|
|
Post by football44 on Nov 29, 2023 10:22:32 GMT -5
Foley read my post. Football and basketball NIL. Why don’t you start an NIL with Coach Riga? Ok so you guys just don't care about hockey...sounds good. Just saying that is what the current NIL world is doing in college hockey. Foley I love hockey but I played football at Holy Cross. That's my passion as it is for my partners who are ex-basketball guys. JR Butler who is a big HC Hockey guy I'm sure could get a group of ex-HC Hockey players together to form a HC Hockey NIL program. I agree that they should do one as well. |
|
|
|
Post by newadvisor on Nov 29, 2023 10:55:23 GMT -5
Yes, you are correct and yes it is! Next year starts now! ....and a gift to the CAF targeted to football would not hurt getting things started.  I would be much more inclined to work with the NIL partnership, as the money would hopefully make it into the hands of the athletes. Not sure where the CAF money goes, but it's not making it to the athletes directly.. |
|
|
|
Post by midwestsader05 on Nov 29, 2023 11:23:23 GMT -5
Yes, you are correct and yes it is! Next year starts now! ....and a gift to the CAF targeted to football would not hurt getting things started. I would be much more inclined to work with the NIL partnership, as the money would hopefully make it into the hands of the athletes. Not sure where the CAF money goes, but it's not making it to the athletes directly.. New A, this will empower the Holy Cross alumni network to have choices when giving back to the program. I’ll speak for myself and say I have and plan on financially supporting both CAF (Gridiron Club specifically) and 1843. I understand the differences b/t the two and there will be more to officially come on this but…CAF(GC) as the football operating budget run by the HC athletic dept and 1843 run by Mark, Whitey and Roger as a completely separate private entity helping get players internships, marketing promotions etc with small businesses and/or C-Corps. But you are correct that 1843 support will be going directly to the football players with NIL market value. And just as an FYI - Dobbs, Sluka and Jalen did receive some modest NIL money for this season in the first iteration of the football NIL. 1843 LLC will be the official long term solution solving for this current void in our platform to compete nationally at the Division 1 level. |
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 29, 2023 11:23:36 GMT -5
Yes, you are correct and yes it is! Next year starts now! ....and a gift to the CAF targeted to football would not hurt getting things started. I would be much more inclined to work with the NIL partnership, as the money would hopefully make it into the hands of the athletes. Not sure where the CAF money goes, but it's not making it to the athletes directly.. I don’t think athletic departments are allowed to give money to players. If they could U of Texas, for example, would dip into their deep pockets and soon be cutting huge paychecks to players. The sham of NIL does require some extra steps |
|
|
|
Post by midwestsader05 on Nov 29, 2023 11:30:17 GMT -5
75, rest assured there will be integrity with 1843 considering the current unregulated mess that NIL has become for many. HC doesn’t live in a world where one well heeled donor is going to cut a 250k check for 100 autographed footballs to pass out to buddies (although they could if they wanted haha). 1843 will work as the intermediary / facilitator to save our athletes time and logistical hurdles in their attempt to gain paid internships and advertising to LLCs, LPs, S-Corps, C-Corps etc.
Again more to come in January but rest assured this has been well thought out with folks that know what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Dec 5, 2023 13:04:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Dec 13, 2023 14:28:34 GMT -5
Just saw this come across the wire...
|
|
|
|
Post by inhocsigno on Dec 13, 2023 14:41:57 GMT -5
Just saw this come across the wire...
Yeah, but you'd have to live in Utah. I would rather live on the Hill than soak in Utah. |
|
|
|
Post by drjack on Dec 13, 2023 14:44:04 GMT -5
So do the students have to pax tax on those trucks?
I'd rather just have extra cash at that point
|
|
|
|
Post by hc1996 on Dec 13, 2023 14:46:29 GMT -5
So do the students have to pax tax on those trucks? I'd rather just have extra cash at that point I see all this ending very poorly for way too many kids. How are 18 year olds expected to manage this? |
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Dec 13, 2023 14:50:37 GMT -5
Just saw this come across the wire...
This shouldnt surprise us as NIL collectives legally hand out cash so I don't see why they couldn't hand out truck leases. The Utah football team already got this deal (which might explain the inclusion of the women's gymnastics team). |
|
|
|
Post by football44 on Dec 13, 2023 19:41:51 GMT -5
Just saw this come across the wire...
