Kiffin's Offical Contract Sheet

[WinningIsRelentless]

I know, I get that but we are not talking about moonlighting or endorsements outside of his coaching contract with the university. He kept stating NIL monies to pay his salary, which can't be done in any form and signing some outside contract that will pay his additional years. He can have that as far as moonlighting but you can't turn around and use that contract money he is receiving as some sort of endorsement to pay his coaching salary. And no matter where the money is coming from, private or otherwise, it has to accounted for to the IHL as far as his coaching salary is concerned. That is directly circumventing the law.

I get what are trying say now but that $10MIL for NIL that they announced was exactly for student athletes. And the boost for NIL has to stay with the student athlete. A separate fund outside of NIL to pay coach/es, fine. They can't let those monies mix and what ever they are paying toward Kiffin's salary out of that fund still has to be and was reported in that contract sent to the IHL. Other wise the school would only report what they are are spending but they can't and didn't. Private or not, his total compensation as an employee of the university has to be disclosed.

Look man you just don?t get it. It can be mixed because all the collective does is basically brand endorsement deals. Those monies are earmarked for ?NIL? because ?NIL? is just a term used to define endorsement.

[Really Clark?]

Look man you just don?t get it. It can be mixed because all the collective does is basically brand endorsement deals. Those monies are earmarked for ?NIL? because ?NIL? is just a term used to define endorsement.

You cannot mix it because the NIL and how the collectives are allowed to operate cannot include coaches in those deals as they are for student athletes only. Now if they have some account and LLC that money can come in to pay coaches outside of NIL, fine. It's not advertised on the NIL site but I'm sure they can find a way do that. But they absolutely cannot use monies that are donated toward NIL deals for student athletes and use that to pay a coach salary, endorsement, etc.

Private foundations have to run money they are paying a coach through the university. They can't pay him directly, as far as his coaching salary is concerned.

ETA. I may have missed it but did it ever say that it was the Grove NIL was the private foundation that they were running this through? I only remember them say "private foundation"

[WinningIsRelentless]

You cannot mix it because the NIL and how the collectives are allowed to operate cannot include coaches in those deals as they are for student athletes only. Now if they have some account and LLC that money can come in to pay coaches outside of NIL, fine. It's not advertised on the NIL site but I'm sure they can find a way do that. But they absolutely cannot use monies that are donated toward NIL deals for student athletes and use that to pay a coach salary, endorsement, etc.

Private foundations have to run money they are paying a coach through the university. They can't pay him directly, as far as his coaching salary is concerned.

ETA. I may have missed it but did it ever say that it was the Grove NIL was the private foundation that they were running this through? I only remember them say "private foundation"

Show me one law/rule on the state or federal registry that deals with Collectives for college athletics. All the laws/rules that exist for NIL is the reporting requirements for tax purposes basically. I don?t know when you dreamed all of this up but it?s just that a dream.

I?m done with this conversation.

[Thick]

I was told that the NIL is non tax deductible, and the players who receive non-company sponsored monies are considered 1099. So if Company A hires Will to do some commercials, his contracted amount is taxed (W-2). If the 1099 part is true, players and their fams better get ready, bc the tax man cometh!

[Really Clark?]

Show me one law/rule on the state or federal registry that deals with Collectives for college athletics. All the laws/rules that exist for NIL is the reporting requirements for tax purposes basically. I don?t know when you dreamed all of this up but it?s just that a dream.

I?m done with this conversation.

The collectives were born from the Supreme Court ruling for Student Athletes. At no point in any ruling by the courts, state laws or the NCAA, does NIL monies extend beyond for student athlete. I didn't make anything up it's is literally everywhere under every ruling and every state law that's been enacted. It's for student athletes only. I cannot fathom how you think otherwise.

[WinningIsRelentless]

I was told that the NIL is non tax deductible, and the players who receive non-company sponsored monies are considered 1099. So if Company A hires Will to do some commercials, his contracted amount is taxed (W-2). If the 1099 part is true, players and their fams better get ready, bc the tax man cometh!

