Stoops nearly pleading for money.

[gamecockcat]

In reading through a lot of posts (not necessarily yours) the term "donation" has been used a lot, but the whole idea around NIL is that a company, for instance a car dealership, will pay for the use of the players NIL to endorse their business. The business will gain positive exposure, that will lead to more customers. It's nothing more than an advertising expense, it is not a donation. A donation is when you give to something usually a charity and expect nothing in return.

So in your example it's important not to conflate a business's advertising budget with what they would make in the way of a donation. It's a distinction with a huge difference. I'm not sure that in your example their ad budget would effect what they might make in the form of a donation to UKs general fund. Granted their return on their NIL advertising investment may or may not justify the expenditure but that's true of any form of advertising.

What Stoops is basically asking for is for companies to go ahead and put NIL in general in their ad budget, setting aside those dollars for future payments to players, and then allow the player to receive the information that those funds will be made available for them to compete for.

I agree with much of what you posted. But, how does a business justify a large 'advertising' expense for a HS senior who's yet to play a single down? Why would that individual bring in more business than a local celebrity, businessman, radio personality, etc.? Can you justify, to the IRS, spending, let's say, $500k annually to have Will Levis or Barion Brown endorse your Cadillac dealership vs. only $50k for Jeff Piecoro (sp?)? With all the OADs on the basketball team, you think having a Shaedon Sharpe or BJ Boston endorsement is worth anything to a local business? Does an endorsement on many, many items made by an 18-year old kid move the needle at all regarding new sales? I highly doubt it.

And, where does this stop? It seems logical that every year a star player will want more NIL money (renegotiating his contract) and, if someone doesn't pony up, that kid enters the transfer portal looking for a school that will. How does the business justify as a normal advertising expense renting that kid for one year?

At what point do boosters say, 'To hell with this'? They're supposed to throw big bucks after players year after year after year - for what? As another thread poster asked, what's the ROI? What's the continuing incentive to do so?

The NIL ruling will be the death of CFB, imo. I think this could've all been avoided if scholarship athletes would've been allowed to be paid as work/study students. $12-$15/hour for 20 hours a week during the season for sure and preseason. Maybe throw in 10 hours per week in the offseason as they are working out, looking at the playbook, etc. The playing field would have been more level, easier to monitor and the need to throw big bucks at kids year after year would have been avoided. Now, it's just going to be a free-for-all every year as teams struggle to recruit AND keep the players they have due to other teams offering more money. Explain to me again how this is good for college sports?

 

[K_TIME]

I'm thinking this is probably not legal as it would essentially just be the university using the business as a conduit to pay players themselves.

100% agree....this is essentially sounds like a violation. But what good is it to get a massive SEC $$$$ but we can't use to get best players. I'd like to see UK be giving contracts to companies that will turn around NIL our athletes to keep the wheels rolling.

This is why our contracts with Nike need to be re-assessed to see if they are more for Duke kids...then maybe we need to be an under armor school, addidas, etc...

I'd argue the same should be for our healthcare contracts, construction contracts, food contracts, financial contracts, etc... that are with UK. For example....if we're going to bank with a company but another bank is willing to NIL our athletes....then why not move our business to the other bank. I know it's shady as all get out...but I do think this kind of stuff is going to have to happen to make UK the place kids want to play

 

[wildcatsincebirth]

Hate this NIL. Going to take overall competitiveness out of college sports over time. The rich will prevail. Hard for small markets.

Wish the college Presidents would reorganize and restructure. Put guidelines and caps in. I bet 99% of college presidents, athletic directors and coaches would welcome a voluntary organization that its’s members would agree to follow administrative regulations.

Uhhh, so how were the rich schools not already dominating college sports? Now it’s the players that actually get some of that money over the table instead of under it.

i agree it’s a mess logistically right now; but the ‘rich schools will dominate recruiting now’ argument makes no sense cause they already did lol.

 

[wildcatsincebirth]

I agree with much of what you posted. But, how does a business justify a large 'advertising' expense for a HS senior who's yet to play a single down? Why would that individual bring in more business than a local celebrity, businessman, radio personality, etc.? Can you justify, to the IRS, spending, let's say, $500k annually to have Will Levis or Barion Brown endorse your Cadillac dealership vs. only $50k for Jeff Piecoro (sp?)? With all the OADs on the basketball team, you think having a Shaedon Sharpe or BJ Boston endorsement is worth anything to a local business? Does an endorsement on many, many items made by an 18-year old kid move the needle at all regarding new sales? I highly doubt it.

And, where does this stop? It seems logical that every year a star player will want more NIL money (renegotiating his contract) and, if someone doesn't pony up, that kid enters the transfer portal looking for a school that will. How does the business justify as a normal advertising expense renting that kid for one year?

At what point do boosters say, 'To hell with this'? They're supposed to throw big bucks after players year after year after year - for what? As another thread poster asked, what's the ROI? What's the continuing incentive to do so?

The NIL ruling will be the death of CFB, imo. I think this could've all been avoided if scholarship athletes would've been allowed to be paid as work/study students. $12-$15/hour for 20 hours a week during the season for sure and preseason. Maybe throw in 10 hours per week in the offseason as they are working out, looking at the playbook, etc. The playing field would have been more level, easier to monitor and the need to throw big bucks at kids year after year would have been avoided. Now, it's just going to be a free-for-all every year as teams struggle to recruit AND keep the players they have due to other teams offering more money. Explain to me again how this is good for college sports?

It’s good for college sports because it’s a multi billion dollar industry and the ‘workers’ weren’t getting any of it. It’s that simple.

if we think it’s ok for a coach to make millions then it should be okay for the players too.

yes we need better regulation but for now let’s just be happy the guys get some money since 95% of them won’t get any money for sports after they graduate.

if anything, this might save college basketball. Players can make money overseas or in the g league and without NIL more and more would have gone that route.

 

[Soupbean]

Your thesis makes a lot of good sense, especially in economic hard times. It seems that bigtime college sports, in terms of overall financial commitment by boosters and fans, is becoming more and more like the cable company model. As we all know, many people have decided to "cut the cord" to save money.

I don't know where it all ends up, but I agree with you that it "will probably strain relationships between long time boosters and universities" ... not to mention the average fan who buys tickets to attend games. Furthermore, I suspect the TV-fans will be subjected to ever-increasing Pay-per-View. Many may simply listen to the games and then watch replays on youtube, if the expense gets overly-burdensome.

And the real problems will start when fans realize the sport they use to love has little to do with their university anymore and that pride, traditions and attachment to it was the main driving force behind their interest in watching/attending to start with. When you create more of a semi pro league and format than a traditional college athletic set up you get a semi pro audience and viewership.

 

[TankedCat]

yes we need better regulation but for now let’s just be happy the guys get some money since 95% of them won’t get any money for sports after they graduate.

I'd say those 95% aren't going to get much money in college either

 

[sluggercatfan]

Do you already buy season tickets?
K Fund donations?
How much finacial contribution are serious fans willing to make?
I'd say for the average fan who watches/ occasionally attends the answer would probably be zero.
Not one who got all jacked out of shape over Sharpe but damn glad i didn't contribute to anything he got.
I think NIL will hurt fandom as a whole and will probably strain relationships between long time boosters and universities.

6 tickets no kfund(although for a few years I was) for 30+ yrs.

 

[sluggercatfan]

And the real problems will start when fans realize the sport they use to love has little to do with their university anymore and that pride, traditions and attachment to it was the main driving force behind their interest in watching/attending to start with. When you create more of a semi pro league and format than a traditional college athletic set up you get a semi pro audience and viewership.

CCC brags about his million dollar boys, but when's the last time you heard about even ONE of them giving back a nickel to the university?

 

[SkyPrince1]

I don't know why the NCAA couldn"t just rule the kid going to UT ineligible due to extra benefits.
Take the position that the kids NIL deal is bogus and make UT show all the specifics.
I guarantee you they can't do it without getting hung up on several aspects of it.

 

[SkyPrince1]

CCC brags about his million dollar boys, but when's the last time you heard about even ONE of them giving back a nickel to the university?

