off their work they owe the colleges?
(no message)
(no message)
And the minute a NIL did that would be the minute that NIL would die.
(no message)
The NIL program that becomes known for making players, who are good enough to opt out of games, play those games, will no longer get players of that caliber, or likely any caliber.
There would be a line of them waiting for players of a certain caliber without such stipulations.
(no message)
It would immediately become a competitive disadvantage for that collective and the school.
“USC is contractually forbidding me from opting out but Oregon isn’t. Hello Eugene!”
(no message)
The school is not supposed to control NIL..which is a crock where it matters.
(no message)
You can't treat the athletes differently than you treat normal students or contracted employees.
The flaw in this idea is taking everything back because of not completing a small portion of the agreement, when a large portion was already earned.
Example, if a student uses federal financial aid the expectation is for them to go to school (since they've received cash) but if they withdraw there is a fork in the road that determines what happens. If they've completed 60% or more of the term/payment period nothing happens, they keep the money. If they withdraw before the 60% mark then funds have to be returned, but not ALL of it..the amount returned is prorated based on what's "already been earned".
Likewise some hospitals have nurses/doctors sign contracts to stay with the hospital for a certain period. If they leave before that contract is up, there is a penalty but it's not returning all money they made while there.
Also coaches sign contracts and leave before it's up but don't return the entire amount of money earned for work already performed. There are buyouts which are usually prorated so that the more of the contract was fulfilled, the less the buyout is.
So like I said before when a similar idea was brought up about canceling or withholding something that has already been earned...great idea, just apply it to the rest of our society first before applying it to only college student-athletes.
Now if they had to pay back a prorated portion, that's at least worth discussing. Question one, is would the probation period be based on the academic year or the start and end of the year for the sport in question?
I took this article to be a satire, and generally do agree with his main point…which is that players should not opt out.
A player comes up with a phantom injury and he no longer is opting out, but is rehabbing an injury
(no message)
(no message)