NIL Donor Fatigue Increasing

[ashokan]

"An emerging complaint from fans around NIL is “donor fatigue,” as fans who are "already asked to donate a lot for season tickets, not to mention the facilities arms race, are now being asked to essentially pay the players," according to Seth Emerson of THE ATHLETIC."

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/03/08/nil-collectives-donor-fatigue

Donor fatigue: Some college football fans wonder why they have to pay for players

Fans worry they'll increasingly be asked for more money in name, image and likeness era.

theathletic.com

 

[Knight Shift]

Posted this in the Saban thread, and some people called The Athletic article over the top and stupid. The comments to the article are better than the article itself.

As I said in the Saban NIL thread--it's not paying the players that necessarily caused people to say enough is a enough (for some fans it is)---it's the straw that broke the camel's back. B1G and SEC schools are awash in money.

Here's a modest proposal- how about reasonable salary caps for head coaches, coordinators and assistants, and use that savings to pay players from the money saved? Yeah, we are not there yet- schools can't pay players, but we will get there. With all of these media money flowing in, schools like Rutgers need to spend more wisely. Paying head coaches $6.25 million/year with lavish perks for clothing and country club memberships is stupid for Universities. They will live just fine on $2-3 million/year.

 

[ashokan]

Posted this in the Saban thread, and some people called The Athletic article over the top and stupid. The comments to the article are better than the article itself.

As I said in the Saban NIL thread--it's not paying the players that necessarily caused people to say enough is a enough (for some fans it is)---it's the straw that broke the camel's back. B1G and SEC schools are awash in money.

Here's a modest proposal- how about reasonable salary caps for head coaches, coordinators and assistants, and use that savings to pay players from the money saved? Yeah, we are not there yet- schools can't pay players, but we will get there. With all of these media money flowing in, schools like Rutgers need to spend more wisely. Paying head coaches $6.25 million/year with lavish perks for clothing and country club memberships is stupid for Universities. They will live just fine on $2-3 million/year.

I've been saying that CFB is now a full-on money chase that will lead to colleges with pro teams the way Green Bay has a team. Even classes don't matter anymore. NCAA requires progress toward a degree. Going to pay a kid 500k and suspend him if he stops classes?

Genie is out of the bottle and NIL collectives built on the demise of CFB are like any rebound - they cant continue as a little pregnant and will aim one way or another. Being part amateur and part pro is on the way to full pro - NFL 2.0 as I say. Want student athletes in your CFB? Pick an academy or DIII team

 

[yesrutgers01]

Posted this in the Saban thread, and some people called The Athletic article over the top and stupid. The comments to the article are better than the article itself.

As I said in the Saban NIL thread--it's not paying the players that necessarily caused people to say enough is a enough (for some fans it is)---it's the straw that broke the camel's back. B1G and SEC schools are awash in money.

Here's a modest proposal- how about reasonable salary caps for head coaches, coordinators and assistants, and use that savings to pay players from the money saved? Yeah, we are not there yet- schools can't pay players, but we will get there. With all of these media money flowing in, schools like Rutgers need to spend more wisely. Paying head coaches $6.25 million/year with lavish perks for clothing and country club memberships is stupid for Universities. They will live just fine on $2-3 million/year.

I don't have an issue with Coaching Salaries. Just like CEO's of any major business.

NIL just has to be addressed in some way. And if courts are now making that impossible- then change the transfer rules. We can't have both in this sport and survive

 

[Knight Shift]

I don't have an issue with Coaching Salaries. Just like CEO's of any major business.

NIL just has to be addressed in some way. And if courts are now making that impossible- then change the transfer rules. We can't have both in this sport and survive

I actually have a bigger issue with head coach salaries and their contracts than with NIL.


Multimillionaires begging ordinary people for more money so that they can make more money. The whole scheme reminds of various lyrics from a Creedence song, albeit about a different issue:

It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one

.....
And when you ask 'em, "How much should we give?"
They only answer, "More, more, more"

 

[Retired711]

Is the problem here just one of form or is also one of content? Right now, fans have to make a specific extra donation (to an NIL collective) to pay players. Suppose that schools were allowed to pay players directly, and increased their ticket/mandatory donation prices to cover that (although without saying that explicitly) . Would donors be just as outraged? Would they see the raised level as anything different from a raise to cover increased coaches' salaries or any other "normal" expense?

To put it differently, how much of donor resistance comes from having to make a specific extra donation to an outside organization, and how much of it is to the whole idea of compensating players?

 

[ashokan]

I actually have a bigger issue with head coach salaries and their contracts than with NIL.