Cuz znd Wall have. I sure theres a few more.

 

[JHB4UK]

Some of y'all just don't understand NIL or what is actually happening, at all. Your talking about mom & pop store on the corner getting more sales after paying a UK football player $1000 to advertise for them. Do you seriously think that is how 4 & 5 star talent is being landed?

NIL is being done by billionaires, not local caddy dealerships fighting to make monthly sales quotas. The Haslems in TN. Ruiz in Miami. Adidas for UL. couple of Tech billionaires funding Mich St. Oil tycoons at T A&M.

This ain't businesses making rational costs that have to be justified, gimme a freaking break. Rich guys are paying out to get their fav school to win football games. Period.

 

[SkyPrince1]

Some of y'all just don't understand NIL or what is actually happening, at all. Your talking about mom & pop store on the corner getting more sales after paying a UK football player $1000 to advertise for them. Do you seriously think that is how 4 & 5 star talent is being landed?

NIL is being done by billionaires, not local caddy dealerships fighting to make monthly sales quotas. The Haslems in TN. Ruiz in Miami. Adidas for UL. couple of Tech billionaires funding Mich St. Oil tycoons at T A&M.

This ain't businesses making rational costs that have to be justified, gimme a freaking break. Rich guys are paying out to get their fav school to win football games. Period.

Why would Addidas pony up more for UL than for UT?

 

[Dddjdd]

Why would Addidas pony up more for UL than for UT?

UT is a Nike school

 

[Dddjdd]

Some of y'all just don't understand NIL or what is actually happening, at all. Your talking about mom & pop store on the corner getting more sales after paying a UK football player $1000 to advertise for them. Do you seriously think that is how 4 & 5 star talent is being landed?

NIL is being done by billionaires, not local caddy dealerships fighting to make monthly sales quotas. The Haslems in TN. Ruiz in Miami. Adidas for UL. couple of Tech billionaires funding Mich St. Oil tycoons at T A&M.

This ain't businesses making rational costs that have to be justified, gimme a freaking break. Rich guys are paying out to get their fav school to win football games. Period.

Exactly right. Problem is sounds like Stoops needs to hear this. I’m sure he knows, but maybe he figures his best/only option is to have local businesses try to pool together enough money?

 

[Deeeefense]

This is why I stated in a post above that UK needs to PROMOTE donor money toward NIL. We receive PLENTY of money from the SEC and the K-Fund for UK Athletics. That's what the schools that are most successful so far are doing.

Come on Mitch!!!

I think that's the plan, but they've apparently been slow getting out of the gate.

 

[gamecockcat]

It’s good for college sports because it’s a multi billion dollar industry and the ‘workers’ weren’t getting any of it. It’s that simple.

if we think it’s ok for a coach to make millions then it should be okay for the players too.

yes we need better regulation but for now let’s just be happy the guys get some money since 95% of them won’t get any money for sports after they graduate.

if anything, this might save college basketball. Players can make money overseas or in the g league and without NIL more and more would have gone that route.

Higher education is a multi-billion dollar industry and most students don't get a sniff of that money other than just being a student, which athletes are also, allegedly in some cases. Most students PAY the university unlike scholarship athletes. Harvard's endowment is roughly $40 billion which means they HAVE to spend $2 billion annually to maintain their tax-exempt status. One would think Harvard would waive tuition which would leave it with a paltry $1.96 billion to spend on itself every year. Do they? So, the higher education institution is just as much of a money-grubbing whore as big-time athletics.

I am/was all in favor of paying the student athletes as I said above as work/study students and, in rare circumstances, for their jersey sales, autographs, etc. The meat market/bidding war it's become is not good for the sport, imo. There's no big, successful business where the owners don't make many times what the workers do - NFL, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. The athletes should be paid as their efforts contribute to the revenue sports bring in for the university. Of course, a lot of that revenue generated by football supports baseball, gymnastics, swimming, fencing, etc. and not the student body at large. Realistically, maybe 10% of the football team will actually make any cash from NIL so how is that fair to all the workers/student-athletes? Shouldn't all the scholarship athletes be paid for their time/effort to keep the revenue rolling in as teams need 2nd and 3rd teamers to develop and keep the starters sharp. Is there no value there?

