I know NIL is a very big topic in the world of Kentucky sports right now. It has definitely revolutionized recruiting in a very short period of time. It has changed the way we cover things. It's an added variable that, oftentimes, people aren't so eager to talk about, but which hangs over many recruitments as an X-Factor everyone knows about.
I do believe NIL is helping other schools more than Kentucky, but how much of the blame to place on Mitch Barnhart for this is a topic of dispute. I have always said that placing blame on him directly, as a scapegoat, and saying "he is responsible" for UK's struggles to this point have been premature.
Now, I think the one thing he did that was not helpful was when he came out in the very beginning and struck a cautionary tone as opposed to being more enthusiastic to whip people up into supporting it financially. I do think that might have made some difference initially.
But the bigger issue is UK needs more money to be available for recruits. What is the role of an AD in that? He is a fundraiser, that's right, but in this new landscape that's a little more complicated because the money is coming from third parties and the private sphere as opposed to needing to fundraise directly for the school, and Mitch technically can't fundraise for those purposes. The schools that are really knocking it out of the park, critics would say, have really stepped into a forbidden area and placed themselves at the mercy of the NCAA, i.e., if they decide to shine the spotlight on what they're doing, cheating, they are screwed.
Kentucky can still successfully leverage NIL. *Some* guys are getting paid and more will get paid. The issue is the number of guys who can get paid. I don't think the same money is there for UK that is there for several other SEC programs, and it remains to be seen how much of that is structural (money available, interest/demand for football, etc) and how much of it can fluctuate or grow over time.
Barnhart and UK's role at this point is approving or denying NIL deals. It's the job of outside parties to step up and make the finances look different. Mitch is not stopping that from happening.
One reason I've spoken up about Mitch now -- and I have never said that he's the problem with NIL -- is that right after Conyer's commitment to UT is an odd time to bring it up. He probably would have made more at UK than UT. My understanding is there was an NIL back and forth that began with folks on the Tennessee side and ended with a higher figure, but one that was smaller than he could have had elsewhere.
There is going to be a very big push in the weeks ahead for outside people to step up. I know there's going to be a meeting with 20+ very wealthy people in the near future with the message being this is what will be required for UK to be great in football.
There's legitimate frustration with NIL right now and I do think Barnhart could have been more positive about it early on, but he is not the reason they lost Conyer and he is not stopping outside people from committing money to this. If you want to talk about a directive, okay, but I think you would be reading too much into it. These exhortations are probably common most places, from people who don't want to get in trouble. At the end of the day coaches and business people are still going to do what they do. It's a big gray area and a mess but it's not because of the athletics director at UK, imo. As Marrow has said, people have to step up.
The amount of money being thrown around by people close to other SEC programs is no joke. Some businesses are $10-20 million deep already.
I do believe NIL is helping other schools more than Kentucky, but how much of the blame to place on Mitch Barnhart for this is a topic of dispute. I have always said that placing blame on him directly, as a scapegoat, and saying "he is responsible" for UK's struggles to this point have been premature.
Now, I think the one thing he did that was not helpful was when he came out in the very beginning and struck a cautionary tone as opposed to being more enthusiastic to whip people up into supporting it financially. I do think that might have made some difference initially.
But the bigger issue is UK needs more money to be available for recruits. What is the role of an AD in that? He is a fundraiser, that's right, but in this new landscape that's a little more complicated because the money is coming from third parties and the private sphere as opposed to needing to fundraise directly for the school, and Mitch technically can't fundraise for those purposes. The schools that are really knocking it out of the park, critics would say, have really stepped into a forbidden area and placed themselves at the mercy of the NCAA, i.e., if they decide to shine the spotlight on what they're doing, cheating, they are screwed.
Kentucky can still successfully leverage NIL. *Some* guys are getting paid and more will get paid. The issue is the number of guys who can get paid. I don't think the same money is there for UK that is there for several other SEC programs, and it remains to be seen how much of that is structural (money available, interest/demand for football, etc) and how much of it can fluctuate or grow over time.
Barnhart and UK's role at this point is approving or denying NIL deals. It's the job of outside parties to step up and make the finances look different. Mitch is not stopping that from happening.
One reason I've spoken up about Mitch now -- and I have never said that he's the problem with NIL -- is that right after Conyer's commitment to UT is an odd time to bring it up. He probably would have made more at UK than UT. My understanding is there was an NIL back and forth that began with folks on the Tennessee side and ended with a higher figure, but one that was smaller than he could have had elsewhere.
There is going to be a very big push in the weeks ahead for outside people to step up. I know there's going to be a meeting with 20+ very wealthy people in the near future with the message being this is what will be required for UK to be great in football.
There's legitimate frustration with NIL right now and I do think Barnhart could have been more positive about it early on, but he is not the reason they lost Conyer and he is not stopping outside people from committing money to this. If you want to talk about a directive, okay, but I think you would be reading too much into it. These exhortations are probably common most places, from people who don't want to get in trouble. At the end of the day coaches and business people are still going to do what they do. It's a big gray area and a mess but it's not because of the athletics director at UK, imo. As Marrow has said, people have to step up.
The amount of money being thrown around by people close to other SEC programs is no joke. Some businesses are $10-20 million deep already.
Last edited:
