2024-25 Portal SZN Thread

[BorWhiskey]

What would they do with it if he did? What the school can pay is capped at the revenue sharing limit; what is left is "real NIL" which has to pass a FMV analysis as an arm's length transaction for services rendered.

Neither collectives nor the school can dole out donations to players any longer (post-House, that is).

I personally don’t believe this Deloitte FMV analysis is going to stand up to any law suit pressure. As soon as someone is turned away from earning an additional $500k because they disagree with the players value, it will get tested in the courts and no way a judge is going to rule in favor of the system.

So, I don’t think it’s truly going to level the playing field nor would I believe in any max cap. For that to happen, collective bargaining needs to happen first, and the players would have to become employees of something.

 

[Carm]

I personally don’t believe this Deloitte FMV analysis is going to stand up to any law suit pressure. As soon as someone is turned away from earning an additional $500k because they disagree with the players value, it will get tested in the courts and no way a judge is going to rule in favor of the system.

So, I don’t think it’s truly going to level the playing field nor would I believe in any max cap. For that to happen, collective bargaining needs to happen first, and the players would have to become employees of something.

these kinds of valuation cases go before judges and arbitrators fairly regularly. Lots of Tax Court, District Court, estate tax litigation on valuation. There are a lot of comps for name, image and likeness type valuations, and plenty of experts as well.

 

[BorWhiskey]

these kinds of valuation cases go before judges and arbitrators fairly regularly. Lots of Tax Court, District Court, estate tax litigation on valuation. There are a lot of comps for name, image and likeness type valuations, and plenty of experts as well.

So you believe someone will be told that they are being paid too much and can’t earn that much money?

 

[Dell Husker]

 

[Kaladin]

lol

Why though

 

[Goskers07]

lol

Why though

Who wouldn't want to play under legends such as Barry Odom and Josh Henson?

 

[Dell Husker]

 

[Goskers07]

Hahahahahahahahaha ho lee fook. What a family.

 

[nja13]

Hahahahahahahahaha ho lee fook. What a family.

He probably heard Tennessee suddenly has some available cash.

 

[Goskers07]

He probably heard Tennessee suddenly has some available cash.

 

[Carm]

So you believe someone will be told that they are being paid too much and can’t earn that much money?

I believe someone will be told "you are getting paid more than the fair market value of your name, image and/or likeness in this situation".

Value is not a black box. If someone pays you $1M to use your likeness and cash flows do not increase enough for the incremental flows to discount back to a value greater than $1M you have overpaid. There is enough quantitative evidence out there from comps to come up with a pretty good estimate without waiting for actual results. It's really not that hard of an issue.

 

[Seaofred92]

 

[Seaofred92]

I believe someone will be told "you are getting paid more than the fair market value of your name, image and/or likeness in this situation".

Value is not a black box. If someone pays you $1M to use your likeness and cash flows do not increase enough for the incremental flows to discount back to a value greater than $1M you have overpaid. There is enough quantitative evidence out there from comps to come up with a pretty good estimate without waiting for actual results. It's really not that hard of an issue.

I don’t disagree that the Deloitte office/program will be able to find accurate comps for it and make a (legit) determination if its FMV or not. But there is no way if someone wants to pay someone a deal they’ll win a lawsuit that says “sorry, we’re going to limit your income potential because we think your deal is too high”

 

[Carm]

I believe someone will be told "you are getting paid more than the fair market value of your name, image and/or likeness in this situation".

Value is not a black box. If someone pays you $1M to use your likeness and cash flows do not increase enough for the incremental flows to discount back to a value greater than $1M you have overpaid. There is enough quantitative evidence out there from comps to come up with a pretty good estimate without waiting for actual results. It's really not that hard of an issue.

Let me add - you're going to have problems sustaining a NIL value if you offered a contract without doing much due diligence to prove out the amount you are offering. This will likely force people offering NIL payments to do a business case up front to justify the payment. That will probably be the first thing Deloitte asks for.

 

[PonyBoy]

Shit happens way too much with in-state kids.

If Frost fucked up, that's on Frost not Rhule.

If Miles fucked up, that's on Miles not Hoiberg.

If Erstad fucked up, that's on Erstad not Bolt.

