ActualTalkingThermos said:

---

ghowe said:

---

The problem is not disparity among teammates, it's disparity among programs. I think in theory players making a buck or two on NIL is fine, but some of you are being naive about how this might play out. Programs with deep packet donors will have a tremendously unfair advantage over poorer programs.

---

Can you imagine a college football landscape where only a handful of programs with deep pockets have any real chance of contending for a championship? Just imagine how pointless it would all feel if before the season even started you knew that Bama, Clemson, and Ohio State would probably be 3 of the 4 teams in the playoff.

---

I'm trying, but I'm having trouble engaging my imagination.

Money & winning are not related.

94chem said:

---

Shouldn't get a dollar until they graduate. Treat them like contractors. Scholarship is up-front payment, any residuals are paid upon completion of the contract, which includes playing when healthy, and completing a degree. After 6 years, accounts pay negative interest.

---

AWESOME take!!!!!!

rootube said:

---

So his premise is that it's not fair that some players image and likeness is more valuable than others? I like Charles a lot, but he has basically been cashing in on his image and likeness his entire professional career. I don't see him setting up a pension fund for utility NBA players not able to collect on their image and likeness.

---

Did you watch the interview? You're countering something he did not say with something he did say.

Quote:

---

What regulators? The NCAA, universities, corporations, Congress......

---

Yes. Currently, nobody even knows how much money gets passed under the table. A regulator cannot regulate if it does not know the scope.

Agsuffering@bulaw said:

---

Quote:

---

What regulators? The NCAA, universities, corporations, Congress......

---

Yes. Currently, nobody even knows how much money gets passed under the table. A regulator cannot regulate if it does not know the scope.

---

Y'all are going under the assumption all illegal payments would stop once this system is in place so that you could regulate it. That is naive in my opinion.

You telling me 69's won't be sold out?

"Charles Barkley weighs in..."

at about 350, I'd guess. No wonder he feels for the big ugly linemen.

nu awlins ag said:

---

94chem said:

---

Shouldn't get a dollar until they graduate. Treat them like contractors. Scholarship is up-front payment, any residuals are paid upon completion of the contract, which includes playing when healthy, and completing a degree. After 6 years, accounts pay negative interest.

---

AWESOME take!!!!!!

---

I posted this on another thread:
I've always felt if they follow thru with this, there should be a mandate for all schools to escrow the money until they finish their degree, and not cut em any checks until after they receive their diploma.
Or if they do, it's a small stipend that's uniform for every player, and draws against their individual balance.

If they transfer, it's forfeited, returns to the school's fund, and they start over wherever they land.

If they leave early for the NFL, they've got 5 years to finish their degree, otherwise it's forfeited and returned to school's fund.

Print all of their names on $5 T-Shirts. Charge $50 each and send $40 to players, divided equally. The shirts for kids charity thing is great, too. Sell those at $20 and buy so many that so many every kid in a Title I school Texas gets a t-shirt. Get them rooting for us early.

Harry Lime said:

---

rootube said:

---

So his premise is that it's not fair that some players image and likeness is more valuable than others? I like Charles a lot, but he has basically been cashing in on his image and likeness his entire professional career. I don't see him setting up a pension fund for utility NBA players not able to collect on their image and likeness.

---

Did you watch the interview? You're countering something he did not say with something he did say.

---

Yes I listened to the entire thing and my point is valid. On one hand he is saying it's not fair to players who don't have image and likeness value and will create resentment. He also makes the same dumb comment about the value of education. Then somehow uses himself and Bo Jackson as the example. Two of the most marketable athletes in history who are still cashing in on their image and likeness. Just pay people what they are worth now. It works in every aspect of our capitalist society. I promise you it will work here too.

itsyourboypookie said:

---

Big uglys will be fine.

Women won't make jack *****

Then we will hear it's because they are women blah blah blah

---

Watch athletic departments start selling calendars and such for the women's sports. Perhaps they already do that, and I'm just not aware

Barkley is awesome.

My favorite personality in pro sports.

In-home recruiting visits will now very likely include agents hired by elite recruits parent(s) to negotiate the NIL portion of the commitment deal. Written and signed contracts are a likely end-product, perhaps with guaranteed income and incentives clauses.

The big programs will be required to greatly expand the financial aspect of recruitment, to the detriment of programs with limited resources. Moreover, scholarship limits will be ineffective as an artificial means of encouraging competitive balance among teams.

I seriously doubt that this approach is the answer to the question of compensating the players, but even a stumbling start gets people off the starting line.

12thMan9 said:

---

Money & winning are not related.

---

Of course they are. Spending money clearly doesn't guarantee winning, but nobody is going to win the NC without having invested hundreds of millions in facilities and coaches and support staff etc.