aligned with University systems and collective oversight.

This move builds on the Classic City Collective, a pioneering organization that helped define the University of Georgia’s NIL ecosystem. Georgia chose to keep its own collective active—unlike many peer institutions that are winding theirs down—signaling an intentional focus on “above-the-cap” compensation via legitimate marketing and licensing deals beyond the NCAA’s standard revenue-share cap of $20.5 million per year.

Head coach Kirby Smart has made Georgia’s NIL philosophy uncompromisingly clear: pay what athletes are worth—but don’t overpay, especially for early-career players. He emphasizes relationships over transactions, favoring loyalty and program fit above big short-term payouts.

Inside fan forums, supporters describe UGA’s NIL approach as consistently investing in players already in the program, rather than splurging on portal or transfer athletes or “mercenaries.” One standard analysis: “While other teams are blowing much of their NIL by signing mercenaries off the Portal, UGA is spending to keep the guys they’ve invested in via development.” That strategy aligns with the revenue-sharing cap environment: rather than maxing out a few megadeals, Georgia spreads its NIL dollars across multiple athletes, reinforcing depth, culture, and long-term value.

Georgia understands that player turnover is costly.

Recent NIL resources have been invested in retaining stars who might otherwise leave via the transfer portal. For example, when rumors swirled about player departures, UGA reportedly provided incentives to keep key contributors on the roster. That approach preserves continuity, fosters trust, and builds a team identity, contrasting with programs that chase immediate success by purchasing experienced portal talent.

During SEC Media Days, Smart acknowledged Georgia occasionally loses out on recruits due to smaller NIL packages. One high-profile case: five-star in-state defensive lineman Justus Terry chose Texas over Georgia, citing a bigger NIL offer. Yet Smart sees this as evidence—not weakness—that Georgia’s emphasis on development and suit-fit trumps transactional offers.

Despite such losses, Georgia has signed four straight top-4 recruiting classes, including the No. 1 class in 2024 and No. 2 in 2025, and leads the chase for 2026. That track record suggests the message—relationships over transactions—resonates with players of character who see UGA as a path to pro success beyond immediate NIL dollars.

With new NCAA regulations capping revenue-share at $20.5 million and banning overly big NIL contracts that resemble pay-for-play (contracts above $600 trigger scrutiny), many schools are winding down their collectives. However, Georgia is bucking that trend, doubling down on above-cap deals through brand licensure and sponsorship, rather than performance-based payouts.

On July 24, 2025, a federal executive order was signed banning third-party, booster-sourced NIL payments used as recruiting inducements, while allowing fair-market endorsement deals. That national guardrail underscores why Georgia’s carefully structured model, rooted in transparency and legitimate marketing, may be more resilient moving forward.

This multi-layered strategy serves several goals: Athlete brand building via professional marketing support. Draft prep and exposure, making players pro-ready with strong off-field platforms. Roster stability, via investments in loyalty. Competitive depth is achieved by deploying NIL across multiple players, rather than relying on a few stars. Institutional alignment, giving Georgia complete oversight and brand integration, not leaving NIL to boosters or third parties.

The payoff is both on-field dominance—back-to-back national titles—and off-field value, as Bulldogs build long-term partnerships that outlast eligibility.

Georgia’s pitch is clear: if you buy into the culture and development model—if you stay loyal and work off and on the field—today’s NIL earnings are just the start. Tomorrow brings bigger returns: professional contracts, long-term endorsement deals, and life after UGA success.

In this context, “Get Paid Now” means athletes are compensated in market-value deals early in their careers. But “Get Rich Later” reflects Georgia’s belief that successful development, exposure, national championships, and personal branding ultimately deliver far more than one-time megadeals.

UGA’s NIL strategy is not about knee-jerk, big-money deals. It is a purposeful, multi-layered plan blending institutional infrastructure, athlete support, cultural alignment, recruitment messaging, and brand partnerships. They’re selling something bigger than endorsement checks—a sustainable blueprint for success: win today, build tomorrow.

