Transfer portal and NIL Money, how they have changed college sports".

[Thirteen Below]

Part of me really dislikes NIL. But in fairness, it's the players and coaches who sell tickets, attract broadcast rights, and attract advertising. Why shouldn't they be paid? And the view that college and olympic athletics is amateur and the players shouldn't receive anything is naive, and has been for a long time. If anything, it's contributed to graft and corruption. The implementation of NIL will be imperfect, but it's better than doing nothing at all.

I flat-out hate it, but I can't really blame the players. I blame the universities and the television networks - they're the ones who turned school athletic programs from a fun, healthy pastime and entertainment for the students and alumni into a multi-billion dollar cash machine for college administrators and media corporations.

The fun's over; it's all about making rich people richer. So yeah - might as well call it a day, and let the players finally get their share of it too.

I wonder how this will affect smaller schools, like DII and DIII?

What about draft eligibility for college athletes? Will the NFL be able to legally defend their current eligibility requirements, if an 18-year old player sues for the right to play professional football? After all, they're already a pro the day they set foot in a college locker room as a freshman, right?

 

[weeds]

Since these guys are becoming de facto employees of the university then ... what becomes of the once-prized full-boat athletic scholarship? Not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things anymore but should these athletes then be getting a free ride? My perception, be it right or wrong, is that by and large the notion of a "student-athlete" in Men's BB or FB was largely a bad joke anyway - there are exceptions that you never hear about, I get it.

If as a good number of pundits are calling the paying of college athletes as employees, as "recognizing the reality" of the situation, then, are we going to "recognize the reality" that a good portion of the very guys looking for a payday, really aren't and never have been "students" anyway? Will those wasted scholarships then be granted to bonafide academics?

 

[Voyageur]

Since these guys are becoming de facto employees of the university then ... what becomes of the once-prized full-boat athletic scholarship? Not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things anymore but should these athletes then be getting a free ride? My perception, be it right or wrong, is that by and large the notion of a "student-athlete" in Men's BB or FB was largely a bad joke anyway - there are exceptions that you never hear about, I get it.

If as a good number of pundits are calling the paying of college athletes as employees, as "recognizing the reality" of the situation, then, are we going to "recognize the reality" that a good portion of the very guys looking for a payday, really aren't and never have been "students" anyway? Will those wasted scholarships then be granted to bonafide academics?

It's going to be interesting seeing how this plays out. A lot of schools could end up dropping football, or at least moving down from DI to DII or DIII. Some could also opt out of the NCAA all together. We might even see a newly structured alliance of colleges and conferences, who set rules that are agreed upon between players and schools, and they'll get a lot of the players who aren't quite good enough to be "super stars" at the highest level.

This is going to change the whole landscape of college football.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Goodbye, college sports. Soon there'll be nothing left but football and men's basketball. Wonder if the major hockey schools can save hockey?

Much like many of the programs that cost Universities more money than they made and were scrapped, many of these sports teams will become clubs. Self funded and budgeted through private donations.

I flat-out hate it, but I can't really blame the players. I blame the universities and the television networks - they're the ones who turned school athletic programs from a fun, healthy pastime and entertainment for the students and alumni into a multi-billion dollar cash machine for college administrators and media corporations.

Greed will eventually catch up with you and this is what is happening to Colleges and their "Sports". They rode those cash cows and milked them for as long as they could, now everyone wants a share of that milk. The only people I "feel sorry for" in all this are fans of the have-nots. Those who will now see their one time successful team, become a D4 equivalent.

Since these guys are becoming de facto employees of the university then ... what becomes of the once-prized full-boat athletic scholarship? Not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things anymore but should these athletes then be getting a free ride? My perception, be it right or wrong, is that by and large the notion of a "student-athlete" in Men's BB or FB was largely a bad joke anyway - there are exceptions that you never hear about, I get it.

If as a good number of pundits are calling the paying of college athletes as employees, as "recognizing the reality" of the situation, then, are we going to "recognize the reality" that a good portion of the very guys looking for a payday, really aren't and never have been "students" anyway? Will those wasted scholarships then be granted to bonafide academics?

