Phil covered a lot of these topics today. some items on his list and QA from callers:
- Will the NIL impact the actual athletic dept budget. Phil said the question didn't make sense as there is no impact, not part of AD, as it is athlete to sponsor.
- Jed mentioned the USC activity, which could get them in hot water as the NCAA is saying the school cannot broker deals and create pay for play. Jed mentioned the DB from NJ who just committed to USC as a possible NIL win over PSU.
- Can athletes use/wear their school's logos/jerseys/play videos etc - Phil mentioned the athletes cannot use the school items, which makes sense since those trademarks are the schools, and athletes do not own them. So if that is the case, the athlete would need an agreement with the school to use the logos for NIL $$, and likely have to pay the school.
- Question of states making laws, and NCAA making guidelines, but no federal law. Many states prohibiting pay for play or university employees engaging in NIL activities with athletes. Area of future confusion and disputes. Enforcement issues for NCAA, or even states who have laws.
- Discussed the big differences between those few athletes who are worth $$M and the vast majority worth very little.
- Mentioned Dabo's idea of paying all athletes $80k per year, and then they pay all their expenses. Have to say I never heard this one, but not sure it was touching the NIL rights.
- Discussed the issues of booster who pays for NIL but is not really and advertiser. So merely paying the player who does not provide any value, is that pay for play?
- Referred to Saquon's value had this been there for him at PSU.
- Discussed is PSU at disadvantage due to being in a "small market" vs say USC? Seemed to be pros and cons to that one.