This shouldnt surprise us as NIL collectives legally hand out cash so I don't see why they couldn't hand out truck leases. The Utah football team already got this deal (which might explain the inclusion of the women's gymnastics team). Absolutely correct hcpride. Car and truck dealerships have the ability to work through Collectives to deliver vehicles to a student athlete or a whole team of athletes. |
|
|
|
Post by newadvisor on Jan 3, 2024 16:02:55 GMT -5
When are we going to find out more info on the 1843 collective?
|
|
|
|
Post by dharry13 on Jan 3, 2024 16:42:28 GMT -5
I assume you are looking for information on how to contribute. That info should be coming out shortly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jan 3, 2024 17:40:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 3, 2024 18:05:39 GMT -5
I'm all for collectives. However, be aware there are major Title IX implications for any collective that focusses exclusively, or nearly exclusively on male athletes. Disagree--here's why. A collective is entirely independent from a college and/or should be. It is not bound by Title IX inasmuch as it is not an educational entity and a private organization can recruit and compensate who it chooses. Just as ESPN is not bound to pay he same in media rights for men's basketball vs. women's basketball, so too a collective exercises its own discretion in who it chooses to ally with. Is Holy Cross the first PL football program to get a collective? I thought Colgate and Fordham would go in this direction first, and we can guess who will be last. |
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jan 3, 2024 18:19:45 GMT -5
I'm all for collectives. However, be aware there are major Title IX implications for any collective that focusses exclusively, or nearly exclusively on male athletes. Disagree--here's why. A collective is entirely independent from a college and/or should be. It is not bound by Title IX inasmuch as it is not an educational entity and a private organization can recruit and compensate who it chooses. Just as ESPN is not bound to pay he same in media rights for men's basketball vs. women's basketball, so too a collective exercises its own discretion in who it chooses to ally with. Is Holy Cross the first PL football program to get a collective? I thought Colgate and Fordham would go in this direction first, and we can guess who will be last. Correct on Title IX. Otherwise, some female athletes at power schools would already be raking it in. Imagine having to balance out Marvin Harrison's deal with a women's soccer player? Given that Georgetown I'm sure already has the ball rolling on an NIL program to stay relevant in Big East hoops, it's hard to imagine you guys being the LAST in the PL to push some funds towards football. If the NCAA created an entire new subdivision of schools wanting to directly pay student athletes, THEN I imagine Title IX implications would come about. I almost feel like star athletes will make out better financially under the current system, which is basically wild west, as opposed to getting paid directly by schools. Sort of like how bartenders make out much better financially as tipped employees than they would as W2 non-tipped employees. |
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Jan 3, 2024 18:20:47 GMT -5
All in for 1843, CAF, and 90 wide
With the combined efforts, and if we promote our approach,HC can responsibly change the world for mid and low major D1 sports in a positive way.
From a social media perspective, I ask the younger generations to think of HC as the new influencers in college athletics. If we succeed, Father Brooks will get it half right, and we move forward.
Remember if you bat .300 you make the HOF, so if we do this right Father Brooks and those embracing his approach will bat .500 and the rest bat 1000
A win-win for the Crusader faithful!✝️✝️✝️
|
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jan 3, 2024 18:29:58 GMT -5
I'm all for collectives. However, be aware there are major Title IX implications for any collective that focusses exclusively, or nearly exclusively on male athletes. Disagree--here's why. A collective is entirely independent from a college and/or should be. It is not bound by Title IX inasmuch as it is not an educational entity and a private organization can recruit and compensate who it chooses. Just as ESPN is not bound to pay he same in media rights for men's basketball vs. women's basketball, so too a collective exercises its own discretion in who it chooses to ally with. Is Holy Cross the first PL football program to get a collective? I thought Colgate and Fordham would go in this direction first, and we can guess who will be last. True, it is not an educational entity, but its sole purpose is to financially reward athletes who are playing a sport while a student at said university. At most colleges and universities, including Holy Cross and Georgetown, the student athlete is subsidized by the tuition/fees paid by all enrolling students. Why should they pay for the education of a student athlete who is receiving an NIL for playing a specific sport? (For some schools in the old Power Five, athletics, i.e., football mostly, underwrites the cost of the university's total athletic program, and then some. So the enrolling students at said university are not underwriting the cost of attendance of an enrolling athlete) By your definition, a collective could be set up to award NIL's to only White athletes, and that would not be discriminatory. |
|
|
|
Post by bowling alone on Jan 3, 2024 18:50:01 GMT -5
I’m an alum and a tuition-paying parent of a current HC student who does not have an athletic scholarship (or any, for that matter). While the collective/LLC is certainly free to do whatever it wants within legal boundaries, I believe such payments will exacerbate the athlete/non-athlete divide on the Hill, which seems to be much greater than when I attended in the 80s. As Phreek notes, athletes’ tuitions are already subsidized by tuition payments from non-athletes (i.e., their parents). They are also provided career counseling and networking opportunities non-athletes are not, and have dedicated training facilities that are not accessible to all students, among other school-funded perquisites. Now they will receive direct cash payments from a group of alumni? At the risk of sounding like Fr. Brooks, whose name is verboten on this board, all of this moves Holy Cross away from its core educational mission.
