Here is the link to the fall sports streaming schedule.

https://appstatesports.com/news/2023/8/ ... edule.aspx

Another Portal Loss and Portal Discussion

AppStFan1
Posts: 5486
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1331 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppStFan1 » Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:57 am

AppSt94 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:39 am
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm
t4pizza wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:17 am


They do have contracts, that is what a national letter of intent is. The issue is that now they are allowed, by rule, to break their contract and immediately be eligible to play anywhere else the first time they break their contract. The schools have always been able to do this as the scholarships are only for 1 year. The new twist is that now if a school picks up a kid from the transfer portal, the school is on the hook until that player exhaust eligibility, graduates, or leaves the program on his/her own (whichever comes first). So yeah, there are contracts but they are pretty useless, except the new one that ties the school to the transfer portal kid.
Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
Why is sitting out a year fair to the kid? The problem or actions around transferring are multifaceted. Not all are transferring to get more money. Some are looking for a better situation. They aren’t unlike the regular student body in that sometimes, the school isn’t a fit. Point being is that there isn’t a perfect way to regulate it all.
Regular students aren’t playing sports so the rules are going to be different. A lot of rules weren’t set to be unfair to players but to prevent pandemonium in the sport. We removed a lot of the rules and we have seen how crazy it has become.

I agree there is no perfect way. What about if there has to be a delay on NIL for transfers and the player can’t get any money for at least 6 months after transfer? My thought it that players should be able to transfer but some rule to deter schools from tampering like they do now. There might not be a good way to do it. This is why there should have been like a 2 year period where all this stuff was worked out and system implemented instead of just being told it’s a free for all in a couple months like they did.

BambooRdApp
Posts: 4001
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:32 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 1463 times
Been thanked: 2762 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by BambooRdApp » Sat Jun 03, 2023 8:38 am

AppSt94 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:39 am
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm
t4pizza wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:17 am


They do have contracts, that is what a national letter of intent is. The issue is that now they are allowed, by rule, to break their contract and immediately be eligible to play anywhere else the first time they break their contract. The schools have always been able to do this as the scholarships are only for 1 year. The new twist is that now if a school picks up a kid from the transfer portal, the school is on the hook until that player exhaust eligibility, graduates, or leaves the program on his/her own (whichever comes first). So yeah, there are contracts but they are pretty useless, except the new one that ties the school to the transfer portal kid.
Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
Why is sitting out a year fair to the kid? The problem or actions around transferring are multifaceted. Not all are transferring to get more money. Some are looking for a better situation. They aren’t unlike the regular student body in that sometimes, the school isn’t a fit. Point being is that there isn’t a perfect way to regulate it all.
I agree. I do not think it is fair to the kid...it is the fan in me that would like to see them stay for 4 years. For me, that is why the emotions go both ways. Want what's right for the kid...go get what you can get....but, the fan in me...stay at App. all four years.
Today I Give My All For Appalachian State!!
#FreeMillerHillForMoMoney!!
#SleeveStripesWereTheBomb!!
#99ForPresident!!

AppSt94
Posts: 9530
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:39 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: Huntersville, NC
Has thanked: 6321 times
Been thanked: 3915 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppSt94 » Sat Jun 03, 2023 9:12 am

BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 8:38 am
AppSt94 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:39 am
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm


Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
Why is sitting out a year fair to the kid? The problem or actions around transferring are multifaceted. Not all are transferring to get more money. Some are looking for a better situation. They aren’t unlike the regular student body in that sometimes, the school isn’t a fit. Point being is that there isn’t a perfect way to regulate it all.
I agree. I do not think it is fair to the kid...it is the fan in me that would like to see them stay for 4 years. For me, that is why the emotions go both ways. Want what's right for the kid...go get what you can get....but, the fan in me...stay at App. all four years.
I completely understand.

