|
NIL
Mar 19, 2023 15:44:48 GMT -5
Post by volleyguy on Mar 19, 2023 15:44:48 GMT -5
You asked if it was an anti-trust issue or collusion, not whether it was fair to rookies.
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 19, 2023 15:47:11 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by dodger on Mar 19, 2023 15:47:11 GMT -5
Seems like 2 groups working to keep a new group of players in an anti competitive situation!? Time for a new test to anti trust maybe.
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 19, 2023 16:03:03 GMT -5
Post by volleyguy on Mar 19, 2023 16:03:03 GMT -5
Seems like 2 groups working to keep a new group of players in an anti competitive situation!? Time for a new test to anti trust maybe. That's not as winning of an argument as you think.
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 19, 2023 22:10:08 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by dodger on Mar 19, 2023 22:10:08 GMT -5
Seems like 2 groups working to keep a new group of players in an anti competitive situation!? Time for a new test to anti trust maybe. That's not as winning of an argument as you think. Its someone else's argument that i put forth: doesnt baseball still have an anti trust exemption?
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 19, 2023 22:46:57 GMT -5
Post by volleyguy on Mar 19, 2023 22:46:57 GMT -5
That's not as winning of an argument as you think. Its someone else's argument that i put forth: doesnt baseball still have an anti trust exemption? The article doesn’t suggest it’s an anti-trust issue. Yes, baseball has had an exemption for over a century, but the players also managed to bring on collective bargaining, and in both leagues, the effects on players in the draft is the same.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Mar 20, 2023 4:51:12 GMT -5
Eh. First of all, it's Reason. They are highly anti-union, so it's not surprising that they spend a big chunk of the article attacking the union. Secondly, even a player who only plays in the NFL for 2-3 years makes more money than a lot of people make in their lifetimes. If they can't keep from being broke a few years after the leave the league, that's on them. Notice that the article has no suggestions for solving this, but blames the union for not solving it. Really this is a problem likely to be faced by any 20-yr-old who suddenly comes into a whole bunch of money. People that age generally aren't all that good at saving for their old age. Thirdly, so what if draftees can't hawk products during the draft? Nobody promises you a right to shill your product placements. It's the NFL's draft show, so they set the rules. If a player really thinks he can make more money by NIL deals than by entering the NFL draft, he is free to try that. Nobody makes these players play in the NFL. They choose it voluntarily. As the article itself notes, they could play in other football leagues. Or even (gasp!) do something other than play football. Even with the salary structure that the article is complaining about, they still make a lot more money than pretty much any other option available to them, unless they happen to be multi-sport pro athletes. The NFL does function as a cartel, which does mean that the players lose some of their bargaining power because the NFL owners agree to not compete in certain ways (like having a draft instead of just letting the best players be free agents and auction off their services). The NFLPA is widely considered to be one of the weakest pro sports players' unions. But again, these players play in the NFL voluntarily.
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 20, 2023 10:52:48 GMT -5
Post by stevehorn on Mar 20, 2023 10:52:48 GMT -5
Seems like 2 groups working to keep a new group of players in an anti competitive situation!? Time for a new test to anti trust maybe. Collective bargaining is well established law. You're in a dream world and so are the writers of the article.
|
|
|
NIL
Mar 20, 2023 11:22:44 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Norah Sus on Mar 20, 2023 11:22:44 GMT -5
Seems like 2 groups working to keep a new group of players in an anti competitive situation!? Time for a new test to anti trust maybe. Collective bargaining is well established law. You're in a dream world and so are the writers of the article. You’d be surprised how many people in the workforce think that the entirety of the term ‘striking’ just means everyone picks a day to walk out together.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Mar 20, 2023 12:04:37 GMT -5
Collective bargaining is well established law. You're in a dream world and so are the writers of the article. You’d be surprised how many people in the workforce think that the entirety of the term ‘striking’ just means everyone picks a day to walk out together. I'm rarely surprised anymore at the amount of misinformation people believe.
|
|
|
NIL
Apr 25, 2023 15:55:49 GMT -5
Post by Friday on Apr 25, 2023 15:55:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
NIL
Apr 25, 2023 16:02:33 GMT -5
Post by slxpress on Apr 25, 2023 16:02:33 GMT -5
I appreciate the post. That's interesting to see women's volleyball higher than women's basketball, even by a negligible amount. My problem with anything regarding NIL numbers is how opaque the entire process is. I'm assuming, without investigating it further, that these numbers are based on opendorse's own proprietary deals done through their service, not NIL contracts overall. While it's still helpful in its own way, it's important to understand no one really knows the numbers overall. On3 is constantly cited with their NIL valuation, but it's a guess based on a formula that heavily weights social media interactivity. Not an actual number. If it's based on something other than opendorse's own contracts, I'd be interested to know where they're getting their data.