My guess is that Universities will drop the education farce for the major programs. Getting a degree will become optional. Athletes are being paid to play, they don't need to be enrolled in classes, the sport is their "education".

The other interesting thing with all this change, how will it effect TV revenue sharing? Deals have already been made by big Networks, that were made before all these changes. Will Networks want to change the deals? Will the MAJOR schools now demand more to televise their teams?

Will Schools decide that players can play for as many years as they want? How will this effect the pool of players available to the NFL?

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Poppa San]

It's going to be interesting seeing how this plays out. A lot of schools could end up dropping football, or at least moving down from DI to DII or DIII. Some could also opt out of the NCAA all together. We might even see a newly structured alliance of colleges and conferences, who set rules that are agreed upon between players and schools, and they'll get a lot of the players who aren't quite good enough to be "super stars" at the highest level.

This is going to change the whole landscape of college football.

Maybe the NAIA will become a thing again.

 

[Voyageur]

Maybe the NAIA will become a thing again.

I have a hunch it's going to be a solid option for schools. A lot of kids want to play sports, and are willing to do it for free. I know it never entered my mind that I'd get paid. Yet, I would never turn down a few bobs that would help me enjoy a bit of night life.

 

[Thirteen Below]

One thing I often wonder about, but have never thought of a good answer because I just don't understand the issue well enough... how will it affect the pro game? I know it's already caused a lot of marginal underclassmen to stay in school rather than declare early, which is a good thing for the NFL because by the time they do enter the draft the scouts have a much better idea of how good they're going to be. A team doesn't have to waste as many draft picks on "cross your fingers and do the sign of the cross" guys.

But what else? Could mean that we'll see more and more players starting or contributing their first year, rather than using a roster spot while warming the bench for one or two development years. Could make training camps more competitive; so that's a good thing.

Seems to me that in some ways, this will only improve the quality of play in the NFL. The league will still draft 255-260 players each April, and they'll still be the best 255-260 players in college football. There are probably going to be a few challenges for GMs, though - it's certainly going to change the way they evaluate talent, and probably the way they draw up contracts. Seems that in some ways, it'll also change the strategies GMs use for building their rosters.

Also, there may never again be another NFL team younger than the 2023 Packers.

 

[weeds]

Admittedly, I'm not a college football guy save the occasional Badgers game - I don't even watch the National Championship games. Where the NFL is concerned, I'll sit down for the Packers' games exclusively. If there is a match up on any given game day, I'll zero in and watch. Truthfully, the last Super Bowl I've watched in its entirety was probably SB45 - that's how slick the NFL game has worn this bitter old man.

So ... the NCAA game would become the NFL's Triple A farm system - the only learning going on there would be How to Hire an Agent 101, Contractual caveats 201 and How To Use Sports Cliches in the Interview Process 201 - all Sophomore level coursework because "Junior years" wouldn't exist?

 

[Voyageur]

Thirteen and Weeds;

You both point out interesting perspectives on the game, and where it's heading. I agree, colleges have always been the training ground for the big time, like a minor league, and I don't think that specifically changes. But, I do think the time is coming when you will see interaction between the NFL and college football. But, I have my own perspective on how that might happen. Here's what I see.

I see the time coming when every NFL team is asked to contribute $5 mill (an arbitrary figure, put whatever you want in here) into a fund that's used as NIL money for colleges. That's 32 teams, so we're talking $160 mill total.

In the process of this happening, I see the 5 major conferences slipping away from the rest, forming their own alliance, with their own media branding. At this point, I believe there's around 65 schools in these 5 conferences.

I see them getting an equal split among all of them, from the NFL, for about $2.4 mill each. This money would be earmarked as developmental money given out as NIL money, across the board, for a given number of players on each team. Let's say it's given to a total of 60 scholarship players at a figure of $40k each.

The fact is, if the NIL program keeps growing, the time will come where teams will turn the player's agreements to play football into contracts as much as scholarhips, that require them to fill their obligations under it's terms, and be ineligible to play elsewhere, including opting into the portal, or skipping to the NFL prior to fulfilling their contract.

It's going to end up regimented like real life, because in the real world, contracts can be the way you earn money, if the person employing you makes it mandatory. If you want the job, you sign on the dotted line.

