Article saying NIL is only one issue facing NCAA

[WVAPPeer]

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... sh-to-fry/

[AtlAppMan]

NIL is not NIL anymore. It is a pure legal avenue to pay athletes in a completely uncontrolled delivery system. If someone wants to pay an athlete the sky is the limit. Don’t pretend it has anything to do with a student’s name, image or likeness.

What it is now is anybody with money can pay a player to join their team. If you don’t have money you won’t get the best players.

This is not a sustainable model for college or professional sports in its current form. Even the pros know this model doesn’t work.

[scatman77]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

[AppStFan1]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

[scatman77]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

[AppStFan1]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

[BambooRdApp]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

Hmmm, a person calling someone else ignorant is typically the ignorant one themselves in some other capacity. Our athletics department, ticket office, and others associated with the ticket office are doing the best they can with the funding they have....

[Yosef84]

It does sound to me that the compliance officer is incorrect. Whereas the booster might always be a booster, the NCAA has no authority to govern alumni if they are no longer associated with the program.

[scatman77]

It does sound to me that the compliance officer is incorrect. Whereas the booster might always be a booster, the NCAA has no authority to govern alumni if they are no longer associated with the program.

That's how I feel that once graduated there no longer the "student athlete/booster" relationship. Not being a NCAA rules expert (not that I wanted to be) I took it at face value.

If you really want to get confused look into the "prior relationship" rules.

[goapps93]

I could see this being plausible when one considers a player/prospect could be enticed with payment after their playing career is over. How in the world is that enforced though?

[AppStFan1]

Yep...pay the athletes. Yet according to our compliance officer (whom I checked with a couple years ago on this scenario) I can't buy a meal for a former player and his wife even after he'd graduated 3 years earlier.

If that has changed due to NIL I'm eager for someone to let me know.

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

Hmmm, a person calling someone else ignorant is typically the ignorant one themselves in some other capacity. Our athletics department, ticket office, and others associated with the ticket office are doing the best they can with the funding they have....

That is a very obvious statement to make. We all are ignorant about something. There is a subject you are ignorant about as well as me but the issue here is these people make their living to supposedly know those rules and give the proper information but they did not. There are people in every field of work who are lazy or do a bad job and football is not immune to that.

2 questions for you. If you buy a meal for John Settle today then... 1 Will the NCAA really care? 2. Who are they going to punish? Even if they are right about it technically the NCAA was never going to enforce that. Just because I was a NCAA eligible prospect in high school or played in college does not mean rules apply to me as one at 30, 40, 50, or 60 years old well after I graduated.

I have looked the issue up and according to the NCAA website a booster, or someone who is a rep of a school's athletic interest, is always one but obviously a player finishes their college career and the roles change. It is not illegal for a booster to buy another booster a meal, even if one of them use to play in college, and it never could be. It would not make sense.

To your statement about our people all doing the best they can all the time then you must not have dealt with every department or person. Go read the 247 board and you will hear so many issues that our season-ticket holders have had simply due to some laziness or bad policy by some in our athletics department. We have some great people but we have had and still have some people who are lazy and don't do their best. I would encourage you to subscribe to 247 and just read about some of the issues people have had with their tickets and other things.

[BambooRdApp]

I hope you are joking because if not our compliance officer was messing with you or doesn’t know anything.

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

Hmmm, a person calling someone else ignorant is typically the ignorant one themselves in some other capacity. Our athletics department, ticket office, and others associated with the ticket office are doing the best they can with the funding they have....

That is a very obvious statement to make. We all are ignorant about something. There is a subject you are ignorant about as well as me but the issue here is these people make their living to supposedly know those rules and give the proper information but they did not. There are people in every field of work who are lazy or do a bad job and football is not immune to that.

2 questions for you. If you buy a meal for John Settle today then... 1 Will the NCAA really care? 2. Who are they going to punish? Even if they are right about it technically the NCAA was never going to enforce that. Just because I was a NCAA eligible prospect in high school or played in college does not mean rules apply to me as one at 30, 40, 50, or 60 years old well after I graduated.

I have looked the issue up and according to the NCAA website a booster, or someone who is a rep of a school's athletic interest, is always one but obviously a player finishes their college career and the roles change. It is not illegal for a booster to buy another booster a meal, even if one of them use to play in college, and it never could be. It would not make sense.

To your statement about our people all doing the best they can all the time then you must not have dealt with every department or person. Go read the 247 board and you will hear so many issues that our season-ticket holders have had simply due to some laziness or bad policy by some in our athletics department. We have some great people but we have had and still have some people who are lazy and don't do their best. I would encourage you to subscribe to 247 and just read about some of the issues people have had with their tickets and other things.

I could care less about this particular issue per se. It is the statement you made about labeling folks in a certain part of the athletics Dept ignorant. You can justify the statement all you want and refer to others that may have made comments, etc. I just think it is ignorant to make that statement about folks working hard in the dept. Please feel free to reply with another, as usual and useless, war and peace length response.

[appst89]

Being overworked or short staffed is no excuse for giving out blatantly wrong information. No slack should be cut for someone who's job it is to know those rules to give bad information.

[AppStFan1]

I could see this being plausible when one considers a player/prospect could be enticed with payment after their playing career is over. How in the world is that enforced though?

Not possible and they couldn't care less.

[AppStFan1]

Being overworked or short staffed is no excuse for giving out blatantly wrong information. No slack should be cut for someone who's job it is to know those rules to give bad information.

Exactly. Get the right information and be accurate. Do your best.

If you want to get into the over worked and under staffed that is another issue. App does not pay well and those who are good don't last long because they get offered better money. We are paying about 1/2 what we should be in most jobs. We have had a lot of good employees who would have stayed if App just paid fairly.

