forums

Darren Heitner talks about Big10 NIL agreements

Advertisement
I have seen many one-sided “#NIL revenue-sharing” contracts from Big Ten schools this cycle. They use the same form provided by the conference.It’s ludicrous that they put in bold writing: “The Institution in its discretion may, at any time, adjust the Consideration to reflect an increase or decrease in the Athlete's NIL value (e.g., a Heisman Trophy win may increase the NIL value and reduced playing time may decrease the NIL value).”And then in a subsequent section write: “The Consideration is not in consideration for the Athlete's commitment to attend the Institution or participate in the Institution's Program (i.e., not "Pay-for-Play").”Being able to adjust down pay based on reduced playing time is “Pay-for-Play.” This contract violates NCAA rules and cuts directly against the arguments NCAA lawyers have made to Judge Wilken when asking her to confirm the proposed settlement in House v NCAA. She should see these agreements!

Why is the NCAA doing nothing about this?It’s also very scary to allow the school to reduce compensation at its sole discretion. How are any athletes signing without negotiation?

Additionally, the contract allows the school to terminate if the athlete enters the transfer portal or is no longer on the Institution's teams. But I thought the Consideration isn’t tied to the athlete’s participation in the Institution’s Program! Furthermore, that termination right implies an athlete has a right to transfer, which we know to be true based on a decision in Ohio v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 1:23-CV-100.The same people complaining about Pay-for-Play are those who are exploiting it to the greatest extent possible .

And by the way, these contracts state that all of Institution's obligations, including the promise of payment, are conditioned on final approval of the House v NCAA settlement, which is still months away and there remains a possibility Judge Wilken rejects it. Then what?College athletes need real advocates to help them more than ever before.
 
Hoyacane1620 said:
I have seen many one-sided “#NIL revenue-sharing” contracts from Big Ten schools this cycle. They use the same form provided by the conference.It’s ludicrous that they put in bold writing: “The Institution in its discretion may, at any time, adjust the Consideration to reflect an increase or decrease in the Athlete's NIL value (e.g., a Heisman Trophy win may increase the NIL value and reduced playing time may decrease the NIL value).”And then in a subsequent section write: “The Consideration is not in consideration for the Athlete's commitment to attend the Institution or participate in the Institution's Program (i.e., not "Pay-for-Play").”Being able to adjust down pay based on reduced playing time is “Pay-for-Play.” This contract violates NCAA rules and cuts directly against the arguments NCAA lawyers have made to Judge Wilken when asking her to confirm the proposed settlement in House v NCAA. She should see these agreements!

Why is the NCAA doing nothing about this?It’s also very scary to allow the school to reduce compensation at its sole discretion. How are any athletes signing without negotiation?

Additionally, the contract allows the school to terminate if the athlete enters the transfer portal or is no longer on the Institution's teams. But I thought the Consideration isn’t tied to the athlete’s participation in the Institution’s Program! Furthermore, that termination right implies an athlete has a right to transfer, which we know to be true based on a decision in Ohio v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 1:23-CV-100.The same people complaining about Pay-for-Play are those who are exploiting it to the greatest extent possible .

And by the way, these contracts state that all of Institution's obligations, including the promise of payment, are conditioned on final approval of the House v NCAA settlement, which is still months away and there remains a possibility Judge Wilken rejects it. Then what?College athletes need real advocates to help them more than ever before.
Click to expand...
This is terrible contract. I’m shocked that any attorney (assuming it is not just agents negotiating) would allow a player to sign a one-sided deal which allows the payer to determine if the payee has met some amorphous standard set by the payer. Who and how exactly will it be determined if the payee’s NIL value has decreased?

Imagine a player being told in game 6 that his NIL is being reduced by 20% because his snaps have been reduced. His first thought will be to blame the coach for reducing his snaps. Or he will blame his teammates. And what if a collective tells a coach to reduce a player’s snaps so that they can reduce the player’s NIL pay out. And before you argue that will never happen, it happens all the time on the pro leagues on performance based contracts. A GM/owner will tell a coach to make sure a specific player does not hit a contractual performance mark, for example that he must play a certain number of snaps or have a certain number of carries/catches.

