Jump to content

bootskii

Verified Member
  • Posts

    3,789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bootskii

  1. On 7/6/2021 at 2:21 PM, DAG said:

    I have to ask but wouldn't this be a pay for play situation? Reading over the bylaws from the NCAA when it comes to NIL

    https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/NIL/NIL_QandA.pdf

    Located on page 2 under question 13 its states: " Individuals and institutions in states with NIL laws or executive actions with the force of law in effect: NCAA rules, including prohibitions on pay-for-play and improper recruiting inducements, remain in effect, but NIL activities protected by state law will not impact eligibility." Some could see this as an improper recruiting inducement. Although, there is so much gray area when it comes to NIL that this could swing either ways.

  2. 1 hour ago, Mikey said:

    The NIL has turned college athletics into a bidding war. The teams with the richest boosters will get the best recruits. If say, Troy has a super-stud that was previously under-recruited, Auburn can easily triple his NIL value, so he'd be a fool not to transfer.

    The rich will get richer. A player's NIL value at Alabama will be much more then it had been being at Mississippi State, so he'll transfer if if Tuskalosers want him.

    The times have changed. I'm happy that the players get a chance to make a lot of money. (some will make a lot, others little to none).

    Anybody who doesn't believe this NIL ruling will hurt competitiveness in college athletics hasn't thought it through.

    I agree partly. I do think some recruits will go to teams with bigger brand power but I also see recruits going to schools in bigger cities such as USC/UCLA, Miami, maybe Washington since they will be in bigger markets. I mean imagine being the face of USC in LA. I know USC isn't what it used to be but in that market you could basically name your price. 

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...