User avatar
AtlAppMan
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:23 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: ATL
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 1261 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AtlAppMan » Sat Jun 03, 2023 10:49 am

AppStFan1 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:57 am
AppSt94 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:39 am
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm


Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
Why is sitting out a year fair to the kid? The problem or actions around transferring are multifaceted. Not all are transferring to get more money. Some are looking for a better situation. They aren’t unlike the regular student body in that sometimes, the school isn’t a fit. Point being is that there isn’t a perfect way to regulate it all.
Regular students aren’t playing sports so the rules are going to be different. A lot of rules weren’t set to be unfair to players but to prevent pandemonium in the sport. We removed a lot of the rules and we have seen how crazy it has become.

I agree there is no perfect way. What about if there has to be a delay on NIL for transfers and the player can’t get any money for at least 6 months after transfer? My thought it that players should be able to transfer but some rule to deter schools from tampering like they do now. There might not be a good way to do it. This is why there should have been like a 2 year period where all this stuff was worked out and system implemented instead of just being told it’s a free for all in a couple months like they did.
Agree athletes are not the same as regular students. Regular students are paying for their tuition as they go. The school does not have a direct investment in their performance. If they do well they graduate with a degree but if they do not they are out. An Athlete is literally getting a scholarship (value) from the school "in return for their contribution to the team/school". The school is making a significant direct investment in "developing" the athlete. This is like investing in a startup company with the expectation that later the investment will yield returns. Therefore, if the athlete leaves early, the school is prevented from realizing any return on its investment risk.

Following this same train of thought, in the investment world, nobody would ever make an early investment in a company if their stock could be taken away from them without any control and without any return being paid back to them.

Mjohn1988
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 10:10 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 289 times
Been thanked: 1237 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by Mjohn1988 » Sat Jun 03, 2023 12:56 pm

BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm
t4pizza wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:17 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 9:55 am


They need to look at having contracts. It’s a profession now. The university can’t be completely invested in a player who can simply do whatever he wants to do. Everybody needs skin in the game.
They do have contracts, that is what a national letter of intent is. The issue is that now they are allowed, by rule, to break their contract and immediately be eligible to play anywhere else the first time they break their contract. The schools have always been able to do this as the scholarships are only for 1 year. The new twist is that now if a school picks up a kid from the transfer portal, the school is on the hook until that player exhaust eligibility, graduates, or leaves the program on his/her own (whichever comes first). So yeah, there are contracts but they are pretty useless, except the new one that ties the school to the transfer portal kid.
Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
I think there could be a rule that if a player takes less NIL money in a move there would be no fee to the new school. That’s almost like a pro player being let go or waived. I do understand that the university doesn’t actually pay the NIL money. My thoughts are that whoever pays the NIL money would need to make a donation to the school to pay the fee. Point was made that the players are being invented in and how will small schools continue to justify those investments if the player can simply walk away. Its hard for me to do but to solve this problem the powers that be will have to stop looking at NIL recipients as “student athletes” or “kids”. I hate it but players who can demand NIL money no longer bleed the school colors, they are a commodity. It’s a mess but the only solution will be found in how pro sports treat player.

AppStFan1
Posts: 5486
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1331 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppStFan1 » Sun Jun 04, 2023 7:54 pm

AtlAppMan wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 10:49 am
AppStFan1 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:57 am
AppSt94 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:39 am
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm


The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
Why is sitting out a year fair to the kid? The problem or actions around transferring are multifaceted. Not all are transferring to get more money. Some are looking for a better situation. They aren’t unlike the regular student body in that sometimes, the school isn’t a fit. Point being is that there isn’t a perfect way to regulate it all.
Regular students aren’t playing sports so the rules are going to be different. A lot of rules weren’t set to be unfair to players but to prevent pandemonium in the sport. We removed a lot of the rules and we have seen how crazy it has become.

I agree there is no perfect way. What about if there has to be a delay on NIL for transfers and the player can’t get any money for at least 6 months after transfer? My thought it that players should be able to transfer but some rule to deter schools from tampering like they do now. There might not be a good way to do it. This is why there should have been like a 2 year period where all this stuff was worked out and system implemented instead of just being told it’s a free for all in a couple months like they did.
Agree athletes are not the same as regular students. Regular students are paying for their tuition as they go. The school does not have a direct investment in their performance. If they do well they graduate with a degree but if they do not they are out. An Athlete is literally getting a scholarship (value) from the school "in return for their contribution to the team/school". The school is making a significant direct investment in "developing" the athlete. This is like investing in a startup company with the expectation that later the investment will yield returns. Therefore, if the athlete leaves early, the school is prevented from realizing any return on its investment risk.