If you want to know where all of this will ultimately end up, the answer is a union for college athletes just like the pro athletes, and collective bargaining. Indeed, it is the NCAA which should be pushing for collective bargaining so that they can actually create enforceable rules. Otherwise, every single NCAA rule will continue to be challenged in court and will continue to be tossed out because the aggrieved party to the specific rule (think 2nd transfer which used to carry a 1 season penalty, or Juco years counting towards eligibility) was not a party to the rule and did not agree to the rule.

Yes I am now actively wanting a player’s union and collective bargaining because without it, there is no entity, certianly not the NCAA, which can create enforceable rules. And without some enforceable rules, college sports will be nothing but chaos. I love change and social evolution, but I do not care for chaos.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
AtlAtty said:
This is terrible contract. I’m shocked that any attorney (assuming it is not just agents negotiating) would allow a player to sign a one-sided deal which allows the payer to determine of the payee has met some amorphous standard set by the payer. Who and how exactly will it be determined if the payee’s NIL value has decreased?

Imagine a player being told in game 6 that his NIL is being reduced by 20% because his snaps have been reduced. His first thought will be to blame the coach for reducing his snaps. Or he will blame his teammates. And what if a collective tells a coach to reduce a player’s snaps so that they can reduce the player’s NIL pay out. And before you argue that will never happen, it happens all the time on the pro leagues on performance based contracts. A GM/owner will tell a coach to make sure a specific player does not hit a contractual performance mark, for example that he must play a certain number of snaps or have a certain number of carries/catches.

If you want to know where all of this will ultimately end up, the answer is a union for college athletes just like the pro athletes, and collective bargaining. Indeed, it is the NCAA which should be pushing for collective bargaining so that they can actually create enforceable rules. Otherwise, every single NCAA rule will continue to be challenged in court and will continue to be tossed out because the aggrieved party to the specific rule (think 2nd transfer which used to carry a 1 season penalty, or Juco years counting towards eligibility) was not a party to the rule and did not agree to the rule.

Yes I am now actively wanting a player’s union and collective bargaining because without it, there is no entity, certianly not the NCAA, which can create enforceable rules. And without some enforceable rules, college sports will be nothing but chaos. I love change and social evolution, but I do not care for chaos.
Click to expand...


I can't wait for the very first lawsuit where a player sues a coach for cutting his playing time (and by extension, his NIL salary).

It's going to be glorious...
 
AtlAtty said:
This is terrible contract. I’m shocked that any attorney (assuming it is not just agents negotiating) would allow a player to sign a one-sided deal which allows the payer to determine of the payee has met some amorphous standard set by the payer. Who and how exactly will it be determined if the payee’s NIL value has decreased?

Imagine a player being told in game 6 that his NIL is being reduced by 20% because his snaps have been reduced. His first thought will be to blame the coach for reducing his snaps. Or he will blame his teammates. And what if a collective tells a coach to reduce a player’s snaps so that they can reduce the player’s NIL pay out. And before you argue that will never happen, it happens all the time on the pro leagues on performance based contracts. A GM/owner will tell a coach to make sure a specific player does not hit a contractual performance mark, for example that he must play a certain number of snaps or have a certain number of carries/catches.

If you want to know where all of this will ultimately end up, the answer is a union for college athletes just like the pro athletes, and collective bargaining. Indeed, it is the NCAA which should be pushing for collective bargaining so that they can actually create enforceable rules. Otherwise, every single NCAA rule will continue to be challenged in court and will continue to be tossed out because the aggrieved party to the specific rule (think 2nd transfer which used to carry a 1 season penalty, or Juco years counting towards eligibility) was not a party to the rule and did not agree to the rule.

Yes I am now actively wanting a player’s union and collective bargaining because without it, there is no entity, certianly not the NCAA, which can create enforceable rules. And without some enforceable rules, college sports will be nothing but chaos. I love change and social evolution, but I do not care for chaos.
Click to expand...
Why would the best players want to be in a union? They have a lot more to gain by negotiating individually, and they're the ones that make the lion's share of the money. They're the ones who drive the process.

Sure, the third-stringers would love to have a price floor, but they aren't the captains of this ship.