So on and so on. I'm so sick of this shit every time a Nebraska kid is brought up.

I had this talk with a local kid awhile ago from a JUCO. He was pissed Nebraska passed on him out of high school and told him to go JUCO. The schools then recruiting him out of JUCO watched him in the summer circuit and multiple showcases while he was in high school. And they passed on him, just like Nebraska did. Not one of them - ZERO - said a word about JUCO while we did.

...and he signs with a school that watched him a minimum of 7 times in a 15 month period, and they originally passed without direct communication. Fuck off, for goodness sake.

 

[Carm]

I don’t disagree that the Deloitte office/program will be able to find accurate comps for it and make a (legit) determination if its FMV or not. But there is no way if someone wants to pay someone a deal they’ll win a lawsuit that says “sorry, we’re going to limit your income potential because we think your deal is too high”

I agree they probably cannot stop what amounts to a an under the table payment by a booster (it's not a gift because it's not the result of disinterested generosity). It's in violation of the court settlement so a court might intervene to stop it.

I admit it would work better if it was part of a CBA, as you could craft a CBA that would strip a player of their eligibility.

The Sup Ct decision only says players are due the income from their NIL. It doesn't entitle players to gratuitous amounts that are not for their NIL.

 

[Seaofred92]

I agree they probably cannot stop what amounts to a an under the table payment by a booster (it's not a gift because it's not the result of disinterested generosity). It's in violation of the court settlement so a court might intervene to stop it.

I admit it would work better if it was part of a CBA, as you could craft a CBA that would strip a player of their eligibility.

The Sup Ct decision only says players are due the income from their NIL. It doesn't entitle players to gratuitous amounts that are not for their NIL.

Yeah I think the CBA portion of this is what’s missing - the NCAA argument is basically if players accept rev share they are “opting in” to the terms of the settlement but the judge also gave guidance that there needs to be ways to challenge this going forward for future athletes that aren’t currently in college.

I am hesitant to think this will be the “final” version of what player comp looks like.. until there is a players union and that union negotiates on behalf of the athletes in it, we will be in a constant stage of legal suits and back and forth. I believe Nebraska and Oregon already have laws in place basically prohibiting the FMV component from being emphasized.. the schools claim they want this until it happens and they’ll skirt around it until there are no avenues left to do so

 

[Carm]

Let's say a booster decides to make a payment to induce a player to attend his alma mater because his alma mater lacks the ability to make the payment under the court settlement - it would be prohibited by the settlement. The booster decides to hide the payment's true nature by labelling it as a FMV payment for use of name, image and likeness.

I'm not sure the premise that a court wouldn't be offended by this is supportable.

 

[Seaofred92]

Let's say a booster decides to make a payment to induce a player to attend his alma mater because his alma mater lacks the ability to make the payment under the court settlement - it would be prohibited by the settlement. The booster decides to hide the payment's true nature by labelling it as a FMV payment for use of name, image and likeness.

I'm not sure the premise that a court wouldn't be offended by this is supportable.

There are a million ways you could challenge the FMV valuation given by the Deloitte entity… it’s going to be based on comps from a, b, and c.. well why should it be? Players have been getting paid for multiple years now and there are plenty of comps available that say high level QBs can go for $2-$4M.. can probably use things like social media followers and other “soft” things to come up with support for whatever valuation you’re trying to back into, as a few examples

The CBA takes all of that away. That’s where they have to get to eventually - everything in between is stalling and lawyer fees

 

[Carm]

There are a million ways you could challenge the FMV valuation given by the Deloitte entity… it’s going to be based on comps from a, b, and c.. well why should it be? Players have been getting paid for multiple years now and there are plenty of comps available that say high level QBs can go for $2-$4M.. can probably use things like social media followers and other “soft” things to come up with support for whatever valuation you’re trying to back into, as a few examples

The CBA takes all of that away. That’s where they have to get to eventually - everything in between is stalling and lawyer fees

The odd thing in this is that what boosters pay isn't related to the underlying value created by the economic activity. The business really doesn't generate the revenue necessary for each P4 school to have, for example, a $50M payroll. What the boosters are paying players for is the psychic rewards they get for their school succeeding in football at a high level and playing a part in it.