Georgia’s pitch wins by offering athletes a clear path: earn immediate NIL, but invest in development, identity, and loyalty, and you’ll “get rich later.”

Jump To Today’s Discussion Thread



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

TABLE

Jul 28 (Reuters)- Koei Tecmo Holdings Co., Ltd. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (in billions of yen unless specified) 3 months ended 3 months ended Year to Jun 30, 2025 Jun 30, 2024 Mar 31, 2026 LATEST YEAR-AGO LATEST RESULTS RESULTS FORECAST Sales 14.80 17.61 92.00 (-15.9 pct) (-3.8 pct) (+10.6 pct) Operating 3.57 5.72 31.00 (-37.5 pct) (-23.8 pct) […]

Published

on

Jul 28 (Reuters)- Koei Tecmo Holdings Co., Ltd. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (in billions of yen unless specified) 3 months ended 3 months ended Year to Jun 30, 2025 Jun 30, 2024 Mar 31, 2026 LATEST YEAR-AGO LATEST RESULTS RESULTS FORECAST Sales 14.80 17.61 92.00 (-15.9 pct) (-3.8 pct) (+10.6 pct) Operating 3.57 5.72 31.00 (-37.5 pct) (-23.8 pct) (-3.5 pct) Recurring 8.77 18.70 37.00 (-53.1 pct) (+27.3 pct) (-26.0 pct) Net 6.07 13.64 27.00 (-55.5 pct) (+29.2 pct) (-28.2 pct) EPS 19.23 yen 43.18 yen 85.49 yen EPS Diluted 19.20 yen 40.50 yen Ann Div 60.00 yen 43.00 yen -Q2 div NIL NIL -Q4 div 60.00 yen 43.00 yen NOTE – Koei Tecmo Holdings Co., Ltd.. To see Company Overview page, click reuters://REALTIME/verb=CompanyData/ric=3635.T

Continue Reading

NIL

Daily Dawg Thread

Jump To Top of Page The Pitch That Wins: “Get Paid Now, Get Rich Later” In the high-stakes world of college athletics, the University of Georgia is selling more than just a scholarship. Its pitch: “Get paid now, get rich later.” Behind the slogan lies a deliberate, long-game NIL strategy that blends smart financial allocation, culture-driven recruiting and athlete […]

Published

on

Daily Dawg Thread

Jump To Top of Page

The Pitch That Wins: “Get Paid Now, Get Rich Later”

In the high-stakes world of college athletics, the University of Georgia is selling more than just a scholarship. Its pitch: “Get paid now, get rich later.” Behind the slogan lies a deliberate, long-game NIL strategy that blends smart financial allocation, culture-driven recruiting and athlete branding infrastructure.

In June 2025, Georgia Athletics teamed with Learfield Impact to launch an independent, full-service NIL agency, integrated with Georgia Bulldogs Sports Marketing. The partnership provides UGA athletes with an elite toolkit for building brands, securing endorsements, and accessing long-term income—all while remaining aligned with University systems and collective oversight.

This move builds on the Classic City Collective, a pioneering organization that helped define the University of Georgia’s NIL ecosystem. Georgia chose to keep its own collective active—unlike many peer institutions that are winding theirs down—signaling an intentional focus on “above-the-cap” compensation via legitimate marketing and licensing deals beyond the NCAA’s standard revenue-share cap of $20.5 million per year.

Head coach Kirby Smart has made Georgia’s NIL philosophy uncompromisingly clear: pay what athletes are worth—but don’t overpay, especially for early-career players. He emphasizes relationships over transactions, favoring loyalty and program fit above big short-term payouts.

Inside fan forums, supporters describe UGA’s NIL approach as consistently investing in players already in the program, rather than splurging on portal or transfer athletes or “mercenaries.” One standard analysis: “While other teams are blowing much of their NIL by signing mercenaries off the Portal, UGA is spending to keep the guys they’ve invested in via development.” That strategy aligns with the revenue-sharing cap environment: rather than maxing out a few megadeals, Georgia spreads its NIL dollars across multiple athletes, reinforcing depth, culture, and long-term value.

