Spider Collective
- Thread starter 72Spider
- Start date
impossible to say without knowing the amount they have available annually to distribute.
I'd look at it more as a percentage of the annual total. maybe we're willing to give 20% or 25% of the annual NIL earmarked for basketball to one star player?
if you think we'll have a millions to spend annually like the big boys do, then we can throw around the kind of numbers you mentioned.
I just don't think we have the depth of fandom to do that. we're a very small school.
I have no idea and I'll be curious if payments/contacts will be disclosed, particularly for people who contribute to the NIL. And I also wonder who makes those decisions?
Just out of curiosity, anyone here know how a collective like this splits up the payments? Is it even among the whole team? Do starters get the lions share and end of bench guys get peanuts? Can you contribute to a specific player? Is it lump sum, monthly, weekly?
Maybe some of this is already widely known, but not by me. And I don't see any obvious answers on the website.
Maybe some of this is already widely known, but not by me. And I don't see any obvious answers on the website.
shouldn't be split evenly. again, that's not the purpose of athletes being able to capitalize on what they bring to the table.
but I don't know how UR is running things.
you can't give to a specific player, at least not through these channels.
but I don't know how UR is running things.
you can't give to a specific player, at least not through these channels.
I see all this $hit turning into a bidding war.
Player: "Is that all you are offering? I can transfer to Morgan State and make twice that....I'm out"
Player: "Is that all you are offering? I can transfer to Morgan State and make twice that....I'm out"
I agree with you, just wondering in this specific setup since I don't see it .
Also, this IS allowing the players to make money on their NIL - they will get what they get for signing on (I'm sure they're free to either be a part of it or not). Plus it does specifically say it's not exclusive - so they can receive money from other sources as well, if they choose to and are able to.
Thats a good point 97 - if you donate, do you at least get to see where the money is going at some point? That way you can decide whether or not you wish to continue to give if you feel its working and money is going in the right places.
Think we are already there.
I don't see why not. The funding goes straight from the collective to the players. The university is not distributing the funds (*wink, wink*), so there's no Title IX issue.
I assume "funding our favorite sports" means adding more mens sports than women's sports. I believe the school has to provide near equal opportunities to stay in line with Title IX. maybe NIL could fund a sport at the club level, but I doubt it can be school sponsored at the DI level if it puts men's and women's sports out of balance.
allowing athletes to monetize their NIL is one thing. but these collectives that are clearly run by people affiliated with the school are another. I think unequal male vs female NIL payments disbursed by people affiliated with the school is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
allowing athletes to monetize their NIL is one thing. but these collectives that are clearly run by people affiliated with the school are another. I think unequal male vs female NIL payments disbursed by people affiliated with the school is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Matter of time before the first fraud scandal comes along in college sports - this is a lot of not well tracked money being funneled around.
You can literally see the writing on the wall for this. Completely unregulated money being given to student athletes from nebulous sources. What could go wrong?
Well, this tied in with legalize sports betting will definitely be a disaster for some kids. We already see Iowa State and Iowa impacted, and that is just one place that it was investigated. And there will be a bunch of guys that get 100K NIL and lose it all on the books.
I like the SDSU model - they pay every one the same - from the top collectives. Then each player can go get his own, selling merch, or doing commercials or whatever. That way the player has a nice stipend to start, and all guys feel treated equal by the coach and school, but they can make more if they are more well known. Of course they did lose a starter to Arizona for apparent big payout - but that was well known he wanted to get paid big all season.
Legalized sports gambling should be an easy rule to follow. If you play a sport that you can gamble on, don't bet on it. If you do and are caught, expect consequences.
Let’s pretend major donor group for mens tiddly winks steps forward and offers to pay coaching salaries, equipment travel and expenses for three men’s teams, one being men’s lax. The group will pay nil money to all roster members to cover tuition, room and board plus. Roster members would have to sign a K with donor group stating they will pay tuition room and board. The lax scholarship money is then pulled from lax budget to align with Title ix monetary guidelines.
Yes this is simplistic but seems doable. Maybe an additional girls sport would be needed.
Yes this is simplistic but seems doable. Maybe an additional girls sport would be needed.
I think what is more likely to happen and has happened elsewhere is that the NIL collective does not take away scholarships, but in essence - adds them. I think this has happened at some football schools, I think BYU comes to mind - where the NIL Collective signed deals will all players not on scholarship and signed deals with them to give them enough money to cover room/board, tuition etc - essentially putting them on scholarship. But since its outside money - doesn't count against scholarship total and no title IX implications. I could see this as a good use in sports where scholarships are limited and you have an NIL really wanting to make a splash. At UR - I could only see this working in maybe Baseball, Football, or MLAX.
But don't you think if this is happening than someone is gonna sue under Title IX. That would make an interesting legal case as it does seem an end around Title IX if it is used that way.
I posted a story on here quite some time ago, about a guy I know that played football at Kansas State. He got involved in the NIL fundraising right away, said it was way easier raising money than they had expected. But to this point, this is exactly what they were doing. Paying walkons with full scholarships, so essentially buying extra scholarships.