As to 95% not getting any money for sports after college, that's not new. And, scholarship athletes have the opportunity for a college degree which costs them nothing. If they're not smart enough to know that only the top 1% of college athletes make enough as a pro to fund a reasonable retirement that's on them. A free college education and the contacts an athlete makes in school should be a huge advantage over the majority of college graduates. In that respect, the 95% who aren't making NIL money are, in fact, getting compensated (free tuition, contacts the rank and file will never obtain, etc.).

Again, I'm 100% in favor of paying athletes like other work/study students. This new system sets up many possibilities of school's cheating, athletes reneging on commitments, a huge gap between the 'have' (NIL guys) and the 'have not' (non-NIL guys) among teammates, etc. I just think the system is going to blow up and will irreparably harm CFB. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[wildcatsincebirth]

I'd say those 95% aren't going to get much money in college either

Would you rather have ‘not much money’ or ‘no money’?

 

[wildcatsincebirth]

Higher education is a multi-billion dollar industry and most students don't get a sniff of that money other than just being a student, which athletes are also, allegedly in some cases. Most students PAY the university unlike scholarship athletes. Harvard's endowment is roughly $40 billion which means they HAVE to spend $2 billion annually to maintain their tax-exempt status. One would think Harvard would waive tuition which would leave it with a paltry $1.96 billion to spend on itself every year. Do they? So, the higher education institution is just as much of a money-grubbing whore as big-time athletics.

I am/was all in favor of paying the student athletes as I said above as work/study students and, in rare circumstances, for their jersey sales, autographs, etc. The meat market/bidding war it's become is not good for the sport, imo. There's no big, successful business where the owners don't make many times what the workers do - NFL, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. The athletes should be paid as their efforts contribute to the revenue sports bring in for the university. Of course, a lot of that revenue generated by football supports baseball, gymnastics, swimming, fencing, etc. and not the student body at large. Realistically, maybe 10% of the football team will actually make any cash from NIL so how is that fair to all the workers/student-athletes? Shouldn't all the scholarship athletes be paid for their time/effort to keep the revenue rolling in as teams need 2nd and 3rd teamers to develop and keep the starters sharp. Is there no value there?

As to 95% not getting any money for sports after college, that's not new. And, scholarship athletes have the opportunity for a college degree which costs them nothing. If they're not smart enough to know that only the top 1% of college athletes make enough as a pro to fund a reasonable retirement that's on them. A free college education and the contacts an athlete makes in school should be a huge advantage over the majority of college graduates. In that respect, the 95% who aren't making NIL money are, in fact, getting compensated (free tuition, contacts the rank and file will never obtain, etc.).

Again, I'm 100% in favor of paying athletes like other work/study students. This new system sets up many possibilities of school's cheating, athletes reneging on commitments, a huge gap between the 'have' (NIL guys) and the 'have not' (non-NIL guys) among teammates, etc. I just think the system is going to blow up and will irreparably harm CFB. I hope I'm wrong.

I’ve heard of basketball teams (like UK) where the money making players put aside money for the rest of the guys to get something. Is that fair? No, but it’s more fair than all of them getting nothing.

im not a huge fan of the meat market bidding war thing that’s going on now, but the system before was so messed up and illegitimate I’m okay with a few years of chaos before they inevitably crack down with lots of rules certain schools will still be allowed to break.

 

[sluggercatfan]

I’ve heard of basketball teams (like UK) where the money making players put aside money for the rest of the guys to get something. Is that fair? No, but it’s more fair than all of them getting nothing.

im not a huge fan of the meat market bidding war thing that’s going on now, but the system before was so messed up and illegitimate I’m okay with a few years of chaos before they inevitably crack down with lots of rules certain schools will still be allowed to break.

You won't be happy...the next step is union's and agents. Genie is out of the bottle, it's not going back.

 

[sluggercatfan]

Cuz znd Wall have. I sure theres a few more.