Georgia understands that player turnover is costly.

Recent NIL resources have been invested in retaining stars who might otherwise leave via the transfer portal. For example, when rumors swirled about player departures, UGA reportedly provided incentives to keep key contributors on the roster. That approach preserves continuity, fosters trust, and builds a team identity, contrasting with programs that chase immediate success by purchasing experienced portal talent.

During SEC Media Days, Smart acknowledged Georgia occasionally loses out on recruits due to smaller NIL packages. One high-profile case: five-star in-state defensive lineman Justus Terry chose Texas over Georgia, citing a bigger NIL offer. Yet Smart sees this as evidence—not weakness—that Georgia’s emphasis on development and suit-fit trumps transactional offers.

Despite such losses, Georgia has signed four straight top-4 recruiting classes, including the No. 1 class in 2024 and No. 2 in 2025, and leads the chase for 2026. That track record suggests the message—relationships over transactions—resonates with players of character who see UGA as a path to pro success beyond immediate NIL dollars.

With new NCAA regulations capping revenue-share at $20.5 million and banning overly big NIL contracts that resemble pay-for-play (contracts above $600 trigger scrutiny), many schools are winding down their collectives. However, Georgia is bucking that trend, doubling down on above-cap deals through brand licensure and sponsorship, rather than performance-based payouts.

On July 24, 2025, a federal executive order was signed banning third-party, booster-sourced NIL payments used as recruiting inducements, while allowing fair-market endorsement deals. That national guardrail underscores why Georgia’s carefully structured model, rooted in transparency and legitimate marketing, may be more resilient moving forward.

This multi-layered strategy serves several goals: Athlete brand building via professional marketing support. Draft prep and exposure, making players pro-ready with strong off-field platforms. Roster stability, via investments in loyalty. Competitive depth is achieved by deploying NIL across multiple players, rather than relying on a few stars. Institutional alignment, giving Georgia complete oversight and brand integration, not leaving NIL to boosters or third parties.

The payoff is both on-field dominance—back-to-back national titles—and off-field value, as Bulldogs build long-term partnerships that outlast eligibility.

Georgia’s pitch is clear: if you buy into the culture and development model—if you stay loyal and work off and on the field—today’s NIL earnings are just the start. Tomorrow brings bigger returns: professional contracts, long-term endorsement deals, and life after UGA success.

In this context, “Get Paid Now” means athletes are compensated in market-value deals early in their careers. But “Get Rich Later” reflects Georgia’s belief that successful development, exposure, national championships, and personal branding ultimately deliver far more than one-time megadeals.

UGA’s NIL strategy is not about knee-jerk, big-money deals. It is a purposeful, multi-layered plan blending institutional infrastructure, athlete support, cultural alignment, recruitment messaging, and brand partnerships. They’re selling something bigger than endorsement checks—a sustainable blueprint for success: win today, build tomorrow.

Georgia’s pitch wins by offering athletes a clear path: earn immediate NIL, but invest in development, identity, and loyalty, and you’ll “get rich later.”

Jump To Today’s Discussion Thread

Continue Reading

NIL

Crypto Sponsorships in Sports

Cryptocurrency firms invest aggressively in sports, locking up stadium deals, jerseys and athlete sponsorship. But are the agreements sustainable partnerships or hype-seeking in a volatile sector? Cryptocurrency’s spread in the world of sports has really not been easy to avoid. Blockchain enterprises emblazoned across teams’ uniforms, stadium naming rights sponsored by crypto and the connection […]

Published

on

Crypto Sponsorships in Sports

Cryptocurrency firms invest aggressively in sports, locking up stadium deals, jerseys and athlete sponsorship. But are the agreements sustainable partnerships or hype-seeking in a volatile sector?