 

[OldSchool101]

One thing I often wonder about, but have never thought of a good answer because I just don't understand the issue well enough... how will it affect the pro game? I know it's already caused a lot of marginal underclassmen to stay in school rather than declare early, which is a good thing for the NFL because by the time do enter the draft the scouts have a much better idea of how good they're going to be. A team doesn't have to waste as many draft picks on "cross your fingers and do the sign of the cross" guys.

But what else? Could mean that we'll see more and more players starting or contributing their first year, rather than using a roster spot while warming the bench for one or two development years. Could make training camps more competitive; so that's a good thing.

Seems to me that in some ways, this will only improve the quality of play in the NFL. Probably going to be a challenge for GMs, though - it's certainly going to change the way they evaluate talent, and probably the way they draw up contracts. Seems that in some ways, it'll also change the strategies GMs use for building their rosters.

Good points -13
This is just my speculation, but it’s already changed our draft strategy.

As a team that was thought to be in rebuild, the Packers have shown our rebuild is clearly not the 3-4 years (at minimum) I perceive many expected. Due to this, we’ve pushed our chips into the earlier rounds (notice we picked 6 times in the top 111 overall).

What I think you get with NIL are a more Pro ready player, but ESPECIALLY IF you target:
1. Players from that ~Top 25 collegiete Programs who are standout athletes in their respective class. Call it similar to SOS in scheduling.

2. Players who held either
a)Leadership Roles (more time to develop and implement)
b) a high volume of experience (games played or multiple programs played in)

Part 2 (especially B) is an outcome derivative of NIL. You’ll notice across the draft how many players were involved in school transfers or 5th year Seniors. Some even qualified by Redshirting or a qualifying Covid year and had 6 years to mature.

So in summary NIL both increased the frequency of more experienced options in the draft and the quality of coming from multiple programs. The desire to get more draft stabs early on was wise for a team that is CURRENTLY a bonafide contender imo. It will result in older players coming off their Rookie contract, but that’s a bridge we can cross after we win our SB.

PS. Apologize. I’ve got to get my whole sentiment in one post because they are working me to death and I have no time lately (it’s ok for now the $ is great) Love you guys have a wonderful Memorial Day!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What I think you get with NIL are a more Pro ready player,

For the most part I followed and agree with your points, but not this one.

Explain to me how players were less "pro ready" before NIL and how NIL has changed that. Are you inferring that because they entered into a professional like contract (for NIL money), they are more seasoned when it comes to contracts and obligations? Perhaps. However, as far as talent goes, I would say NIL isn't improving players, if anything it might do the opposite. A freshman all of a sudden has a million dollars. Does this make him more/less/same competitive and eager to advance to that next level? My answer is all of the above is possible, depending on the individual.


I don't think the fact that NFL players are getting paid more money than they ever have, makes the 2024 player any better than the guy earning 90% less in the 80's.

 

[Thirteen Below]

For the most part I followed and agree with your points, but not this one.

Explain to me how players were less "pro ready" before NIL and how NIL has changed that. Are you inferring that because they entered into a professional like contract (for NIL money), they are more seasoned when it comes to contracts and obligations? Perhaps. However, as far as talent goes, I would say NIL isn't improving players, if anything it might do the opposite. A freshman all of a sudden has a million dollars. Does this make him more/less/same competitive and eager to advance to that next level? My answer is all of the above is possible, depending on the individual.


I don't think the fact that NFL players are getting paid more money than they ever have, makes the 2024 player any better than the guy earning 90% less in the 80's.

I don't think the NIL is necessarily making players better; it's making it more likely they won't enter the NFL until they've gotten all the developmental experience college football has to offer.

I think the reasoning is that far fewer underclassmen are coming out of school early. Players are much more likely to have a full 4 years experience in a major college program when they are drafted - more development time, and also more of a known quantity than guy with only a couple years of experience. By the time they're being drafted, teams have much more certainty about how good they're going to be.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Thirteen and Weeds;

You both point out interesting perspectives on the game, and where it's heading. I agree, colleges have always been the training ground for the big time, like a minor league, and I don't think that specifically changes. But, I do think the time is coming when you will see interaction between the NFL and college football. But, I have my own perspective on how that might happen. Here's what I see.

