NIL in perspective

[gamecockcat]

Certainly on the political board there are those who whine about CEOs salaries. Yet, a HS DL who has proven nothing gets a multi-million dollar NIL deal and the comments are, 'Its the going rate', 'its only fair to the players' etc. Am I the only one who thinks this sort of reasoning is fatally flawed?

I can't see this current model lasting. If OSU spent $20+M this year, you know next year teams will be looking to spend $25+, then $30+, etc. That just can't continue forever. Sanity must return to the game at some point, right?

 

[Caveman Catfan]

I agree with the sentiment of your post. But, I don’t think OSU is paying any player. The fans, and to a lesser extent what is truly NIL, are buying the players. We all probably know people who are making annual or monthly contributions to collectives to buy players. Ohio is a populated state with most of the college football fans being OSU fans. So long as fans pay for players, this will continue and the teams at the top will eventually separate from the rest. Which schools can increase that war chest each year and sustain the high level of payments? IMO, UK has not and cannot. The divide certainly will get bigger. When you know there are millions, maybe tens of millions, separating your teams ability to buy players from the upper tier, will people continue to pump their cash into a collective?

If there is no control, there will be a pro league of young players that have about 15-30 teams, or less, and the reminder of college football will become something else.

 

[truebluewildcat]

It’s a simple fix.

Instead of shadowy collectives, NCAA and institutions should just come up with a percentage of the take that programs can dispense.

-tickets
-merch
-trademark royalties
-post season bonuses

Have a cap in terms of how much can be spent on football and transparency in the market in terms of who’s making what.

Outside of that what players are able to make from local and regional deals isn’t the concern of ncaa or individual institutions. Just like the academic side doesn’t care what students make at job, internships, fellowships, etc…in fact it’s kind of the whole point of it all. Go make some money.

 

[gamecockcat]

It’s a simple fix.

Instead of shadowy collectives, NCAA and institutions should just come up with a percentage of the take that programs can dispense.

-tickets
-merch
-trademark royalties
-post season bonuses

Have a cap in terms of how much can be spent on football and transparency in the market in terms of who’s making what.

Outside of that what players are able to make from local and regional deals isn’t the concern of ncaa or individual institutions. Just like the academic side doesn’t care what students make at job, internships, fellowships, etc…in fact it’s kind of the whole point of it all. Go make some money.

Should each conference, since the revenues aren't equal across conferences, have a fixed stipend for all scholarship athletes as a % of total athletic revenue - each sport figured separately? - (richer conferences would, therefore, have a higher stipend)? Then, above that, the 'face' players can negotiate local deals. Would that result in an even playing field or more level than it is now, anyway? Then the players on Georgia, for instance, would have to weigh stipend at a B12 team + new NIL money from local sources vs SEC stipend and playing time. Might curtail the unlimited transfers somewhat if those other factors are thrown in.

 

[truebluewildcat]

Should each conference, since the revenues aren't equal across conferences, have a fixed stipend for all scholarship athletes as a % of total athletic revenue - each sport figured separately? - (richer conferences would, therefore, have a higher stipend)? Then, above that, the 'face' players can negotiate local deals. Would that result in an even playing field or more level than it is now, anyway? Then the players on Georgia, for instance, would have to weigh stipend at a B12 team + new NIL money from local sources vs SEC stipend and playing time. Might curtail the unlimited transfers somewhat if those other factors are thrown in.

Yeah essentially a cap.

Folks, money is never equal across any industry.

Sports is no different. There is vast differences in wealth in NBA and NFL.

Richest owners aren’t necessarily hoarding all the hardware.

Teams that make good-great hires and personnel decisions, draft, free agency, culture, scheme, etc…win.

Same goes for college. Success and hardware aren’t hoarded by the richest schools, in the richest states, with the richest alumni bases.

Back to the main point. Yeah, CFB is obviously an industry. Some schools and conferences are going to make more. Some fan bases are going to spend more.

Come up with some structure that accounts for that.

 

[FirewithFire]

Contacts and a hard cap with harsh penalties. That is what the pros figured out decades ago.

 

[TucsonCat]

I'm looking through the thread. Not sure I see the problem these ideas are supposed to solve. It seems to be, too much money going to players?

 

[CaptainBoogerBuns]

I'm looking through the thread. Not sure I see the problem these ideas are supposed to solve. It seems to be, too much money going to players?

Certain players. Causing rifts in the locker room etc. Offensive linemen who feel cheated because the qb makes 6 million-- and all of a sudden sacks start coming out of the woodwork