Yes, although in theory you could add both a men’s and a women’s “non-scholarship” program at the same time and just use NIL to fund just one.
Not sure if that runs afoul of some larger Title IX control around how many sports you offer and if they all have to use common scholarship rules.
I would say legally this has no title IX implications because from a rules and legal standpoint - the Spider NIL collective is seperate and independent of UR, and from a technical standpoint - the coaches and administration can't be involved.
Forget men/women and title IX. There is nothing that would prohibit the collective from giving all money to one player, correct? The collective can do what they want. And since these are not "scholarships" but outside money - I don't see title IX being an issue.
BUT - in reality, I could see some schools and UR being one of them - having conversations with the NIL and explaining to them, we want to be equal as possible. Or we want you to share the wealth. But at the end of the day - its the collective decision.
so who is "the collective"?
someone with an axe to grind will someday test this in court and it won't be hard to connect the dots between this so called "collective" and people in the universities.
the schools are absolutely calling the NIL shots. there's no way some random fan is in charge of decising who gets what.
someone with an axe to grind will someday test this in court and it won't be hard to connect the dots between this so called "collective" and people in the universities.
the schools are absolutely calling the NIL shots. there's no way some random fan is in charge of decising who gets what.
This is what I haven't understood either. Supposedly the collectives are totally separate from the schools, but yet kids are being recruited in part by NIL dollars, so how does that work if the two sides aren't at least talking? You're not allowed to interfere with recruiting if you're a booster...but also, you can somehow wave $500,000 in front of a kid at the same time?
Should we believe that Larranaga had no idea his booster was offering that kind of cash for transfers and that they just picked Miami hoping that they would get that cash? Come on.
A bunch of collectives are being run by people who just left their schools' athletic departments. Pretty easy to connect the dots, as you said.
Agreed. Again, I am no legal expert but this just seems like a Title IX lawsuit waiting to happen. Yes, they are technically separate entities but they are being used to give extra money/benefits almost exclusively to male athletes heavily compensating men and they have to be able to coordinate with the schools in some manner because certainly you aren't paying $$$ to a kid a coach doesn't want on his roster.
Must be hell to be a coach these days. Imagine some booster paying someone who isn’t your top target a huge amount of money to commit, then your other targets or current players start thinking they are undervalued and start to look elsewhere. Pretty sure this has already happened in Miami.
You are correct in reality. Schools are calling shots. Kids are being offered NIL money as part of recruiting - which is illegal, and the NIL and schools are walking such a thin line between the two, they cross over all the time. But the NCAA created this mess and now the only way out is to full on minor league sports. Which I think based on the recent conference re-alignments - will happen sooner than later. We as a mid-major, will likely get left out and the P6 schools will break away from the NCAA and create their own system. The 2nd tier, which will be UR and many others - will then have to decide to we move forward as part of the NCAA or try to break off in some manner as well.
But to your point - is a random fan in charge of the NIL. No. But according to the NCAA - the answer is YES. And right now - that is all that matters.
The answer will be - there is no affiliation.
We know in theory this is not true - but on paper, this is how it works and how the NCAA wants it to work. And the collective can't just give money to the kids. They are expected to do something or use their image for something. Most collectives I see might have dinners or events, and will just expect the kids to show up and talk to donors. Or I even seen some that said the kids will perform some level of community service - like speaking to elementary schools, etc. There is some exchange. But it can be as simple as give a kid 50K and he shows up for one dinner.
But again - the school has ZERO connection on paper with the Collective. Just think of the collective as any other company. Imagine if Ukrops Foods wanted to use some of the kids in NIL work for their Food Hall. That food hall has nothing to do with UR. And the money they give the kids - goes straight to the kids.
But we all know in the background - the schools that are really using and exploiting NIL, are working with companies, and collective through middle men to ensure their players get deals or to secure deals for recruits before they get on campus.
As a few of us here will remember Carle Davis drilling in our heads in tax class at TCW, “Gain from whatever source derived.”
That likely is the main difference - athletic scholarships are tax free. But if a collective gives you 40K and the expectation is that is used for tuition, that is likely taxable as it would be seen as a 40K gift or payment for services/goods - so taxable income. So collectives just need to factor that into their payments to cover the tax burden.
Scholarship amounts that cover room and board and other non-qualified expenses are taxable, but obviously tuition is the bulk of the expense at a private school like UR, and that is indeed tax-free. In-state tuition at public schools typically a different story.
There was a Senate bill a couple of years ago that proposed to entirely tax at the federal level scholarships of athletes who receive over $20,000 in NIL money, but I don't think it went anywhere.
There was a Senate bill a couple of years ago that proposed to entirely tax at the federal level scholarships of athletes who receive over $20,000 in NIL money, but I don't think it went anywhere.
I mean realistically - how much do you think the Spider Collective is paying Noyes or Bailey or Hunt? 10K? 5K? more?
Similar threads