Following this same train of thought, in the investment world, nobody would ever make an early investment in a company if their stock could be taken away from them without any control and without any return being paid back to them.
That is a great analogy and a big reason why I think a buyout is completely fair to poach a player.

AppStFan1
Posts: 5486
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:37 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1331 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppStFan1 » Sun Jun 04, 2023 7:59 pm

Mjohn1988 wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 12:56 pm
BambooRdApp wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 6:31 am
Mjohn1988 wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:16 pm
AtlAppMan wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:56 pm
t4pizza wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:17 am


They do have contracts, that is what a national letter of intent is. The issue is that now they are allowed, by rule, to break their contract and immediately be eligible to play anywhere else the first time they break their contract. The schools have always been able to do this as the scholarships are only for 1 year. The new twist is that now if a school picks up a kid from the transfer portal, the school is on the hook until that player exhaust eligibility, graduates, or leaves the program on his/her own (whichever comes first). So yeah, there are contracts but they are pretty useless, except the new one that ties the school to the transfer portal kid.
Non-binding contracts are useless. I think you have a point here that at one point the school had all the advantage, now it is flipped on its head.

Maybe, following your logic, IF a school offered a multi-year contract (schlolarship) that the player signed then both parties are bound for the length of the contract. That would provide both parties with some protection for the duration. If a school makes an investment in a raw talent and develops that talent, they should have some reasonable expectation of reaping some benefits for the duration of the scholarship. The player must also be locked into that contract as they are getting the benefit of that investment in their career. There could be some "reasonable" out clauses in extreme circumstances.
The NFL realized that it would be impossible to build a competitive situation if unlimited money could be spent and if players could simply switch teams at will. I think some of the things the NFL does could be incorporated into the situation. For instance, when a player gets traded in the NFL the team tradings him away gets compensated in some way. So let’s say App recruits a guy and he plays at App for 2 years and gets poached via the portal by Auburn. Auburn would owe App an amount equivalent to half of said player’s NIL money per year. App invested in that player for half of his eligible playing time. If he only played at App for a year the amount owed would be 25%. The NCAA also needs to find some way to limit the total amount any one team can spend on NIL money per season.
Like this in theory, but Auburn (in your example) isn't fronting the NIL money. It is people, businesses outside of university. Also, this would have to go both ways. Do we now owe Auburn if kid comes to App and the kid gets NIL money. Realize NIL money at App would be much less...but App would owe Auburn for a portion of NIL money the kid earned at App. We do not have funding to do that.
Although not popular I know and I do not like this as I am a free market economic guy in most situations, is the only possible deterrent now to not allow instant eligibility upon transfer (you have to sit a year). ..If not this, what other policies could be put in place to look limit free agency? Not sure there is or do I want to...This is tough as I know the kids work hard and deserve the compensation for their services. Maybe the only idea is that we need more NIL money flowing at App to limit the transfers out. We will never compete with NIL money at SEC. However, maybe we have players think twice if they were getting more from businesses for App related NIL.
From personal standpoint, hated to see 35 go to Auburn. However, he is getting paid for his services at a rate that App (or App NIL related) could not pay. So, glad he gets paid. The emotions go both ways.
And no, in today's world tte scholarship is not enough as the kid gets a scholarship at the new school just like at App.
I think there could be a rule that if a player takes less NIL money in a move there would be no fee to the new school. That’s almost like a pro player being let go or waived. I do understand that the university doesn’t actually pay the NIL money. My thoughts are that whoever pays the NIL money would need to make a donation to the school to pay the fee. Point was made that the players are being invented in and how will small schools continue to justify those investments if the player can simply walk away. Its hard for me to do but to solve this problem the powers that be will have to stop looking at NIL recipients as “student athletes” or “kids”. I hate it but players who can demand NIL money no longer bleed the school colors, they are a commodity. It’s a mess but the only solution will be found in how pro sports treat player.
We are already getting close and I think sooner than later we will see them 100% treated like pros in D1.