|
|
|
NIL
Apr 25, 2023 16:19:44 GMT -5
Post by volleyguy on Apr 25, 2023 16:19:44 GMT -5
I appreciate the post. That's interesting to see women's volleyball higher than women's basketball, even by a negligible amount. My problem with anything regarding NIL numbers is how opaque the entire process is. I'm assuming, without investigating it further, that these numbers are based on opendorse's own proprietary deals done through their service, not NIL contracts overall. While it's still helpful in its own way, it's important to understand no one really knows the numbers overall. On3 is constantly cited with their NIL valuation, but it's a guess based on a formula that heavily weights social media interactivity. Not an actual number. If it's based on something other than opendorse's own contracts, I'd be interested to know where they're getting their data. Whether or not Student-Athletes have to report NIL activities to their school depends on state laws, or conference rules, so there isn't a reliable source for this information (and the NCAA cannot technically require conferences to do so because, as noted in the SC decision, conferences aren't subject to anti-trust laws, and institutions within a conference might also be subject to different state laws), but mostly, it's a purely Hobbesian situation.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Apr 25, 2023 16:49:41 GMT -5
I appreciate the post. That's interesting to see women's volleyball higher than women's basketball, even by a negligible amount. My problem with anything regarding NIL numbers is how opaque the entire process is. I'm assuming, without investigating it further, that these numbers are based on opendorse's own proprietary deals done through their service, not NIL contracts overall. While it's still helpful in its own way, it's important to understand no one really knows the numbers overall. On3 is constantly cited with their NIL valuation, but it's a guess based on a formula that heavily weights social media interactivity. Not an actual number. If it's based on something other than opendorse's own contracts, I'd be interested to know where they're getting their data. Whether or not Student-Athletes have to report NIL activities to their school depends on state laws, or conference rules, so there isn't a reliable source for this information (and the NCAA cannot technically require conferences to do so because, as noted in the SC decision, conferences aren't subject to anti-trust laws, and institutions within a conference might also be subject to different state laws), but mostly, it's a purely Hobbesian situation. Even if the student athletes reported every single one of their NIL activities to the schools Opendorse wouldn't have access to that without a slew of FOIA requests, and even then information can be redacted if the school determines it would identify specific players. Not to mention private schools have no obligation to abide by FOIA requests. In addition I know the Louisiana state legislature has forbidden schools from divulging NIL information by law even if presented with FOIA requests. Other states may have done so as well. The point is, take anything regarding the overall amounts involved with NIL with a grain of salt, because it's truly a guess. Now, my speculation is that these numbers are derived from Opendorse's own system, so if that's the case, the numbers are true insofar as their system is concerned. But that has its own obvious issues if used to extrapolate anything beyond the very specific source of their information. And there's no way there getting anything comprehensive. You and I are in agreement on that.
|
|
|
NIL
Apr 25, 2023 17:14:28 GMT -5
Post by volleyguy on Apr 25, 2023 17:14:28 GMT -5
Whether or not Student-Athletes have to report NIL activities to their school depends on state laws, or conference rules, so there isn't a reliable source for this information (and the NCAA cannot technically require conferences to do so because, as noted in the SC decision, conferences aren't subject to anti-trust laws, and institutions within a conference might also be subject to different state laws), but mostly, it's a purely Hobbesian situation. Even if the student athletes reported every single one of their NIL activities to the schools Opendorse wouldn't have access to that without a slew of FOIA requests, and even then information can be redacted if the school determines it would identify specific players. Not to mention private schools have no obligation to abide by FOIA requests. In addition I know the Louisiana state legislature has forbidden schools from divulging NIL information by law even if presented with FOIA requests. Other states may have done so as well. The point is, take anything regarding the overall amounts involved with NIL with a grain of salt, because it's truly a guess. Now, my speculation is that these numbers are derived from Opendorse's own system, so if that's the case, the numbers are true insofar as their system is concerned. But that has its own obvious issues if used to extrapolate anything beyond the very specific source of their information. And there's no way there getting anything comprehensive. You and I are in agreement on that. I think we are on the same page, just approaching it from different angles. I think [some] transparency about how much NIL activity exists is good for a lot of reasons (at least in terms of aggregate amounts by school, conference or sport)--and certainly in terms of NCAA compliance and mitigating pay for play. There's little incentive for anyone else--conferences, schools, athletes or companies like Opendorse [sic?]--to disclose accurate or actual numbers in the current environment.
|
|
|
NIL
Apr 25, 2023 18:07:23 GMT -5
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 25, 2023 18:07:23 GMT -5
My problem with anything regarding NIL numbers is how opaque the entire process is. I'm assuming, without investigating it further, that these numbers are based on opendorse's own proprietary deals done through their service, not NIL contracts overall. While it's still helpful in its own way, it's important to understand no one really knows the numbers overall. On3 is constantly cited with their NIL valuation, but it's a guess based on a formula that heavily weights social media interactivity. Not an actual number. If it's based on something other than opendorse's own contracts, I'd be interested to know where they're getting their data. It says "according to anonymized transactions completed or disclosed through Opendorse".
|
|