Cryptocurrency’s spread in the world of sports has really not been easy to avoid. Blockchain enterprises emblazoned across teams’ uniforms, stadium naming rights sponsored by crypto and the connection between sports entertainment and virtual currency have become more overt. However, as the degree of trust in the sector ebbs and flows, the eyes are now only on whether the arrangements constitute long-term investment planning or short-term marketing stunts.

While sponsorships have really given crypto sites widespread coverage, online market volatility remains a wildcard. The Bitcoin price live at high-profile events frequently reflects popular interest boosts, illustrating the extent to which fan sentiment tracks headlines in financial news.

A Surge in Crypto Branding Across Major Leagues

From Formula 1 to European football, the crypto branding boom has changed the sponsorship landscape of professional sports. Multi-million-dollar contracts have placed crypto exchanges, wallet platforms and NFT startups center stage among global audiences.

In the Premier League, Serie A, UFC and NBA, blockchain-backed firms have struck high-profile deals for shirt sponsorships, virtual fan tokens and sports star endorsements. The aim is real-time access to active audiences, often geographically dispersed and tech-savvy. As the value of bitcoin live usually trends in real-time sports events on social media, crypto visibility in stadiums and broadcasts keeps pace with real-time audience engagement.

Nonetheless, not all of these collaborations have gone smoothly. Certain clubs and leagues have suspended or withdrawn from crypto agreements due to concerns of volatility, unclear deliverables or adverse fan reception. These contradictions have raised questions concerning the long-term sustainability of crypto-sports convergence.

Stadium Naming Rights

Arguably, the most daring uses of crypto’s presence in sports have come through stadium naming rights agreements. In various markets, blockchain companies have made multi-decade deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars to create a permanent presence in the sports space.

These deals, while sensational, are at the mercy of the market. Some deals have had to be renegotiated or terminated prematurely due to declining valuations, leadership changes or increased local regulation. Due to the allure of mainstream acceptability, these disappointments demonstrate a potential disconnection between crypto’s future potential longevity and practical application.

However, in some instances, naming agreements have continued to make headlines, as logos are used in broadcasts and products internationally. The latest price of bitcoin at premier game times has often become a subject of discussion, confirming the presence of the digital economy in today’s fan culture, even as the fate of the collaborations remains unpredictable.

Athlete Endorsements and Performance-Based Deals

Sponsorships of individual sports have also been another significant crypto playbook move. Universal football, tennis, basketball and combat sport deals have brought crypto branding directly to millions of Twitter fans and television audiences.

These sponsorships vary from advertising campaigns to more experimental deals in which the athletes are paid in virtual currencies or endorse individual NFTs. The short-term marketing reach cannot be denied, but the long-term brand effect relies greatly upon mutual trust, market sentiment and reception among the people.

These athlete endorsements of blockchain products now have reputational risk to manage. Should the market fall or platforms fail to deliver the touted utility, they can count on backlash. Nonetheless, some athletes have rising crypto activity when the Bitcoin live price happens in conjunction with favorable publicity, which makes the connection between financial education and athletic prowess more overt.

Mixed Signals from the Global Community

Reception among fans of crypto sponsorships has varied. Virtual currencies are viewed as a badge of financial emancipation and innovation in some sectors. In others, mistrust persists due to past controversies, regulatory fears or misunderstandings of the protocol itself.

Clubs implementing fan tokens, for example, have cited resistance when the purported gains, like casting club decisions via vote or receiving exclusive content, fail to meet expectations. Fans are usually open to the idea if the communication and implementation are transparent. But unforeseen token price swings or sponsorship volatility can breed mistrust.

Bitcoin price often becomes the gauge of common sentiment, particularly if the swings occur around major sporting events. The ever-present tension between risk and innovation continues to define the future of crypto entities in the sporting landscape.

What’s Next for Crypto in Sports?

The future of sports crypto sponsorships has wide-ranging potential. Market forces, technological breakthroughs and regulatory clarity will all decide the longevity of the deals. The initial crypto branding boom has generated awareness, but the future stage may be subject to enduring utility, clarity and flexibility.

