Should NIL have buy outs if kids want to move?

[Palatine]

A large part of the justification for the portal is that coaches could move and players couldn't. Yeah, but almost every coach's contract has a buyout clause. They can't just change jobs every year without some financial penalty. Shouldn't buyout be part of NIL if the player wants to move?

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Makes zero sense under the current model. The schools aren’t the ones paying the players (technically) and I think most of these deals are year to year, where the protection of a buyout is of little value.

When they move to a new direct pay model, I’m not opposed to it as long as the players have proper representation when negotiating the contract. Of course, in that scenario, the NIL/other compensation payer would likely be paying more up front to compensate for the protection they get in a buyout. Buyouts are not just a given in coaching contracts. They’re negotiated and provide value to each party.

 

[superjohn]

A large part of the justification for the portal is that coaches could move and players couldn't. Yeah, but almost every coach's contract has a buyout clause. They can't just change jobs every year without some financial penalty. Shouldn't buyout be part of NIL if the player wants to move?

Coaches have contracts, NIL in its current form is boosters paying players. Players can renege and boosters can renege.

 

[Palatine]

What if you're a local car dealer or restaurant?