I don't see the incentive for the high earners.
 
Brains said:
Why would the best players want to be in a union? They have a lot more to gain by negotiating individually, and they're the ones that make the lion's share of the money. They're the ones who drive the process.

Sure, the third-stringers would love to have a price floor, but they aren't the captains of this ship.

I don't see the incentive for the high earners.
Click to expand...
This is correct, just as it is in Kevin Durant’s best interest to negotiate separate from the other players so he is not limited by the NBA’s max contract or limitations on free agency. But it is in the sport’s best interest to have collective bargaining so that universities don’t have to negotiate with every player.

I have never worked on a a pro deal to know whether pro players are required to enter the player’s union (unlikely or it would have been challenged in court). I can only assume that the players believe they receive enough consideration from joining the union that it is in their best interest to do so. But the collective bargain model is the only model that will allow college sports to survive. Otherwise college sports will literally be year to year free agency with no rules, no limits on salary, no limits on tampering, etc. . I just can’t see how any sports league can survive in this manner.
 
AtlAtty said:
This is correct, just as it is in Kevin Durant’s best interest to negotiate separate from the other players so he is not limited by the NBA’s max contract or limitations on free agency. But it is in the sport’s best interest to have collective bargaining so that universities don’t have to negotiate with every player.

I have never worked on a a pro deal to know whether pro players are required to enter the player’s union (unlikely or it would have been challenged in court). I can only assume that the players believe they receive enough consideration from joining the union that it is in their best interest to do so. But the collective bargain model is the only model that will allow college sports to survive. Otherwise college sports will literally be year to year free agency with no rules, no limits on salary, no limits on tampering, etc. . I just can’t see how any sports league can survive in this manner.
Click to expand...
The English Premier League is the most popular sporting league by such distance it isn't even worth measuring. There are next to zero rules to begin with, and the ones that do exist aren't enforced. It's a **** near 100% free market.

College football would survive, but in a very clearly fully professional form.
 
Advertisement
AtlAtty said:
This is terrible contract. I’m shocked that any attorney (assuming it is not just agents negotiating) would allow a player to sign a one-sided deal which allows the payer to determine if the payee has met some amorphous standard set by the payer. Who and how exactly will it be determined if the payee’s NIL value has decreased?

Imagine a player being told in game 6 that his NIL is being reduced by 20% because his snaps have been reduced. His first thought will be to blame the coach for reducing his snaps. Or he will blame his teammates. And what if a collective tells a coach to reduce a player’s snaps so that they can reduce the player’s NIL pay out. And before you argue that will never happen, it happens all the time on the pro leagues on performance based contracts. A GM/owner will tell a coach to make sure a specific player does not hit a contractual performance mark, for example that he must play a certain number of snaps or have a certain number of carries/catches.

If you want to know where all of this will ultimately end up, the answer is a union for college athletes just like the pro athletes, and collective bargaining. Indeed, it is the NCAA which should be pushing for collective bargaining so that they can actually create enforceable rules. Otherwise, every single NCAA rule will continue to be challenged in court and will continue to be tossed out because the aggrieved party to the specific rule (think 2nd transfer which used to carry a 1 season penalty, or Juco years counting towards eligibility) was not a party to the rule and did not agree to the rule.

Yes I am now actively wanting a player’s union and collective bargaining because without it, there is no entity, certianly not the NCAA, which can create enforceable rules. And without some enforceable rules, college sports will be nothing but chaos. I love change and social evolution, but I do not care for chaos.
Click to expand...
I am 100% in favor of a 'College Football Player's Association' with collective bargaining. The only way to properly fix the transfer portal and revenue sharing are rules mutually agreed to by a 'CFBPA', the major P2/P4 conferences and a governing body.

Unfortunately each conference is only interested in itself and not the sport as a whole. Agents only care about getting a quick cut of player NIL agreement payout, and players generally lack legal representation acting in the players best interest.

Good luck!
 
Brains said:
The English Premier League is the most popular sporting league by such distance it isn't even worth measuring. There are next to zero rules to begin with, and the ones that do exist aren't enforced. It's a **** near 100% free market.