Yes it looked bad and invited the agitators.
So many "highest paid in the state" football coaches while a player loses Heisman over a limo ride.
A couple of coaches are almost guaranteed winners but most are overrated

 

[Knight Shift]

Yes it looked bad and invited the agitators.
So many "highest paid in the state" football coaches while a player loses Heisman over a limo ride.
A couple of coaches are almost guaranteed winners but most are overrated

Have said it before- in what other job is someone paid millions to be mediocre or to suck at their job, and then get paid a 3 plus year severance for sucking so bad to go away? It's ludicrous.

 

[ashokan]

Have said it before- in what other job is someone paid millions to be mediocre or to suck at their job, and then get paid a 3 plus year severance for sucking so bad to go away? It's ludicrous.

Indeed and I find a lot of fans fall for the con.
When teams need a coach they are often like "We need a big name coach!"
If "big name" means big contract they are ok with that.
But how many big name coaches carry their first successes to another team?
Saban and Meyer are only coaches I can think of who won NCs with two different teams.
Dabo Sweeney gets 11.5m and struggles without Trevor Lawrence.

Michigan, Ohio St and USC are only teams not from southern states to win a NC in last 20 years.
For the vast majority of teams mediocrity is the standard and usual.
Sometimes a Cincy or TCU sneak into a big game and then they get crushed on the way to being a Jeopardy question

 

[Knight Shift]

Indeed and I find a lot of fans fall for the con.
When teams need a coach they are often like "We need a big name coach!"
If "big name" means big contract they are ok with that.
But how many big name coaches carry their first successes to another team?
Saban and Meyer are only coaches I can think of who won NCs with two different teams.
Dabo Sweeney gets 11.5m and struggles without Trevor Lawrence.

Michigan, Ohio St and USC are only teams not from southern teams to win a NC in last 20 years.
For the vast majority of teams mediocrity is the standard and usual.
Sometimes a Cincy or TCU sneak into a big game and then they get crushed on the way to being a Jeopardy question

Mel Tucker and Kenneth Walker III is yet another cautionary tale. Perhaps the biggest fly by night success to flameout in college coaching history?

 

[LeapinLou]

As of Jan 24, the average annual salary in Alabama is $49,075. Nick Saban made over $11,000,000. I agree he could have lived pretty well in Alabama with $2M/year and use the other $9M for other things including NIL. Then you don't have to ask boosters for NIL money.

I don't hate Nick. I hate the system. It has to be reformed.

 

[anon1753890747]

At some point a student Athlete alternative will emerge, guys who want to play have no pro aspirations and just want to get the best education/experience with that in mind.
I predict that will be a more attractive entertainment option for fans of college athletics.
What is currently going on is unsustainable and at some point will become unappealing from an entertainment standpoint, as what makes college athletics entertaining is being stripped away.

 

[rurichdog]

Have said it before- in what other job is someone paid millions to be mediocre or to suck at their job, and then get paid a 3 plus year severance for sucking so bad to go away? It's ludicrous.

Meg Whitman, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard is on Line 1...

EMI/Virgin Records, who paid Mariah Carey $28 Million to not make any more albums under their label after the Glitter disaster is holding on Line 2...

 

[Knight Shift]

As of Jan 24, the average annual salary in Alabama is $49,075. Nick Saban made over $11,000,000. I agree he could have lived pretty well in Alabama with $2M/year and use the other $9M for other things including NIL. Then you don't have to ask boosters for NIL money.

I don't hate Nick. I hate the system. It has to be reformed.

Another great lyric comes to mind. (Dance of the Dead by Corrosion of Conformity):

If the system had one neck, you know I'd gladly break it.

 

[koleszar]

Paying head coaches $6.25 million/year with lavish perks for clothing and country club memberships is stupid for Universities. They will live just fine on $2-3 million/year.

Many of those coaches eat sh*t sandwiches for years upon years before hitting a payday. Very few come in without paying their dues. Look at Saban, it took him 17 yrs. before he saw his first $1 mil. dollar payday. College kids play 4 yrs. of high school and then look for a million dollar payday.

 

[Knight Shift]

Many of those coaches eat sh*t sandwiches for years upon years before hitting a payday. Very few come in without paying their dues. Look at Saban, it took him 17 yrs. before he saw his first $1 mil. dollar payday. College kids play 4 yrs. of high school and then look for a million dollar payday.

Agree with you with respect to young kids and "getting in line." Still, IMO, the pay of well over half of the P5 coaches is way out of line. Looking at it another way, they are doing a job that they love, and many of us would love to have, versus grinding out construction jobs, being a police officer, teacher, firefighter or office worker staring at a computer screen all day, all of which making much less. I work long hours too, but don't make anywhere near what football coaches make. Yeah, I'm crying y'all a river.