Haven't heard this. Is there any documentation? I know MM was making like 1 million a yr and he and his wife donated a million over 10 years whether he was employed by UK or not. The only player I've heard was Mash donating like $500 k in his early NBA career. You'd think coaches making in the ball park 6-9 mil a year could sweat a few pennies.

 

[JHB4UK]

I think that's the plan, but they've apparently been slow getting out of the gate.

Generous. I think the problem is the main man in charge has both feet on the brakes. Hoping & wishing the present goes away and he can be comfortable again in the past. And nobody has the power to pry his feet off.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

Haven't heard this. Is there any documentation? I know MM was making like 1 million a yr and he and his wife donated a million over 10 years whether he was employed by UK or not. The only player I've heard was Mash donating like $500 k in his early NBA career. You'd think coaches making in the ball park 6-9 mil a year could sweat a few pennies.

If you followed the basketball program you would know this. Stop spouting off when you don't follow basketball.

 

[Kybluedude]

Uhhh, so how were the rich schools not already dominating college sports? Now it’s the players that actually get some of that money over the table instead of under it.

i agree it’s a mess logistically right now; but the ‘rich schools will dominate recruiting now’ argument makes no sense cause they already did lol.

I don’t think Villanova Gonzaga or Cincinnati would be considered rich schools. They have been in recent NC discussions. There are plenty of smaller money schools that field very competitive teams.

 

[sluggercatfan]

If you followed the basketball program you would know this. Stop spouting off when you don't follow basketball.

Probably twice as long as you have! I'm 72 and started at 11. Listened to Claude Sullivan and Cawood. Doubt if your old enough to remember either.

 

[TankedCat]

Would you rather have ‘not much money’ or ‘no money’?

I don't think it would be enough to matter

 

[The-Hack]

A lot of the old school boosters had the impression that when they bought a player he would be at the school 4yrs.
Not the case now.

What was once an understanding (that was often breached) can now be reduced to writing and written off as tax deductible advertising.

Hell, this isn’t hard. I have a small business. Someone set up a website called, “Big Blue Advertising Board,” which can be easily accessed. I’ll give a thousand bucks for a small business card ad. The tax savings from it should save me $350.00 to $400.00 per year.

Find a few hundred lawyers, hardware stores, doctors, dentists, etc. and you’ll have a pretty good pool of money in a month.

 

[The-Hack]

Explain to me again how this is good for college sports?

Explain to me how cancer is good for humanity.

It isn’t, but it is what we have to deal with, so we might as well get after it.

 

[The-Hack]

Imo in football recruiting we don't have to get millions together.

IMO, we need to come up with a Big Blue Wall “calendar,” that folks can buy ads to hang on the physical calendar, or see in a dedicated website, for 1,000.00 a throw (250.00 just to have name listed) and use ALL of UK’s offensive and defensive linemen, maybe at 25K to 50K apiece. One visit with photographs at each business by two players, in a twelve month period.

Yep. Real advertising. Each business can hang the calendar on the wall, with his little ad displayed with dozens/hundreds more, and after a few years a cool collection of photos to display of business owner posing with linemen through the years.

Tell me someone with contacts couldn’t get 20K in one day in communities the size of Pikeville, Paducah, Owensboro, E-Town, Richmond, London, etc.

Hell, I could get 5K out of Danville on a sunny afternoon.

If this sounds strangely familiar, small town Sheriffs departments, FFA chapters, and other school organizations have been doing it for decades.

Why a calendar? Because if it is for “advertising” it is tax deductible, so you get 30-45 percent of the money back when you file your taxes.

But isn’t it really a “donation.”

I’ve been deducting these “advertising” costs for 33 years in my small town.

 

[DCFseattle]

But how exactly to do it or what Barnhart will allow is still freaking clear as mud.

There's a lot to read in this thread yet, so it may have been addressed. But I listened to Stoops when he said this on KSR, so I think I can maybe clear it up some.

Stoops was adamant in saying, several times, "you can do this. It's legal", and he kind of hinted that the administration may have been saying the opposite. But over and over "this is legal". So there's nothing Barnhart can do about it. Nothing for him to allow. It doesn't concern him.