AppSt94
Posts: 9530
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:39 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: Huntersville, NC
Has thanked: 6321 times
Been thanked: 3915 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppSt94 » Mon Jun 05, 2023 8:19 am

I get the rationale for wanting schools to receive monetary compensation for losing players but how is that going to enforceable? Who pays it? The school is simply offering the student athlete an alternative educational option than the current school. The school isn’t directly responsible for the monetary incentive to lure the student athlete to transfer. It is being done though a collective with “no” substantive ties to the school. So who would be held liable for the compensatory sum? Aside from that, what burden of proof can be provided to a legal body to make the case.

I have proof that one of our players was being shopped around during last season. I have been told who was shopping him around and that he had numerous suitors. What I don’t know is what schools were by name, or if NIL was involved. That’s not enough to launch any sort of investigation nor is it worth the NCAA’s time as one investigation likely leads to hundreds.

In my opinion,If you were in favor of NIL, then this is what you get. Auburn and Oklahoma aren’t going to pay us for poaching the McLeods and Everretts of the world.

t4pizza
Posts: 4862
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:00 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 2366 times
Been thanked: 1733 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by t4pizza » Mon Jun 05, 2023 9:28 am

The Supreme Court was pretty clear, the NCAA operates as a monopoly and therefore it's behavior is contrary to the laws of the USA. As such, they can not limit the actions of student athletes. Making another school pay for a player that chooses to leave would be yet another limit that the Supremes told us can not exist. Unless/until there is an antitrust exception given to the NCAA by Congress, the NCAA will essentially remain powerless to do anything. As the only player in town, they can not restrict the student athletes- penalties, payments, missed years of eligibility, etc- are all restrictions on players and all will be held unconstitutional without an antitrust exemption. So it really doesn't matter how fair anyone thinks it is, it can't be changed without literally a federal law (or the S.Ct reversing itself which until very recent history it just really never did).

User avatar
AtlAppMan
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:23 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: ATL
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 1261 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AtlAppMan » Mon Jun 05, 2023 10:58 am

The NCAA isn't going to do anything to solve this in my opinion. The collective of the schools have to agree to something. As I said earlier, it will happen when some big boys get screwed enough to get push back.

The problem with the schools and the NIL money being disconnected is that you can't hold the schools and their staff accountable. Today if Sally works for Company A and an outsider with some interest in Company B's success (say an investor) pays Sally a ton of money ON THE SIDE to leave A and go to B then there is nothing that anyone can problem do. Especially if Sally doesn't have a contract with Company A. That can and maybe does happen but rarely in corporate world. But in our screwed up world of CFB today it is the wild wild west until sanity is reinstated.

I am a free market guy BUT also want fairness and ethics to govern. We don't have either right now. The "league of FBS" has to realize this is not in the best interest for its own good and find a solution.

Mjohn1988
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 10:10 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 289 times
Been thanked: 1237 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by Mjohn1988 » Mon Jun 05, 2023 12:00 pm

I’m not looking to get in a fight with anybody about this, just throwing out some ideas for conversation. Pro sports leagues have regulated players and how they move from team to team. They do this because they realize it’s necessary for the survival of the leagues. Surely the NCAA and ESPN will come to the same conclusion and figure this thing out. If it gets to the point that only 10 teams really have a shot at major success and people lose interest in watching the rest, ESPN will have a bunch of dead air to fill. Money made the mess, maybe money will fix the mess.

