I've read a few articles, and am having a tough time figuring out how all of the is actually going to work. Can anyone recommend a website with a good and clear explanation of how the payment/cap system will work going forward?

If it were just football, or even men's basketball, it would be pretty easy to understand. But the whole "title IX" still applies concept, and statements in some articles that "all student athletes will be paid, regardless of sport" are mucking up my understanding.

MaxPower said:

---

No, just removed the amateur from amateur student athlete

---

The NCAA lost control of its misuse of shamateurism…

for past payments: there will be something set up that values the amount of NIL, then assigns that person a portion of the settlement. A QB is going to likely get more than a girl's lacrosse player

for future payments: no one knows how its going to work. thats up to the schools to figure out.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Bag said:

---

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

---

I have heard this talking point for a few months, is there any legs to this or is this fear mongering? I simply do not see the value for the schools to keep paying some 26 year old.

---

you don't see the value of Johnny Football spending a decade in college station making $15m a year in Salary + NIL?

I've done exactly 38 seconds of research on the topic outside of Texags, and I quickly got bored and scrolled past all of y'all's responses, so by Texags standards, I'm basically now an expert. Thus, please take what I'm about to say as gospel.

Am I wrong in thinking that this cap is only the revenue share and we and other schools still have at our disposal NIL deals not (officially) arranged by the schools? As in, exactly how players were getting paid the past few years. I don't think the NCAA can do away with that, can they? The revenue share would be in addition to it?

Read the thread.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Read the thread.

---

Moe, if you read the thread you'll even get to see a sip get owned as a bonus to kick things off. And you'll also get an idea of how many sip trolls frequent this site by the number of stars on his failed post. Enjoy.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Read the thread.

---

Sorry. No longer have the attention span.

(Actually, I did keep reading and found your excellent recap and now understand that we'll be back to under-the-table deals like the good old days. Boosters will always pay-to-play whether it is out in the open like NIL has been up until this point or under the table like it used to be and I think will be again. No school with money truly wants a level playing field.)

So…Johnny's coming back?

Bag said:

---

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Bag said:

---

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

---

I have heard this talking point for a few months, is there any legs to this or is this fear mongering? I simply do not see the value for the schools to keep paying some 26 year old.

---

you don't see the value of Johnny Football spending a decade in college station making $15m a year in Salary + NIL?

---

I see that point, however it become very expensive for boosters to have a player or players on the payroll commanding that much money. At that point non-university payroll is north of $30 million per year, boosters see zero financial return on investment unlike pro team that sees return on payroll. It is the same issue as last week prior to this ruling; boosters aren't going to fund these $20+ million payrolls every single season when they do not see any financial return. The odds of players having unlimited eligibility seem very low for a variety of reasons.

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't think there is really any argument that title IX is not still applicable.

kessler knows this. probably has another class action ready to go the minute these payments start being made

---

If future revenue shares are based on "true NIL" does Title IX apply?

For NIL not done through school, title IX does not apply.

What got Oregon in lawsuit was the school pushing NIL opportunities to males and not females.

greg.w.h said:

---

General Jack D. Ripper said:

---

I the ncaa's gravy train is over. What purpose do they serve now? Except for the title games they do very little.

---

So $20 million out of almost $200 in good years before the cfp kicks in will destroy the ncaa? Me thinks that's ludicrous…

---

Me thinks you are full of yourself

Great news! But I don't think Universities wanted this dirty little secret out about their HUGE PROFITS and ability to pay players directly, because now they no longer have an excuse for sucking on the tit of generous donors! The TMF tag just became worthless!

Indianrider said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

General Jack D. Ripper said:

---

I the ncaa's gravy train is over. What purpose do they serve now? Except for the title games they do very little.

---

So $20 million out of almost $200 in good years before the cfp kicks in will destroy the ncaa? Me thinks that's ludicrous…

---

Me thinks you are full of yourself

---

Possibly. But that sounds like name calling so you lost.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Bag said:

---

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

---

I have heard this talking point for a few months, is there any legs to this or is this fear mongering? I simply do not see the value for the schools to keep paying some 26 year old.

---

Why not? Schools are just bringing in paid mercenaries anyway. If we could have paid Johnny to win a bunch on year 6, 7, 8- we would have...

And it's gonna be the kid(s) that bring down the eligibility wall via more lawsuits... Once it's knocked down- of course schools will hang on to guys that can get them more wins - if the kid's not NFL bound..

Bill Superman said:

---

$20mil seems like a good enough number for now and will level the playing field to a degree.

It should make these NIL numbers more reasonable too. Wonder if sip can still pay Ewers and them eleventy billion or whatever they claimed.

---

This is collusive behavior by the NCAA. They do not have an anti-trust exemption so it will be illegal for them to enforce a limit on what the individual athletes can secure from NIL. They can maybe use this cap to limit what NCAA member institutions spend...but it will in no way limit total NIL for players.

Big $ schools will continue to have independent booster NIL groups who will continue to spend more than they should....just like today. This changes nothing except it might allow for some universities to funnel some amount of institutional money into the athletic program and tag some of it specifically for NIL.

So who is leaching off whom ? Players off school brands or school brands off players ? I think the former. If they don't fix the unlimited free agency the sport is close to ruined. I'd rather watch real student athletes play n let the minor leaguers go play for the Corpus Christi renegades of the Texas league

College Station Aggies.