Newer applications are beginning to materialize, including blockchain-based ticket systems, virtual collectibles and smart contract merchandise licenses. These usages foreshadow a more integrally embedded use of crypto beyond the simplest of logos and taglines.

Whether the cost of bitcoin rises or falls, the sports-decentralized finance experiment has already left its mark. The real challenge, however, lies in transitioning from hype to impact—the fact that the connection between the two universes represents something more than a temporary trend.

The post Crypto Sponsorships in Sports appeared first on Stadium Rant.

Continue Reading

NIL

5 Reasons President Donald Trump’s “Save College Sports’ Order Will Backfire

By passing legislation via Congress, US President Donald Trump has issued a “Save College Sports” executive order. As with most topics in which Trump weighs in, a storm of commentary, both pro and anti, has erupted. Here are a few potential snags in this order. Dive into Try out PFSN’s FREE college football playoff predictor, […]

Published

on


By passing legislation via Congress, US President Donald Trump has issued a “Save College Sports” executive order. As with most topics in which Trump weighs in, a storm of commentary, both pro and anti, has erupted. Here are a few potential snags in this order.

PFSN College Football Playoff Predictor
Dive into Try out PFSN’s FREE college football playoff predictor, where you can simulate every 2025-26 NFL season game and see who wins the National Championship!

5 Reasons President Donald Trump’s College Sports Order Will Backfire

Ed O'Bannon (middle) was a significant NCAA pioneer. (Photo Credit: IMAGN)
Ed O’Bannon (center) was a pioneer in the NIL arena with his suit against the NCAA, but the executive order from President Trump may ban such action. (Photo Credit: IMAGN)

1. Legal scholars indicate that the order could be vulnerable to overruling

President Trump has been aggressive in his use of executive orders, in which the President sets a government policy in the absence of any explicit legislative statement. However, executive orders in general are subject to being overturned by courts, which could render the order, in whole or in part, invalid. The uncertainty of the order will be a potential problem.

2. Trump’s decree that athletes can receive only “fair market value” from a third party is nearly unenforceable

The executive order purports to limit player compensation from third parties to only “fair market value” for services provided. In the realm of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL), trying to establish a fair market value is near impossible. All the deals will be different from one another, and an unenforceable standard might be the only thing worse than no standard.

Additionally, the order doesn’t say exactly who will determine “fair market value.” Would it be the NCAA, the applicable federal court, or President Trump himself? Stay tuned, because without any mechanism of policing, a standard is hard to justify.

3. Protections on nonrevenue scholarships are unwieldy at best

Given the Trump administration’s prior stance on Title IX, a stated protection on nonrevenue scholarships will be unwieldy for college programs to handle. Is requiring schools to maintain nonrevenue scholarship levels a de facto limitation on their NIL money spent on football and basketball?

How will alums of major football schools react when there’s not enough NIL money to fund top recruits in football and all of those nonrevenue scholarships in less popular sports?

4. Limitations on athletes as employees could push courts in the alternative direction

One of the major issues now is whether college athletes should be classified as employees. In light of the time requirement and the control over athletes’ schedules, a credible argument has been raised that athletes are employees.

However, the Trump order says otherwise, and with the pendulum swinging in favor of an employee determination, President Trump’s order may ultimately cause a court to hasten to a contrary finding.

5. NCAA lawsuit protection seems unlikely to stand

To be clear, NIL changes have been made only because of litigation from former athletes. The Trump order indicates that the NCAA will be protected against suits from former athletes. That could be significant in issues like extra seasons of eligibility, whether transfer requirements sideline athletes, and more in the contours of athlete protection. Given the interconnection of the NCAA and athletes, a ban on litigation seems unlikely to stick.

College Sports Network has you covered with the latest news, analysis, insights, and trending stories in footballbasketball, and more!



Link

Continue Reading

Most Viewed Posts

Trending