They are all 1099. W2 would make them employees and thus entitled to the standard benefit packages that are offered to other employees.

[Really Clark?]

I was told that the NIL is non tax deductible, and the players who receive non-company sponsored monies are considered 1099. So if Company A hires Will to do some commercials, his contracted amount is taxed (W-2). If the 1099 part is true, players and their fams better get ready, bc the tax man cometh!

A collective can be a 501c3 but ours is not and most are not, I believe.

[Johnson85]

I know, I get that but we are not talking about moonlighting or endorsements outside of his coaching contract with the university. He kept stating NIL monies to pay his salary, which can't be done in any form and signing some outside contract that will pay his additional years. He can have that as far as moonlighting but you can't turn around and use that contract money he is receiving as some sort of endorsement to pay his coaching salary. And no matter where the money is coming from, private or otherwise, it has to accounted for to the IHL as far as his coaching salary is concerned. That is directly circumventing the law.

Where is the rule or regulation that you think requires this? I'm a little skeptical it exists. When this issue has come up in the past, the question was asked related to foundations that are subject to a lot of (or complete?) control of the school. And there's a decent chance the school or IHL asked for the opinion they received. Not sure the IHL would have (1) gone out and put detailed rules and regulations out about 3rd parties not under the control of the school and what schools have to put in their contract to ensure those third parties don't supplement a coaches salary or provide any guarantee that the university is not allowed to provide and (2) done that in such a way that it can't easily be sidestepped by structuring the deal as some sort of endorsement deal or other type of contract that does not fall within the purview of the rule.

[Really Clark?]

Where is the rule or regulation that you think requires this? I'm a little skeptical it exists. When this issue has come up in the past, the question was asked related to foundations that are subject to a lot of (or complete?) control of the school. And there's a decent chance the school or IHL asked for the opinion they received. Not sure the IHL would have (1) gone out and put detailed rules and regulations out about 3rd parties not under the control of the school and what schools have to put in their contract to ensure those third parties don't supplement a coaches salary or provide any guarantee that the university is not allowed to provide and (2) done that in such a way that it can't easily be sidestepped by structuring the deal as some sort of endorsement deal or other type of contract that does not fall within the purview of the rule.

The IHL board has ruled on this previously with outside foundations and with this contract requiring all compensation and the term length to spelled out again, appears they have ruled the same in regards to third party. It's why what was sent to them this time included all compensation he's receiving not just what the school is paying and a term length of 4 years. When the contract is sent to the IHL board all funds are included in his compensation package. Let me ask you, if running everything through a private third party foundation would all allow the compensation and terms to be hidden from the IHL and FOI requests, why do we have it in print publicly and the IHL review it? Because the university can't and all monies for compensation have to be run through the university. A separate intently cant pay him direct or else all contracts for university employees could be hidden, president, AD, Deans, etc. Under the premise that a third party allows university employee contracts to be hidden from IHL, you could run them all through private 3rd party foundations They couldn't circumvent the law and the rules set by IHL. This is not a precedent that should be set. Maybe there is another area in state government where this is done and 3rd parties pay and sign contracts for employees to do their state job outside of state law, show me where that happened and what they are using to justify circumventing the law.

[Ezsoil]

So you?re saying that the foundation doesn?t have to report what they are paying in addition to his 4 year state contract? He?s getting paid regardless, and everyone knows the state only allows 4 year contracts. Am I missing something? Just asking

I'd think this would fall under the NIL changes ...a private foundation cam make a separate deal for some other personal services such as appearances or twitter commentary or anything else that can be thought of .....similar to how they do coaches shows to get around it...

[Really Clark?]

I'd think this would fall under the NIL changes ...a private foundation cam make a separate deal for some other personal services such as appearances or twitter commentary or anything else that can be thought of .....similar to how they do coaches shows to get around it...

No it doesn't fall under NIL. Coaches can't get NIL deals, that's for student athletes. Why would they? They have been able to get endorsements for forever.