 

[rubaseball78_rivals]

Posted this in the Saban thread, and some people called The Athletic article over the top and stupid. The comments to the article are better than the article itself.

As I said in the Saban NIL thread--it's not paying the players that necessarily caused people to say enough is a enough (for some fans it is)---it's the straw that broke the camel's back. B1G and SEC schools are awash in money.

Here's a modest proposal- how about reasonable salary caps for head coaches, coordinators and assistants, and use that savings to pay players from the money saved? Yeah, we are not there yet- schools can't pay players, but we will get there. With all of these media money flowing in, schools like Rutgers need to spend more wisely. Paying head coaches $6.25 million/year with lavish perks for clothing and country club memberships is stupid for Universities. They will live just fine on $2-3 million/year.

You can't put a salary cap in place until the coaches form a union and then you can collectively bargain for a cap with the union.

 

[365Poster24Seven]

This fanbase definitely should not have any type of donor fatigue. Right?

 

[koleszar]

This fanbase definitely should not have any type of donor fatigue. Right?

But we do have @365Poster24Seven fatigue on telling us how to spend our money.

 

[Knight Shift]

But we do have @365Poster24Seven fatigue on telling us how to spend our money.

Some posters create douchebag fatigue 365 days week 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

 

[365Poster24Seven]

Some posters create douchebag fatigue 365 days week 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

I barely post you on the other hand live here and act like you own the board. Rock on life is too short

 

[Retired711]

Agree with you with respect to young kids and "getting in line." Still, IMO, the pay of well over half of the P5 coaches is way out of line. Looking at it another way, they are doing a job that they love, and many of us would love to have, versus grinding out construction jobs, being a police officer, teacher, firefighter or office worker staring at a computer screen all day, all of which making much less. I work long hours too, but don't make anywhere near what football coaches make. Yeah, I'm crying y'all a river.

I understand you're blowing off steam. I'm sure you realize that in a market society, pay is determined by supply and demand. Whether you love or hate your job is irrelevant. Hard work is relevant only insofar as it makes you a more desirable employee. Spending years making yourself a better candidate for a head coaching job helps a lot in increasing your earning potential; spending years making yourself a better police officer not nearly so much even though we need good police officers more than we need good football coaches. Taylor Swift makes her money not because she is "better" than a classical musician; she makes it because she has made herself into a product that millions of people want.

 

[yesrutgers01]

Agree with you with respect to young kids and "getting in line." Still, IMO, the pay of well over half of the P5 coaches is way out of line. Looking at it another way, they are doing a job that they love, and many of us would love to have, versus grinding out construction jobs, being a police officer, teacher, firefighter or office worker staring at a computer screen all day, all of which making much less. I work long hours too, but don't make anywhere near what football coaches make. Yeah, I'm crying y'all a river.

A heck of a lot of surgeons, actors, hedge fund etc also love what they do. They are getting paid because there are very few that can do what they do..,
I would HC a college team for a lot less but I would suck at it.
I never question salaries of anyone- much less, someone that worked for years and is putting in 80 hour weeks

 

[Brisket and Bourbon]

Fatigue will set in with programs that are not awash in cash…some programs, even IN top conferences, (RU comes to mind) will not be able to compete all that well. Imagine a top RB or WR at RU has an amazing year (like Heisman level good) and here comes Michigan or Georgia offering him a sack of cash…everyone of us would bolt in a nanosecond.

 

[Knight Shift]

I understand you're blowing off steam. I'm sure you realize that in a market society, pay is determined by supply and demand. Whether you love or hate your job is irrelevant. Hard work is relevant only insofar as it makes you a more desirable employee. Spending years making yourself a better candidate for a head coaching job helps a lot in increasing your earning potential; spending years making yourself a better police officer not nearly so much even though we need good police officers more than we need good football coaches. Taylor Swift makes her money not because she is "better" than a classical musician; she makes it because she has made herself into a product that millions of people want.

Sure, it's not just what they are making. It's what they are asking the police officers etc. to do so they have a better team and they can make more money. See below.

A heck of a lot of surgeons, actors, hedge fund etc also love what they do. They are getting paid because there are very few that can do what they do..,
I would HC a college team for a lot less but I would suck at it.
I never question salaries of anyone- much less, someone that worked for years and is putting in 80 hour weeks

I guess I did not make a point, or make it clear. It's one thing for college football coaches to be paid exorbitant sums of money. It's quite another to be one of the people exhorting the rank and file fans making a LOT less money in the professions I listed to give more and more money to support their cause and to build a winning team.