|
|
|
|
Post by hiltonheadcrusader on Jan 3, 2024 19:04:00 GMT -5
Feel free not to give if you do not support the mission.
|
|
|
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 3, 2024 19:16:18 GMT -5
True, it is not an educational entity, but its sole purpose is to financially reward athletes who are playing a sport while a student at said university. At most colleges and universities, including Holy Cross and Georgetown, the student athlete is subsidized by the tuition/fees paid by all enrolling students. Why should they pay for the education of a student athlete who is receiving an NIL for playing a specific sport? (For some schools in the old Power Five, athletics, i.e., football mostly, underwrites the cost of the university's total athletic program, and then some. So the enrolling students at said university are not underwriting the cost of attendance of an enrolling athlete) By your definition, a collective could be set up to award NIL's to only White athletes, and that would not be discriminatory. Some thoughts: 1. Unless specifically stated, a link between NIL and discrimination is very speculative. If a collective had an NIL deal last season for Matthew Sluka but not Josh Jenkins, that's not against the law. 2. The average NIL payment per athlete in Division I is $3,711 per person. For every Shaddeur Sanders and Arch Manning out there, a lot of other kids are getting $40 for signing autographs, so the idea of player underwriting really doesn't exist below the top 40-50 schools. And at many P3 universities, football does not underwrite the athletic department, it merely underwrites the football program. Texas A&M, for example, spends a whopping $46 million on football, but TV revenues cover less than half of a $169 million budget across all sports. 3.That said, does a PL school really need NIL to be competitive when the available talent pool of AI-capable athletes is so thin? A lot of people, myself included, thought Georgetown would be run out of the PL if they hoped to compete without 60 scholarships; yet, they beat Fordham, Lehigh, and Bucknell this past season, in no small part because most of the PL isn't very good even with scholarships. (By comparison, imagine how Georgetown would fare in CAA football.) How NIL changes this calculus, I'm not sure, but I suspect we're about to find out at HC, Colgate, and Fordham. |
|
|
|
Post by football44 on Jan 3, 2024 19:22:42 GMT -5
Non NIL believers are entitled to their opinions. I just don’t agree with their opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by 78purple on Jan 3, 2024 21:35:43 GMT -5
Non NIL believers are entitled to their opinions. I just don’t agree with their opinions. well said, 44 |
|
|
|
Post by 78purple on Jan 3, 2024 21:57:11 GMT -5
I’m an alum and a tuition-paying parent of a current HC student who does not have an athletic scholarship (or any, for that matter). While the collective/LLC is certainly free to do whatever it wants within legal boundaries, I believe such payments will exacerbate the athlete/non-athlete divide on the Hill, which seems to be much greater than when I attended in the 80s. As Phreek notes, athletes’ tuitions are already subsidized by tuition payments from non-athletes (i.e., their parents). They are also provided career counseling and networking opportunities non-athletes are not, and have dedicated training facilities that are not accessible to all students, among other school-funded perquisites. Now they will receive direct cash payments from a group of alumni? At the risk of sounding like Fr. Brooks, whose name is verboten on this board, all of this moves Holy Cross away from its core educational mission. Is there an athlete/non-athlete divide on The Hill ?? Really ?? Any more so than Alabama, USC or Notre Dame ??......its not clear that athletes have enhanced access to career counseling/network opportunities, and even if they do, there is no financial aspect to it.......the so-called "access " is pro bono from the standpoint of alumni athletes wanting to give back.....How is this moving away from the " core educational mission "  I have a hard time getting my hands around the concept that Gonzaga, Marquette, St. Mary's ( CA ), Dayton, Duke, Virginia, Villanova, or Notre Dame ( among others ) having their " educational mission " irrevocably damaged by supporting varsity basketball/football programs....If anything, ethical support of those programs enhances the mission....it does not detract from it |
|
I have a hard time getting my hands around the concept that Gonzaga, Marquette, St. Mary's ( CA ), Dayton, Duke, Virginia, Villanova, or Notre Dame ( among others ) having their " educational mission " irrevocably damaged by supporting varsity basketball/football programs....If anything, ethical support of those programs enhances the mission....it does not detract from it