Yosef10
Posts: 1750
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 11:15 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 687 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by Yosef10 » Mon Jun 05, 2023 12:06 pm

Mjohn1988 wrote:
Mon Jun 05, 2023 12:00 pm
I’m not looking to get in a fight with anybody about this, just throwing out some ideas for conversation. Pro sports leagues have regulated players and how they move from team to team. They do this because they realize it’s necessary for the survival of the leagues. Surely the NCAA and ESPN will come to the same conclusion and figure this thing out. If it gets to the point that only 10 teams really have a shot at major success and people lose interest in watching the rest, ESPN will have a bunch of dead air to fill. Money made the mess, maybe money will fix the mess.
Pro sports leagues have collectively bargained, colleges have not. Though they will be sooner than later.

Also, to your point about 10 schools - only 15 have won national championships since the AP Poll started. This has always been college football, the biggest and most invested have always paid the players sums of money - now you’re just seeing it in the open.

t4pizza
Posts: 4862
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:00 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 2366 times
Been thanked: 1733 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by t4pizza » Mon Jun 05, 2023 12:28 pm

A real big problem with collective bargaining in college is that the student/athletes are not employees (yet and maybe never) and don't currently have the right to unionize and collective bargain. Since it is hard to see a situation within the near future that would allow collective bargaining, the only real resolution is from Congress. Either an antitrust exemption that give the NCAA teeth again, or national NIL laws and enforcement. Until the NCAA can actually govern it is just a glorified event planner (NCAA tournament, etc) wasting a lot of office space and getting paid a ton of cash to do so.

User avatar
AtlAppMan
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:23 pm
School: Appalachian State
Location: ATL
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 1261 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AtlAppMan » Mon Jun 12, 2023 3:12 pm

There is a building wave of folks now realizing how much of a monster they have created with NIL.

See this ESPN article with NCAA President Charlie Baker.

https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/37 ... -framework

Stonewall
Posts: 5249
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 12:26 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 2664 times
Been thanked: 2563 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by Stonewall » Wed Jun 14, 2023 7:10 pm

Buyers remorse.

KentHogan
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:24 pm
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by KentHogan » Wed Jun 21, 2023 6:45 pm

I hate everything about NIL, it’s terrible for the game and it has made college football nothing more than a farm league for the NFL.

I don’t blame the players for cashing in but I disagree with the idea that they have been taken advantage of in the past. Most of these players have been given full scholarships and received free education, sometimes worth tens of thousands of dollars a year, and then if talented enough they can make millions as a pro, so they have certainly been compensated.

I understand that the NCAA and conferences make crazy money from the television deals, but those same deals give the players incredible exposure and a better opportunity to be discovered. The players benefit from those deals and get their free education to boot.

Anyway, I love the game and believe that the monster of NIL is bad for the game’s future, but I don’t blame the players for taking advantage while they can.

9Steelman
Posts: 506
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:40 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by 9Steelman » Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:06 pm

NIL Deals: Is the income taxable, if so do the players get 1099 or W-2 and from who?

BambooRdApp
Posts: 4001
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:32 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 1463 times
Been thanked: 2762 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by BambooRdApp » Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:08 pm

9Steelman wrote:
Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:06 pm
NIL Deals: Is the income taxable, if so do the players get 1099 or W-2 and from who?
Yes, and any noncash items are taxable at fair market value of the item
Today I Give My All For Appalachian State!!
#FreeMillerHillForMoMoney!!
#SleeveStripesWereTheBomb!!
#99ForPresident!!

User avatar
AppStateNews
Posts: 2736
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:36 am
School: Appalachian State
Has thanked: 220 times
Been thanked: 2289 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by AppStateNews » Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:09 pm

9Steelman wrote:
Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:06 pm
NIL Deals: Is the income taxable, if so do the players get 1099 or W-2 and from who?
Whoever gives them the NIL deal. For example, Cam Peoples had a deal with Boone Chamber. Boone Chamber gave him X amount of taxable income. Boone Chamber would have to provide the tax documents (I would assume 1099) to Cam
tAPPedInSports.net

Not affiliated with the above website

Saint3333
Posts: 12971
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2000 8:42 am
Has thanked: 2966 times
Been thanked: 4562 times

Re: Another Portal Loss

Unread post by Saint3333 » Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:29 pm

I never wanted a non-Cline started thread to die more than this one.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Appalachian Football”