Aston04 said:

---

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Bag said:

---

so, now the question becomes, why have eligibility at all?

Next to go is this concept of Freshman, Soph, Jr. Sr.

If a kid just wants to play SEC play forever, then let him. Imagine how many years Johnny could have played for TAMU? 8-9 years?

The power 5 should go toe to toe with the NFL.

The list of great SEC players that never made it in the NFL is long and distinguished, they could have just stayed in college forever and raked in great money

---

I have heard this talking point for a few months, is there any legs to this or is this fear mongering? I simply do not see the value for the schools to keep paying some 26 year old.

---

Why not? Schools are just bringing in paid mercenaries anyway. If we could have paid Johnny to win a bunch on year 6, 7, 8- we would have...

And it's gonna be the kid(s) that bring down the eligibility wall via more lawsuits... Once it's knocked down- of course schools will hang on to guys that can get them more wins - if the kid's not NFL bound..

---

To be clear: the NCAA already lost the suit on competitiveness of educational benefits 9-0 in NCAA v. Alston. That decision installed a maximum additional payment up to $5,980 per annum hat each school could additionally grant above the original grants-in-aid derived from cost of attendance. So of a group of students wanted to pursue working n PhDs at school expense it's not unreasonable that based on that previous decision a lower court would grant it.

Exception might be conferences like the Ivies that just don't allow a fourth year of eligibility under any circumstance. The narrow four-year window has been extended already by schools, after all, for THEIR benefit…

Yeah, seems this only makes sense if they let student athletes unionize and collectively bargain. The federal government could pass a law and make the NCAA a true governing body but I still don't see how they can legally enforce players being unable to make money elsewhere. I imagine at big schools the football "payroll" is already more than $20M a year so they can't argue it's representative of market value.

So, now the players will be funding the 12th Man Foundation?

Now that "student athletes" will be paid by the school, the description of amateur for said "student athlete" goes away, doesn't it? So the "student athlete" is now a professional.
So, can a MLB player who gets sent to minor leagues decide to play college ball again?
Can a NFL player who was cut from the roster come back to college and play?
They're all professionals now.

This is collusive behavior by the NCAA. They do not have an anti-trust exemption. . . YET

Prohibiting anyone from making money by accepting a role with an entity should quite obviously not be a thing we allow

Eligibility, however, don't see a fundamental issue there. You don't have a right to work

Aginnebraska said:

---

Bill Superman said:

---

$20mil seems like a good enough number for now and will level the playing field to a degree.

It should make these NIL numbers more reasonable too. Wonder if sip can still pay Ewers and them eleventy billion or whatever they claimed.

---

This is collusive behavior by the NCAA. They do not have an anti-trust exemption so it will be illegal for them to enforce a limit on what the individual athletes can secure from NIL. They can maybe use this cap to limit what NCAA member institutions spend...but it will in no way limit total NIL for players.

Big $ schools will continue to have independent booster NIL groups who will continue to spend more than they should....just like today. This changes nothing except it might allow for some universities to funnel some amount of institutional money into the athletic program and tag some of it specifically for NIL.

---

I'm my humble former A&M athlete's opinion, as long as an athlete is enrolled in an institution making progress toward graduation, then they should be allowed to compete in athletics as well. They could be there for 12 years. They could be a 35 year old former NFL guy who goes back to school. It doesn't matter.

Quote:

---

Must be "true NIL" based on developed "fair market value" data

---

Interesting choice of words………. These kids now have a "market value.

In an effort to avoid schools having bagmen in the future, I think there should be some entity with which every school has to release all NIL information. Maybe that's the NCAA or another entity. Just a thought...

Youknowwho777 said:

---

ima get **** for this lol but why does every single post that's made on here within the first 4 comments/responses it has a comment towards Texas? Yes...hate me ..im a "SIP" family went to ATM. Brother and Mom to ATM and sister and dad to Texas. Im at Texas currently. SO excited to play you guys again. One of my all time fav rivalries growing up and i was sad to see the powers above fcked it for all of us. But i just had to ask..why is within 4 comments of a threat "SIPS" come up lol just seems...idk odd..rent free kinda thing.

anyways im sure im going to get shyt on after this..but best of luck to yall next season..how cool would it be to have a undefeated ATM and undefeated Texas on the last game of the year? I know Kyle field will be rocking and i will be there in my Orange.


anyways, from a friendly "SIP" cant wait to play you guys again.

---

rightfully so you will get ***** You perpetuated your own stigma to further your argument. Not too smart are you?

Well, schools may pay players directly bit you cannot limit NIL. That cat is out of the bag. So you can have star QB get laid a million bucks by school but that QB can make several million more in NIL.

W said:

---

and of course...

does Title IX apply to this $20 MM ?

---

So $10 million to revenue sports and $10 million to sports nobody cares about. Too funny!

The settlement doesn't solve all of the NCAA's most pressing problems. The association faces other antitrust cases, and still has three legal challenges looming over whether athletes should be classed as employees. There are also ongoing questions about the NCAA's ability to maintain competitive balance, as it is regularly sued over its rules, and state laws in about half the country have overridden it on athletes' ability to profit from their name, image and likeness.

NCAA Agrees to Share Revenue With Athletes in Landmark $2.8 Billion Settlement - WSJ

yes, this is one big problem that is not getting fixed

football still has to carry all the women's sports

Pay them to walk-on. Be like Francionne days with almost half the team starting being walk-ons; except different.

Sure sweetie