As far as how, I think it's against NCAA rules for the school (admins and coaches) to be directly involved. So this has to be organized by donors and boosters. And Kentucky is behind because business leaders in the community have been told by the athletic department not to do it because it will hurt the University.

So now the wheels are in motion, this will likely be settled in a couple weeks at the longest, and there will be more information about how.

 

[DCFseattle]

my take won't be popular but here is it

This is exactly the message I have been scared to hear as it relates to the NIL

Stoops is coming out and telling donors to take money they would have normally earmarked for the school , essentially to help *all* students and put that money into a marketing fund to give solely to athletes.

I don't blame him, its what he has to do to be competitive, but what I see is a football player will get a new corvette as opposed to a kid from Pikeville getting an engineering scholarship.

I think that is where the messaging is flawed in this idea that the players make all this revenue for the University. The funding these players are getting isn't touching the revenue they generate , its coming out of the pockets of the fans/business that has finite resources to spread it around.

I welcome debate as to how my way of thinking is wrong on this.

Nah, I think you're pretty wrong here.
Believe it or not, the vast majority of people don't care at all about sports. More money is donated because of academia, and the ratio isn't particularly close. The university budget for 22-23 is, I think, 5 and a half billion dollars. 10 million for athlete endorsements ain't touching that.

 

[ghorn19]

my take won't be popular but here is it

This is exactly the message I have been scared to hear as it relates to the NIL

Stoops is coming out and telling donors to take money they would have normally earmarked for the school , essentially to help *all* students and put that money into a marketing fund to give solely to athletes.

I don't blame him, its what he has to do to be competitive, but what I see is a football player will get a new corvette as opposed to a kid from Pikeville getting an engineering scholarship.

I think that is where the messaging is flawed in this idea that the players make all this revenue for the University. The funding these players are getting isn't touching the revenue they generate , its coming out of the pockets of the fans/business that has finite resources to spread it around.

I welcome debate as to how my way of thinking is wrong on this.

You're not wrong.

 

[DCFseattle]

I agree with much of what you posted. But, how does a business justify a large 'advertising' expense for a HS senior who's yet to play a single down? Why would that individual bring in more business than a local celebrity, businessman, radio personality, etc.? Can you justify, to the IRS, spending, let's say, $500k annually to have Will Levis or Barion Brown endorse your Cadillac dealership vs. only $50k for Jeff Piecoro (sp?)?

1) that's their problem to figure out how to best spend their money
2) athletes are more visible than businessmen and radio personalities. They are local celebrities
3) you don't have to justify an advertising expense. You just need to make sure that the dollars you're reporting are the correct amount.

 

[SECCountry75]

Bingo. He's having to play word games to suit Mitch's conservative approach.

Imo in football recruiting we don't have to get millions together. The top guys getting that kind of money were never coming here anyway. All we need to do is be competitive in nil and we will still get the caliber of kids we're used to.

Unfortunately without the use of collectives, we won't be able to get that done. There isn't large enough business with enough disposable cash to throw money at unproven recruits. Once they get here, they do well in nil. Companies showed they have no issue paying for proven talent. It's actually smart on their part but leaves us a bit lacking on the front end.

Maybe stoops recharacterizing collectives will somehow appease Mitch. Guess we'll see

The rush to negative judgment against Mitch Barnhart on this website never stops. And yet, Kentucky keeps winning and building new facilities. Stoops keeps recruiting good players. We just got a commitment from Avery Stuart.

From what I can see, every school is navigating the new rules. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I doubt I am the only Kentucky fan who is glad our athletics department is careful. Cliff Hagan was not careful, and look what happened. There will always be some who want Kentucky to take chances and push the envelope. Those people got Kentucky in lots of trouble before. I am not in that group. Barnhart knows what he is doing. We are winning. Stoops is recruiting better than this website gives him credit. We do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

[SECCountry75]

Sounds like Stoops is tired of MB’s handcuffs and telling people how to get around it. At the same time he’s saying the NCAA is powerless to stop those that are using NiL to hire HS students to their schools.