[AtlAppMan]

As was said, once an athlete completes their last game and no longer eligible for any scholarship, the contract (scholarship) between school and student athlete no longer exists. Even if someone interprets the rule as was stated, it could not be enforced. I say buy the meal and don't ask questions.

[huskie3]

I always paid for the whole table so no one could say I was giving preference.just said they were friends.

[AppStFan1]

I repeated the scenario and got the same answer and reiterating "once a booster always a booster." I know that NCAA ruling but I still don't see how it pertained to a former player who's already graduated. Of course who would know what I did, if it's still true?

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

Hmmm, a person calling someone else ignorant is typically the ignorant one themselves in some other capacity. Our athletics department, ticket office, and others associated with the ticket office are doing the best they can with the funding they have....

That is a very obvious statement to make. We all are ignorant about something. There is a subject you are ignorant about as well as me but the issue here is these people make their living to supposedly know those rules and give the proper information but they did not. There are people in every field of work who are lazy or do a bad job and football is not immune to that.

2 questions for you. If you buy a meal for John Settle today then... 1 Will the NCAA really care? 2. Who are they going to punish? Even if they are right about it technically the NCAA was never going to enforce that. Just because I was a NCAA eligible prospect in high school or played in college does not mean rules apply to me as one at 30, 40, 50, or 60 years old well after I graduated.

I have looked the issue up and according to the NCAA website a booster, or someone who is a rep of a school's athletic interest, is always one but obviously a player finishes their college career and the roles change. It is not illegal for a booster to buy another booster a meal, even if one of them use to play in college, and it never could be. It would not make sense.

To your statement about our people all doing the best they can all the time then you must not have dealt with every department or person. Go read the 247 board and you will hear so many issues that our season-ticket holders have had simply due to some laziness or bad policy by some in our athletics department. We have some great people but we have had and still have some people who are lazy and don't do their best. I would encourage you to subscribe to 247 and just read about some of the issues people have had with their tickets and other things.

I could care less about this particular issue per se. It is the statement you made about labeling folks in a certain part of the athletics Dept ignorant. You can justify the statement all you want and refer to others that may have made comments, etc. I just think it is ignorant to make that statement about folks working hard in the dept. Please feel free to reply with another, as usual and useless, war and peace length response.

I simply had a few points to make. I also never called out entire departments but said we have some in general who don't put in the time to give accurate info because that person was wrong. They should have made the effort to give our boosters correct info. That is literally part of their job. Even if they were right, the NCAA would never enforced it anyway.

[AppStFan1]

I always paid for the whole table so no one could say I was giving preference.just said they were friends.

I still think it was technically against the rules but in reality who is going to rat on you when you pay for the whole table? lol It definitely makes it safer.

I always thought the accusation of buying McDonald's or something is so improper that it would influence a player to sign was dumb. What they should have done is set a max amount but to bust boosters for buying a poor kid a 10 dollar meal always seemed crazy to me.

[BambooRdApp]

They are wrong. That player is now an alumni and could be booster themselves. They aren’t prospects or a college player forever.

I know this because agents were always legally allowed to sign and pay players once their last game was done. The rules end in that relationship once their last game is completed.

It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department. It just shows how HS scouting, weight room development, and good coaching on field can overcome a lot.

Hmmm, a person calling someone else ignorant is typically the ignorant one themselves in some other capacity. Our athletics department, ticket office, and others associated with the ticket office are doing the best they can with the funding they have....

That is a very obvious statement to make. We all are ignorant about something. There is a subject you are ignorant about as well as me but the issue here is these people make their living to supposedly know those rules and give the proper information but they did not. There are people in every field of work who are lazy or do a bad job and football is not immune to that.

2 questions for you. If you buy a meal for John Settle today then... 1 Will the NCAA really care? 2. Who are they going to punish? Even if they are right about it technically the NCAA was never going to enforce that. Just because I was a NCAA eligible prospect in high school or played in college does not mean rules apply to me as one at 30, 40, 50, or 60 years old well after I graduated.

I have looked the issue up and according to the NCAA website a booster, or someone who is a rep of a school's athletic interest, is always one but obviously a player finishes their college career and the roles change. It is not illegal for a booster to buy another booster a meal, even if one of them use to play in college, and it never could be. It would not make sense.

To your statement about our people all doing the best they can all the time then you must not have dealt with every department or person. Go read the 247 board and you will hear so many issues that our season-ticket holders have had simply due to some laziness or bad policy by some in our athletics department. We have some great people but we have had and still have some people who are lazy and don't do their best. I would encourage you to subscribe to 247 and just read about some of the issues people have had with their tickets and other things.

I could care less about this particular issue per se. It is the statement you made about labeling folks in a certain part of the athletics Dept ignorant. You can justify the statement all you want and refer to others that may have made comments, etc. I just think it is ignorant to make that statement about folks working hard in the dept. Please feel free to reply with another, as usual and useless, war and peace length response.

I simply had a few points to make. I also never called out entire departments but said we have some in general who don't put in the time to give accurate info because that person was wrong. They should have made the effort to give our boosters correct info. That is literally part of their job. Even if they were right, the NCAA would never enforced it anyway.

"It is really amazing at our success on the field with all the dumb people we have had in our athletics department." This is your exact quote. You said with "all the dumb people we have in our athletic department" I could care less about this particular issue or what the topic was about. Calling people in our athletic dept "dumb" pretty poor taste. Like I said, I could care less about the topic at hand. Getting on a message board and calling them "dumb" is poor taste and somewhat unintelligent comment within itself. If the athletic dept employees are not doing their job to the best of the abilities, people should give feedback to their direct reports, etc. getting on a message board ....and an App St. related message board, and calling them dumb...is sad. if you do not see that, I got nothing else for you..