I see the time coming when every NFL team is asked to contribute $5 mill (an arbitrary figure, put whatever you want in here) into a fund that's used as NIL money for colleges. That's 32 teams, so we're talking $160 mill total.

In the process of this happening, I see the 5 major conferences slipping away from the rest, forming their own alliance, with their own media branding. At this point, I believe there's around 65 schools in these 5 conferences.

I see them getting an equal split among all of them, from the NFL, for about $2.4 mill each. This money would be earmarked as developmental money given out as NIL money, across the board, for a given number of players on each team. Let's say it's given to a total of 60 scholarship players at a figure of $40k each.

Whenever I stop paying attention for a minute, my mind keeps sneaking off into the bushes and playing with that same general theme. It's never been able to get very far with it, but it at least bats it around a little bit every now and then. You've thought it through far better than I've ever been able to develop it, and I feel very strongly that you're very much onto something.

I don't see any way the league can stop itself from something of that nature. Their Machievellian minds can't possibly look at this situation without seeing a dozen ways to get their claws around a number of brand new revenue streams, and they'll essentially infiltrate college football before they're done.

Maybe Green Bay works out a relationship with Georgia; where we get our helmets painted by the same place to cut costs and get first shot at their best players....

The fact is, if the NIL program keeps growing, the time will come where teams will turn the player's agreements to play football into contracts as much as scholarhips, that require them to fill their obligations under it's terms, and be ineligible to play elsewhere, including opting into the portal, or skipping to the NFL prior to fulfilling their contract.

It's going to end up regimented like real life, because in the real world, contracts can be the way you earn money, if the person employing you makes it mandatory. If you want the job, you sign on the dotted line.

I think it has to be this way, and I think that's something where the NFL's business-brains would probably take a leadership role. The current structure is disastrous, just complete chaos. There was never any way that was ever going to be sustainable, and I can't believe how much they dropped the ball on that. The loopholes are just jawdropping.

 

[Voyageur]

Whenever I stop paying attention for a minute, my mind keeps sneaking off into the bushes and playing with that same general theme. It's never been able to get very far with it, but it at least bats it around a little bit every now and then. You've thought it through far better than I've ever been able to develop it, and I feel very strongly that you're very much onto something.

I don't see any way the league can stop itself from something of that nature. Their Machievellian minds can't possibly look at this situation without seeing a dozen ways to get their claws around a number of brand new revenue streams, and they'll essentially infiltrate college football before they're done.

Maybe Green Bay works out a relationship with Georgia; where we get our helmets painted by the same place to cut costs and get first shot at their best players....



I think it has to be this way, and I think that's something where the NFL's business-brains would probably take a leadership role. The current structure is disastrous, just complete chaos. There was never any way that was ever going to be sustainable, and I can't believe how much they dropped the ball on that. The loopholes are just jawdropping.

I think the biggest mistake the NCAA made was not understanding before it started, that they could lose in court. I think their arrogance in thinking they were untouchable created this problem. Had they used their heads, and created some sort of equity for the players, before it hit the courts, they could have had something fairly well cut in stone, in place, to maintain control.

The reason the NCAA has failed like this is arrogance. The belief that they were above reproach, and nobody could, nor had the right, to challenge them destroyed them. The courts had no choice but to rule against them, and turn it into the wild west.

Had they gone into the courts with a plan for realigning the revenue stream where athletes could make some money from playing, the courts might well have ruled in their favor, saying that the scholarship itself was a huge part of the payment they were getting to play the sport, for that school.

It's kind of like that old adage, "You can't put the Genie back in the bottle, after it's gotten out." Now college football is nearing that crossroads where certain things are going to be inevitable. It's not going to be pretty. Let's just hope that pro sports doesn't totally take over the programs in schools, because the next reach will be past colleges, and into high schools. And that is nearing as well, as some states, like Florida, are looking to allow kids to have NIL deals while in high school.