College football would survive, but in a very clearly fully professional form.
Click to expand...
The challenge to college football and basketball is that rules did exist, and their fan bases have some expectations of rules, especially in comparison to US pro leagues which have rules for salaries and changing teams. I don’t think a US fan base will continue to support a product at the current level that it doesn’t trust or understand because players are changing teams every season or contracts aren’t being met. I’m not saying it will crash and burn, but it will negatively impact the product from lack of continuity and ultimately fan interest.

Contracts need to have meaning and enforceability. Right now in college football and basketball they don’t from either side.

I can’t speak to soccer leagues as I can’t watch a sport in which less than 2 goals can be scored over 90 minutes and the game is considered a classic. And apparently no one knows how much extra time will be added. As an obnoxious, loud American I demand points. Maybe if soccer awarded 10 points per goal it would keep my interest. I half-jokingly say that the reason soccer fans sing and cheer so much is to give them something to do since most of the action on the field (to my admittedly un-trained eye) consists of; passes it, passes it, passes it, has it taken away, passes it, passes it, passes it, takes a shot and misses.
 
AtlAtty said:
The challenge to college football and basketball is that rules did exist, and their fan bases have some expectations of rules, especially in comparison to US pro leagues which have rules for salaries and changing teams. I don’t think a US fan base will continue to support a product at the current level that it doesn’t trust or understand because players are changing teams every season or contracts aren’t being met. I’m not saying it will crash and burn, but it will negatively impact the product from lack of continuity and ultimately fan interest.

Contracts need to have meaning and enforceability. Right now in college football and basketball they don’t from either side.

I can’t speak to soccer leagues as I can’t watch a sport in which less than 2 goals can be scored over 90 minutes and the game is considered a classic. And apparently no one knows how much extra time will be added. As an obnoxious, loud American I demand points. Maybe if soccer awarded 10 points per goal it would keep my interest. I half-jokingly say that the reason soccer fans sing and cheer so much is to give them something to do since most of the action on the field (to my admittedly un-trained eye) consists of; passes it, passes it, passes it, has it taken away, passes it, passes it, passes it, takes a shot and misses.
Click to expand...
Collective bargaining by athletes is a rarity in the world, including among its most successful leagues is the main point.

The best players in college football, and the collectives/other NIL sources, should insist on buyout clauses and/or multi-year deals. Both can address much of the "chaos" of the current market.
 
Brains said:
Collective bargaining by athletes is a rarity in the world, including among its most successful leagues is the main point.

The best players in college football, and the collectives/other NIL sources, should insist on buyout clauses and/or multi-year deals. Both can address much of the "chaos" of the current market.
Click to expand...
Tie multi-year scholarships with revenue sharing and transfer rules, including buyout clauses for by both sides.
 
Advertisement
Brains said:
Buyout clauses and transfer fees exist for a reason. There's no reason they wouldn't work in college football.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

A player wants to transfer should have to wait a minimum number of seasons. A team wants to runoff a player who’s not living up to expectations for whatever reason, they should have to pay out a guaranteed amount of the players revenue sharing for remainder of the players scholarship/contract. A player and a team could also agree to terminate the scholarship and let the player go.

Or something like that.
 
AtlAtty said:
This is correct, just as it is in Kevin Durant’s best interest to negotiate separate from the other players so he is not limited by the NBA’s max contract or limitations on free agency. But it is in the sport’s best interest to have collective bargaining so that universities don’t have to negotiate with every player.
Click to expand...

Not all decisions in a given sport are made between a player and the team they're playing for. Kevin Durant is negotiating for his own contract and that's all he controls. He is not going to get the NBA to change a rule that would be beneficial to him. That's why you need a union because the only leverage the players have is with their contracts.
 
Advertisement
Hoyacane1620 said:
Click to expand...


I know someone on here posted that Heitner is too much of a social media personality and self promoter. But he's nailing the hypocrisy. Saban with his 10M+ annual salary complaining to Congress about payers getting paid. Fickel with glaringly obvious NCAA violations complaining about "tampering".

Corruption runs really deep in college sports. And I think it no coincidence that more seasoned players like Cam and Barrow choose to portal into Miami. We've proven we have integrity.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top