That's been the contention of this thread. With this release from a FOI, it appears they still can't hide compensation or terms using a third party

[Ezsoil]

With NIL money? You have lost the plot dude. NIL money cannot be used to pay a coach. You have continuously brought up using NIL money. That is to pay the student athletes. Coaches can't get paid from that money and they can't put money into the NIL fund.

You keep missing the point ....the NIL ruling is FEDERAL case that supersedes any state law...and if you actually read the case law, you would understand that it is much broader that just college athletes ... it basically says ANYONE has a right to benefit from their name image and likeness....

Where is it stated that ALL NIL money is for college athletes that may be how the BI is sent up ...but any private organization can pay anyone for the use of their name image and likeness ....heck they could even pay Juice the dog if they like...

[Really Clark?]

You keep missing the point ....the NIL ruling is FEDERAL case that supersedes any state law...and if you actually read the case law, you would understand that it is much broader that just college athletes ... it basically says ANYONE has a right to benefit from their name image and likeness....

It does say but Coaches already benefit from it. They do not need NIL, they have never needed NIL!! They get endorsements from some of those same people regardless.

Coaches can't be employed by an NIL (same for all university employees), donate to an NIL (same with all university employees) and can't be a part of NIL deals. Now the last part has to do with helping broker a deal for a student athlete, granted. But donated monies are used for student athletes and until there is a rule change or Federal law, that's the way it will stay. These contracts are reported / reviewed by the university as well.

Even if coaches could get NIL deals, why would they need too? Name just one coach signed to a NIL deal. Heck just name one collective that have a coach listed under possible deals. Show me under the state law where anyone other than student athlete is mentioned under the regulations.

[Ezsoil]

It does say but Coaches already benefit from it. They do not need NIL, they have never needed NIL!! They get endorsements from some of those same people regardless.

Coaches can't be employed by an NIL (same for all university employees), donate to an NIL (same with all university employees) and can't be a part of NIL deals. Now the last part has to do with helping broker a deal for a student athlete, granted. But donated monies are used for student athletes and until there is a rule change or Federal law, that's the way it will stay. These contracts are reported / reviewed by the university as well.

Even if coaches could get NIL deals, why would they need too? Name just one coach signed to a NIL deal. Heck just name one collective that have a coach listed under possible deals. Show me under the state law where anyone other than student athlete is mentioned under the regulations.

You homey..you keep saying that NIL is restrictive to students only....what paragraph is that in the opinion?. Whatever restrictions are put in place by the collective and how they are filed with the IRS ...but there is no such thing as any "NIL LAW" ...now litigation may follow to see how different states handle it...But for now, there are no such rules in place . as the Supreme Court stated, ANYONE can receive compensation for their name image and likeness. this particular opinion defines what is allowed not what is restricted ....your concept of law is skewed ....

[Really Clark?]

You homey..you keep saying that NIL is restrictive to students only....what paragraph is that in the opinion?. Whatever restrictions are put in place by the collective and how they are filed with the IRS ...but there is no such thing as any "NIL LAW" ...now litigation may follow to see how different states handle it...But for now, there are no such rules in place . as the Supreme Court stated, ANYONE can receive compensation for their name image and likeness. this particular opinion defines what is allowed not what is restricted ....your concept of law is skewed ....

We have a law on the books in the State of Mississippi concerning NIL. That law is written specifically for student athletes. Please read the law, as I have, a show where that law governs anyone else but student athletes. It doesn't. Coaches do not and have never needed NIL, the could already make money off of endorsements. Student athletes could not. That is what the opinion is referring too, not that coaches can be a part of NIL deals. The only part of the NIL that address coaches (actually talks about school faculty) under the amended NIL law is that it relaxes the original law allowing them to help facilitate deals for the student athletes and allow them to help collectives fundraise for the NIL for the student athlete.

Read the Bulldog Initiative, in no section are NIL deals for coaches mentioned. It's for student athletes only. But it does state that they will adhere to NCAA compliance regulations and the state law govern NIL deals.