I can only imagine how that's going to fly. Little Johnny is 6-5, and good enough to play varsity basketball in HS by the age of 10, so for the next 7 years he plays with a high school team that has sponsors who pay what is now Big Johnny at 7-2, a million a year to play at their school, even though it's 85 miles away from where he lives. No problem, Johnny's new digs is large acreage, and there's a helipad about 50 yards away from the back door. He gets air lifted to school every day when it's time to practice, because he's been home tutored and doesn't have to attend in person. Just when he feels like it.

 

[OldSchool101]

For the most part I followed and agree with your points, but not this one.

Explain to me how players were less "pro ready" before NIL and how NIL has changed that. Are you inferring that because they entered into a professional like contract (for NIL money), they are more seasoned when it comes to contracts and obligations? Perhaps. However, as far as talent goes, I would say NIL isn't improving players, if anything it might do the opposite. A freshman all of a sudden has a million dollars. Does this make him more/less/same competitive and eager to advance to that next level? My answer is all of the above is possible, depending on the individual.


I don't think the fact that NFL players are getting paid more money than they ever have, makes the 2024 player any better than the guy earning 90% less in the 80's.

Maybe the term “pro ready” wasn’t the best term. Let’s call it more mature. I’m probably just regurgitating lingo used by scouts when I read their analysis. I don’t know that anyone is ready for the Pro environment the ones we think are often spiral into nothingness. I just think there’s a marked difference between a college Junior from 1 program declaring and that same player across a full 4 seasons + AND being 18 months years older (also playing in multiple programs)

I graduated HS as a 17 year old and I can assure you when I ran Track (this goes for any of the 3 sports I played through HS) as a 16 year old Junior against a 19 year Senior in the same event, it was a noticeable difference in maturity and I’m not the one who initially noticed the disparity, so there was zero conflict of interest in my part. Even half of that or 1.5 years of growth can spell the difference between a 5’10” 175lb athlete and a 6’1 X 200 pounder if that makes sense. Thats just the physical side what about the raw experience that 19 year old got from being held back a year or getting a 5th go at it.
Age is a huge factor for young men playing sports and it often plays a vital role in draft placement. How many players do we see declaring early for the draft that should’ve stayed at least 1 more season to improve their stock. Now they can if they get compensated or have a chance to go to a program that puts their talent on full display. Call it strengthening their stock and that’s absolutely an outcome of NIL.

I never considered the contractual advantages, but that’s a good angle also, but probably benefiting the individual. It still affects the scenario caused by NIL so good thought there.

 

[Voyageur]

Maybe the term “pro ready” wasn’t the best term. Let’s call it more mature. I’m probably just regurgitating lingo used by scouts when I read their analysis. I don’t know that anyone is ready for the Pro environment the ones we think are often spiral into nothingness. I just think there’s a marked difference between a college Junior from 1 program declaring and that same player across a full 4 seasons + AND being 18 months years older (also playing in multiple programs)

I graduated HS as a 17 year old and I can assure you when I ran Track (this goes for any of the 3 sports I played through HS) as a 16 year old Junior against a 19 year Senior in the same event, it was a noticeable difference in maturity and I’m not the one who initially noticed the disparity, so there was zero conflict of interest in my part. Even half of that or 1.5 years of growth can spell the difference between a 5’10” 175lb athlete and a 6’1 X 200 pounder if that makes sense. Thats just the physical side what about the raw experience that 19 year old got from being held back a year or getting a 5th go at it.
Age is a huge factor for young men playing sports and it often plays a vital role in draft placement. How many players do we see declaring early for the draft that should’ve stayed at least 1 more season to improve their stock. Now they can if they get compensated or have a chance to go to a program that puts their talent on full display. Call it strengthening their stock and that’s absolutely an outcome of NIL.

I never considered the contractual advantages, but that’s a good angle also, but probably benefiting the individual. It still affects the scenario caused by NIL so good thought there.

You're absolutely right. That age difference is huge. Being a 17 year old graduate, and competing at the top level in HS sports is pretty amazing, because a lot of kids that age have close to two years left of playing, and growing.