Yes, it must be terrible. About to bypass Bear Bryant for all time wins. One of the best contracts in college football. Picked #2 in the SEC East by almost everyone, with the national champions visiting Lexington this year. Our qback likely to be a high NFL draft choice. Just won the Citrus Bowl and signed the best class in school history. Stoops must be tired of this shit storm, right?

Compliance is the athletics department's job. I have not seen any actual reason to doubt them, but there will always be outliers who cannot be satisfied.

 

[JHB4UK]

Stoops was adamant in saying, several times, "you can do this. It's legal", and he kind of hinted that the administration may have been saying the opposite. But over and over "this is legal". So there's nothing Barnhart can do about it. Nothing for him to allow. It doesn't concern him.

Other UK discussion sites have made claims that Barnhart has in fact threatened some prominent booster/advertisers with exclusion and banishment from all UK athletics if they attempt to do what Stoops was begging them to do.

Whatever is the truth, it is undeniable

1)UK is far behind our competitors in the SEC and instate on NIL
2)the UK head football coach and the UK athletic director are nowhere near being on the same page on this issue

 

[EliteBlue]

Do you already buy season tickets?
K Fund donations?
How much finacial contribution are serious fans willing to make?
I'd say for the average fan who watches/ occasionally attends the answer would probably be zero.
Not one who got all jacked out of shape over Sharpe but damn glad i didn't contribute to anything he got.
I think NIL will hurt fandom as a whole and will probably strain relationships between long time boosters and universities.

Especially w $7 gas….who has extra cash to throw into a fire?

 

[SECCountry75]

Especially w $7 gas….who has extra cash to throw into a fire?

That is a different question entirely. And an interesting one, too.

 

[SECCountry75]

I'm thinking this is probably not legal as it would essentially just be the university using the business as a conduit to pay players themselves.

Therein lies the rub. Our athletics department knows what can and cannot be done. Mitch Barnhart is on some of the NCAA bodies that study, write, and police the policies. When people post about what Mitch should do, or what Mitch is not doing, they are doing this with little or no working knowledge of the risks and benefits. As you surmised in your comment, some of these hopes and wishes would not be legal. That is why they do not happen.

The name-image-likeness rule allows a business to hire an athlete for advertising purposes. The rule was written by the NCAA to avoid continuing to be a defendant in expensive civil trials. The NCAA has stuck a finger in the air and decided to roll with the punches. The problem is that this is a moving target. With every new enforcement incident or lawsuit, there will be the potential for new thinking and new rules, because there is not a founded guiding principle behind what is happening.

It is the job of the athletics department to study and anticipate the regulatory climate in college athletics. Many posters assume Barnhart is behind the times. What if you are wrong? What if Barnhart knows more than we know because he has access to information we do not have? You will just melt back into the foggy background. Barnhart and his assistants cannot do that. They are responsible.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

The rush to negative judgment against Mitch Barnhart on this website never stops. And yet, Kentucky keeps winning and building new facilities. Stoops keeps recruiting good players. We just got a commitment from Avery Stuart.

From what I can see, every school is navigating the new rules. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I doubt I am the only Kentucky fan who is glad our athletics department is careful. Cliff Hagan was not careful, and look what happened. There will always be some who want Kentucky to take chances and push the envelope. Those people got Kentucky in lots of trouble before. I am not in that group. Barnhart knows what he is doing. We are winning. Stoops is recruiting better than this website gives him credit. We do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

So is the rush to defend him. I give Barnhardt his due in that several things he does is good. However....a glaring deficiency in his leadership style is the willingness to accept change. Selling beer was the first example.

Leaders like Mitch get focused on the cost of a potential bad outcome. However they always lose sight that doing nothing is also one of the bad outcomes; and is usually more costly than making an aggressive error in judgement

 

[JHB4UK]

people who rush to defend Barnhart on NIL because of loyalty from past results were probably also demanding Tubby Smith be left alone from criticism & he be allowed to coach UK for decades.

He won a championship! How dare you say his 20-10 seasons aren't good enough!

The football coach he hired won 10 games! How dare you say his NIL policy is backwards and harmful!

Same energy