If the coaches are making money, the AD and staff are making money and the school is profiting…Why the heck is it bad for the kids actually playing the sport to make money?
Hint: It’s not.
4 Likes
I agree.
Although it’s still going to take time until the market adjusts itself to properly value NIL contracts.
For example, if a top rated QB of a particular class is getting different NIL offers from different schools, then it’s likely that athlete takes the highest bidder. The dilemma becomes well what determines how much schools are willing to offer?
I think the biggest problem however is that at the end of the day , these aren’t professional athletes. They are by definition amateurs. Yet it’s possible that college athletes can make more in college than the professional leagues. I think universities will get to a point where they will figure out how to keep high value athletes for as long as possible.
2 Likes
Why leave if you’re making $10 million…
We must have a different definition of professional athlete. They are not players in the NFL, but they are being paid and reporting income to the IRS.
3 Likes
Not specifically the kids (kids? adults and professionals now)
Bad for the sport. Having schools with $20 million in salaries starting next year and “NIL” up to $30 million vs schools that might be able to pay out $20 million total is not creating a level or fair playing field. There is no way for the sport to keep even what little (very little) balance it had. All the top players will be in the B1G and SEC. School like Indiana and Illinois and Vandy will be bringing in better players because they have these huge media contracts to support them.
The Big 12 and ACC will fall further behind (not even mentioning G schools having cinderella seasons Like Utah’s Sugar Bowl, TCU’s Rose Bowl or UH’s Peach Bowl - no more)
At least NFL players have proven their value at some point in high level college or pros to earn their high paychecks. High school kids and freshmen college players have done nothing of proof. Just egos to pay high ratings.
(Not to mention it is every industry. How much money would the CEOs of Walmart be making without the low paid cashiers and stockers in their companies.
2 Likes
Agreed, but what’s stopping the NFL from doubling or even tripling their rookie contracts just to entice athletes to leave college early?
It’s getting dicey.
This is why the super league is likely going to happen. The networks want to pay as much as possible for the most valuable schools so that they only have to pay Pennie’s to everyone else
It also likely involves relegation. But the other issue arises with the lack of a formal draft in order to keep balance within the league. Otherwise, the Ohio States’ and Texas’ expect to remain the top dogs indefinitely
It’s not leveling the playing field though.
As I’ve pointed out before, it’s simply making the rich RICHER.
Four of the current top five schools are from the RICHEST conference.
At least eight of the top ten, and arguably nine of the top ten are large brands.
That’s NOT leveling in ANY sense of the word.
In the end, only the biggest, richest brands will have the money to fund NIL sufficiently enough to stay on top.
UH, for the record, is NOT one of those.
In this case, one of the biggest RICHEST brands of all is openly BUYING players.
1 Like
FIFY
It will also cause the money to dry up faster by donor fatigue. Millionaires don’t stay rich by giving an endless amount like this so it’s not sustainable. So from that standpoint it levels the playing field. Rich people own pro sports or big companies but don’t give that much away especially something like nil. A person needs to ask what I’m I getting by giving 3 mil to 1 player ? A few more wins for Michigan? Smart people buy property or a pro sports team vs hey I’ll give joe 2 mil to sign for my college. You’ll then have the kids or wife saying what the hell are y doing? So do you get stock in Michigan.
Buying stock in a college team could actually be way more worth it than giving to a player who can leave next yr or who doesn’t care about the school.
3 Likes
Every time the NCAA tried to bring any kind of order to this mess it was knocked down by the courts. This is entirely on the courts.
2 Likes
Actually…i see it the other way.
Parity Everywhere!
At a level we’ve never seen before and it is very exciting!
SMU is leading the ACC
Indiana is leading the B1G
BYU/Colorado are leading the Big 12.
None of those are blue blood powers…they just know how to build a team in this new era
3 Likes
I honestly see these “inestors” paying NIL money to earn a % of the player’s future earnings.
These early wave of NIL donors are S-T-U-P-I-D they are literally just setting their money on fire.
Remember the Aggies NIL pot?
1 Like
-
SMU isn’t in the Top Ten, and can’t even beat the top Big 12 team at home; BAD example, AND
-
nearly the entire Top Ten are familiar big, rich brands, with most of the Top Five being from the single RICHEST conference.
As I said, Rich getting RICHER.
To the extent SMU is your example, it’s not a very good example, and even if it were, it would be the exception that proves the rule, looking at the Top 5 and Top 10.
All that evidence is completely contrary to and debunking of your theory.
1 Like
The NFLPA…
Not sure what you’re looking at but SMU is leading the ACC and control their on path to the Playoff.
Notice that Power House, FSU, is barely even in that screen shot…lol
1 Like
More like:
Indiana is leading the B1G
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.BYU/Colorado are leading the Big 12
SMU is leading the ACC
Big 12 and ACC will not keep up with the B1G or SEC with their new much higher TV contracts. There might be more parity just within the B1G, not between the B1G and Big 12.
Not sure what YOU are looking at, but I suggest that you look at the Top Ten.
They are all familiar large, RICH brands, with SMU NOT included.
Also, take a look at the Top Five.
Four of the five are from the RICHEST conference, with the only outlier being from the second richest conference.
Again…rich getting richer. NO “parity.”
It’s good that SMU is having an uncharacteristically good year.
But that ONE exceptional team….does NOT prove that NIL is creating parity, especially given that a) it’s literally the ONLY example you can find, and b) it’s not even a very good example, given that they aren’t in the Top Ten and can’t beat the beat Big 12 teams. Likely overrated at that.
It’s simply the exception that proves the “NIL is rich getting richer” rule.
You’ll have to come up with more than one not so good example to prove your parity theory Bro.
News flash: you can’t.
First of all, Indiana is from the RICHEST conference; as I said, the rich got richer.
Bad example.
And last I checked, Indiana has neither played, nor beaten, a ranked team.
They most likely won’t finish on top of the B1G.
Unless and until they beat Ohio State, they will still have many skeptics, including yours truly.
Even UH has more wins over ranked teams at this point.
All you have to do is win your conference to land an automatic playoff spot!!!
Indiana, SMU, BYU & Colorado DEFINITELY have a path to the Playoff and 2 of those 4 were G5 programs two years ago…hardly your typical playoff participants
1 Like