My #2 son went through that in all sports. He was the star in both baseball and football, but it was a constant challenge. He was a long way off from being 18 when he graduated from HS. In fact, he was in college, playing college football, on his 18th birthday.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There seems to be pros and cons of a players age and experience coming out of college. We have heard lots of talk about it due to the Covid Exemption creating a lot of "older" guys being in the draft the last few years. Would you rather have a rookie 21 year old RB with low mileage or a rookie 24 year old RB with high mileage? All things equal, I would lean towards the 21 year old. I might feel the opposite with a QB.

NIL (Name, Image and Likeness) money amounts aren't always given in direct proportion to talent. As a matter of historical fact, they were intended to be tied to the use of an athlete's name, image, and likeness through marketing and promotional endeavors, not tied to what happens on the field/court/ice. They were not supposed to be used to recruit athletes per se.

Anyway, we will have to see what kind of "Pro" the NFL gets with college players that have already potentially made millions at the college level. If I had to put money on it, I think we see more players make bad decisions with the cash, get into trouble, aren't nearly as hungry to advance as they once were...or a combination of all of the above.

 

[Voyageur]

There seems to be pros and cons of a players age and experience coming out of college. We have heard lots of talk about it due to the Covid Exemption creating a lot of "older" guys being in the draft the last few years. Would you rather have a rookie 21 year old RB with low mileage or a rookie 24 year old RB with high mileage? All things equal, I would lean towards the 21 year old. I might feel the opposite with a QB.

NIL (Name, Image and Likeness) money amounts aren't always given in direct proportion to talent. As a matter of historical fact, they were intended to be tied to the use of an athlete's name, image, and likeness through marketing and promotional endeavors, not tied to what happens on the field/court/ice. They were not supposed to be used to recruit athletes per se.

Anyway, we will have to see what kind of "Pro" the NFL gets with college players that have already potentially made millions at the college level. If I had to put money on it, I think we see more players make bad decisions with the cash, get into trouble, aren't nearly as hungry to advance as they once were...or a combination of all of the above.

You're probably a lot closer to the reality of what's going to happen than any of us would like to believe. A kid with a lot of money is a serious problem for themselves. There are already way too many temptations for them on campus than they need, and this just ups the ante to a serious level.

I've heard they have a short leash on Arch Manning. I've also heard that he's probably never going to play a down for the Longhorns and will find a way to get a 2nd red shirt from this year, so he can move on next year, and still have 4 years of eligibility to play, and still raking in millions every year in NIL. Of course, that's not the talk you hear in public. He's a great publicity draw at this point, and that's what matters. A lot of people see Trey Owens ending up starting next year, and that's why he hasn't hit the portal.

That said, I've also heard they have a couple of top flight QBs already in their sights as the next one up behind either Owens or Manning.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You're probably a lot closer to the reality of what's going to happen than any of us would like to believe. A kid with a lot of money is a serious problem for themselves. There are already way too many temptations for them on campus than they need, and this just ups the ante to a serious level.

I've heard they have a short leash on Arch Manning. I've also heard that he's probably never going to play a down for the Longhorns and will find a way to get a 2nd red shirt from this year, so he can move on next year, and still have 4 years of eligibility to play, and still raking in millions every year in NIL. Of course, that's not the talk you hear in public. He's a great publicity draw at this point, and that's what matters. A lot of people see Trey Owens ending up starting next year, and that's why he hasn't hit the portal.

That said, I've also heard they have a couple of top flight QBs already in their sights as the next one up behind either Owens or Manning.

Well said.

We see it in the NFL and at the college level, money can buy trouble, lots of it. That isn't to say that a college aged kid that suddenly gets a million dollars, won't do good with it either.

New found money can lead anyone to new found things, including troubling things and good things.

I think paying college athletes is going to have more of a negative impact on "the sport", whatever that sport may be. I don't think it will produce "better" athletes, better student-athletes or better people in general. Instead, money will just complicate things more for college athletes.

Gymnast Olivia Dunne is said to have brought in over $3.3M and if you follow her, she is a good gymnast, but not a great one by any means.

 

[Voyageur]

Well said.

We see it in the NFL and at the college level, money can buy trouble, lots of it. That isn't to say that a college aged kid that suddenly gets a million dollars, won't do good with it either.

New found money can lead anyone to new found things, including troubling things and good things.

I think paying college athletes is going to have more of a negative impact on "the sport", whatever that sport may be. I don't think it will produce "better" athletes, better student-athletes or better people in general. Instead, money will just complicate things more for college athletes.

Gymnast Olivia Dunne is said to have brought in over $3.3M and if you follow her, she is a good gymnast, but not a great one by any means.

Your point on Olivia Dunne is so true, and what escapes me is how she is given so much considering she isn't even one of the Olympic hopefuls to represent the US at this point. Suni Lee, Simone Biles, and Gabby Douglas are so far the three best we have, and even if there is a role for Dunne, it's not going to be a major role. But, not following it as close as I should, I suppose anything can happen.

You're right that none of it really hinges on talent. It's more about name recognition. So much else plays into it, and Olivia Dunne projects those things that others don't, in the sport. She indicated that her Olympic dreams died when she was about 15 or 16, due to an injury. It's plausible, but quite honestly, I just don't see her as good as those on the international stage. She'd only stand to lose some of that NIL money if she competed against them, and that wouldn't make sense.

Dunne, fortunately for her, realizes she has the goose that lays golden eggs, and has used it to her advantage to make money, and I don't blame her. She knows that the goose is only on loan to her, she don't own it, so someone else is gonna be getting those eggs in the near future.

But, for every smart kid, who suddenly ends up with money, there's at least two or three that haven't got a clue on how to move forward, and they are destined to fail.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Your point on Olivia Dunne is so true, and what escapes me is how she is given so much considering she isn't even one of the Olympic hopefuls to represent the US at this point. Suni Lee, Simone Biles, and Gabby Douglas are so far the three best we have, and even if there is a role for Dunne, it's not going to be a major role. But, not following it as close as I should, I suppose anything can happen.

You're right that none of it really hinges on talent. It's more about name recognition. So much else plays into it, and Olivia Dunne projects those things that others don't, in the sport. She indicated that her Olympic dreams died when she was about 15 or 16, due to an injury. It's plausible, but quite honestly, I just don't see her as good as those on the international stage. She'd only stand to lose some of that NIL money if she competed against them, and that wouldn't make sense.

Dunne, fortunately for her, realizes she has the goose that lays golden eggs, and has used it to her advantage to make money, and I don't blame her. She knows that the goose is only on loan to her, she don't own it, so someone else is gonna be getting those eggs in the near future.

But, for every smart kid, who suddenly ends up with money, there's at least two or three that haven't got a clue on how to move forward, and they are destined to fail.

Dunne made a name and "Face" for herself on social media. Not to take anything away from her talents as a gymnast, because she is good, but her "looks" is what made her the money machine that she is today.

That said, this gets back to what "NIL" really is or what it started out as. In its pure form, NIL was making money off of your "Name, Image and Likeness", while being an athlete. I get it, there are a ton of "hot looking" and/or "talented" people that have made millions off of themselves via the internet or through businesses. It's been going on for decades for professional athletes, pitching products in exchange for money.

However, now "NIL" has morphed into something else. It is now "How much is this athletes abilities and NIL worth to bring to our program?" They are not just being paid for their Name, image or likeness.

Maybe they need to add an "A" for abilities to "NIL"? Call it what it is, "NILA". Whatever they do, if College athletics wants to maintain somewhat of a competitive level of programs, they need to CAP the amount that athletes for each program can be paid, individually and collectively.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Dunne made a name and "Face" for herself on social media. Not to take anything away from her talents as a gymnast, because she is good, but her "looks" is what made her the money machine that she is today.

That said, this gets back to what "NIL" really is or what it started out as. In its pure form, NIL was making money off of your "Name, Image and Likeness", while being an athlete. I get it, there are a ton of "hot looking" and/or "talented" people that have made millions off of themselves via the internet or through businesses. It's been going on for decades for professional athletes, pitching products in exchange for money.

However, now "NIL" has morphed into something else. It is now "How much is this athletes abilities and NIL worth to bring to our program?" They are not just being paid for their Name, image or likeness.

Maybe they need to add an "A" for abilities to "NIL"? Call it what it is, "NILA". Whatever they do, if College athletics wants to maintain somewhat of a competitive level of programs, they need to CAP the amount that athletes for each program can be paid, individually and collectively.

Hmmm, maybe place a cap on the universities. Not sure how that would work, but it works in the NFL.

Never thought the NCAA would need a Pete Rozelle “parity” check, but here we are. Still not sure it would work.

 

[Voyageur]

The problem is two-fold. It's the NIL, and then there's the issue of schools actually paying the players. This is where it gets sticky. The NIL money has absolutely nothing to do with the wages, and vice versa. The wages will fall under laws related to work issues, and the NIL is actually nothing more than a "side-gig," and shouldn't be considered as part of the wages.

The NFL has rules related to wages, but they do not control the "side-gigs," which is NIL money. No professional sport even tries to do that, because they know that if they do, they're going to run smack dab into the face of labor laws, and if that happens, we're going to see the courts side with the players almost continuously.

Just the thought that schools might attempt to force sharing of NIL money on a team basis would have labor law attorneys smacking at the lips, seeing easy paydays with a lot of money heading their way. In the end, schools would start dropping athletic programs one after another, because the majority of them lose money and wouldn't be affordable. It would reduce most sports on campuses to nothing more than clubs, where the players wouldn't even have scholarships, and might even have to pay for their own equipment, etc.

Make no mistake about it, the face of college sports is going to change, and not for the better. You just need to realize there are two bouncing balls out there, and there's a third, which is going to be a real stickler. It's called "equal pay," under the law. Sports like fencing, etc, with equal pay, would give the participants the same money as football players, as an example. How long do you think it would take for the fencing team to disappear from the school? You can count on over half of all sports disappearing in a short period of time, when they were found to create red ink.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The problem is two-fold. It's the NIL, and then there's the issue of schools actually paying the players. This is where it gets sticky. The NIL money has absolutely nothing to do with the wages, and vice versa. The wages will fall under laws related to work issues, and the NIL is actually nothing more than a "side-gig," and shouldn't be considered as part of the wages.

The NFL has rules related to wages, but they do not control the "side-gigs," which is NIL money. No professional sport even tries to do that, because they know that if they do, they're going to run smack dab into the face of labor laws, and if that happens, we're going to see the courts side with the players almost continuously.

Just the thought that schools might attempt to force sharing of NIL money on a team basis would have labor law attorneys smacking at the lips, seeing easy paydays with a lot of money heading their way. In the end, schools would start dropping athletic programs one after another, because the majority of them lose money and wouldn't be affordable. It would reduce most sports on campuses to nothing more than clubs, where the players wouldn't even have scholarships, and might even have to pay for their own equipment, etc.

Make no mistake about it, the face of college sports is going to change, and not for the better. You just need to realize there are two bouncing balls out there, and there's a third, which is going to be a real stickler. It's called "equal pay," under the law. Sports like fencing, etc, with equal pay, would give the participants the same money as football players, as an example. How long do you think it would take for the fencing team to disappear from the school? You can count on over half of all sports disappearing in a short period of time, when they were found to create red ink.

Yeah good point V that I missed. NIL money is like, well like Love getting paid probably a ton to be a brand ambassador for American Life - endorsement money based on his stature in the NFL and recognizability. Tons of examples. That cannot and is not touched by the NFL. So allocating a cap to universities - my idea but I kinda knew it wouldn't work - won't work........

You're also right - it would be like a full-employment act for labor attorneys, not that they need the help.

 

[Voyageur]

Yeah good point V that I missed. NIL money is like, well like Love getting paid probably a ton to be a brand ambassador for American Life - endorsement money based on his stature in the NFL and recognizability. Tons of examples. That cannot and is not touched by the NFL. So allocating a cap to universities - my idea but I kinda knew it wouldn't work - won't work........

You're also right - it would be like a full-employment act for labor attorneys, not that they need the help.

I have a friend, retired, who practiced labor law. I talked to him about this. He mentioned something that I thought was actually something that could happen. If players, particularly football and basketball, ask for money from the schools, at the DI level, whatever is determined by law would also effect all schools in DII and DIII, as well as other affiliations. You could kiss all those programs goodbye, because none of them are profitable to start. At the DI level, the number of sports would diminish considerably.

This thing is going to be a real mess before it's over.