 

[Knight Shift]

Fatigue will set in with programs that are not awash in cash…some programs, even IN top conferences, (RU comes to mind) will not be able to compete all that well. Imagine a top RB or WR at RU has an amazing year (like Heisman level good) and here comes Michigan or Georgia offering him a sack of cash…everyone of us would bolt in a nanosecond.

Nope. Some of us have a sense of loyalty and team. Laugh all you want. Not everyone goes to the highest bidder.

 

[Retired711]

Sure, it's not just what they are making. It's what they are asking the police officers etc. to do so they have a better team and they can make more money. See below.


I guess I did not make a point, or make it clear. It's one thing for college football coaches to be paid exorbitant sums of money. It's quite another to be one of the people exhorting the rank and file fans making a LOT less money in the professions I listed to give more and more money to support their cause and to build a winning team.

If I understand you correctly , you have no problem with the players being paid so long as it's done by the school and not through "collectives." You don't like the idea of being solicited by the collectives to make a donation. But once the schools start paying players, they are going to "exhort" fans to give even more money than at present to fund the payments. Is that OK with you? In other words, is your objection to giving money to the collectives on top of what you're giving to Rutgers sports, or is your objection to giving more money no matter who asks for it? If you do object to giving more money, then do you expect the schools to reduce their other athletic expenditures to pay for compensating players?

 

[Knight Shift]

If I understand you correctly , you have no problem with the players being paid so long as it's done by the school and not through "collectives." You don't like the idea of being solicited by the collectives to make a donation. But once the schools start paying players, they are going to "exhort" fans to give even more money than at present to fund the payments. Is that OK with you? In other words, is your objection to giving money to the collectives on top of what you're giving to Rutgers sports, or is your objection to giving more money no matter who asks for it? If you do object to giving more money, then do you expect the schools to reduce their other athletic expenditures to pay for compensating players?

No, not really. Having thought about all of this lunacy with the money pouring in, I'm done. Maybe I was naive in thinking that the big media $$$ would cure all of Rutgers Athletics' money ills. It only seems to spawn a bigger and greedier monster. To be clear, I don't like the idea of the collectives and their operating under a veil of secrecy. For me, if I am going to give money, I'd like to know where it's going. Like if I gave to Tunnels to Towers- 95% goes to building homes for wounded veterans and families of military and emergency services personnel that have died in the line of duty. THAT is worthy.
Expectation? I have none. They will probably continue to spend money with reckless abandon. If we choose to keep season tickets, we will be contributing some through mandatory donations, and that's enough.
To be clear, I'm not mad, nor am I blowing off steam. I'm just fatigued after thinking it all over the last several months and seeing the media rights money coming in, the continued bloated salaries and contracts for coaches and now the NIL tab to pay. Just fatigued. Don't expect to recover any time soon.

 

[Retired711]

No, not really. Having thought about all of this lunacy with the money pouring in, I'm done. Maybe I was naive in thinking that the big media $$$ would cure all of Rutgers Athletics' money ills. It only seems to spawn a bigger and greedier monster. To be clear, I don't like the idea of the collectives and their operating under a veil of secrecy. For me, if I am going to give money, I'd like to know where it's going. Like if I gave to Tunnels to Towers- 95% goes to building homes for wounded veterans and families of military and emergency services that have died in the line of duty. THAT is worthy.
Expectation? I have none. They will probably continue to spend money with reckless abandon. If we choose to keep season tickets, we will be contributing some through mandatory donations, and that's enough.
To be clear, I'm not mad, nor am I blowing off steam. I'm just fatigued after thinking it all over the last several months and seeing the media rights money coming in, the continued bloated salaries and contracts for coaches and now the NIL tab to pay. Just fatigued. Don't expect to recover any time soon.

I sympathize. It's interesting to me that for many donors the breaking point seems to be compensating athletes. (After all, this is not the only item that's driving bigger AD budgets.) Part of this is certainly the idea of sending contributions to an outside "collective;" but for many it's the whole idea of paying athletes. That is certainly a radical change, especially as combined with the free transferability that puts athletes on a one-year lease as other posters have put it. I don't think any of us know what the future will hold, but all fans will have to decide when they've reached their limit. Being a college sports fan is fun, but at some point even fun becomes too expensive.

 

[Westcoast]

Have said it before- in what other job is someone paid millions to be mediocre or to suck at their job, and then get paid a 3 plus year severance for sucking so bad to go away? It's ludicrous.

Every fired CEO fits this scenario.

 

[RUskoolie]

If there wasn't a demand for those salaries they wouldn't get paid them. I have no problem with coaches getting paid millions.

 

[NickRU714]

I've asked this before and don't think I ever got a real answer.

How did this all start?
When did the begging start?
When did ADs start forcing "mandatory donations" above and beyond ticket/parking prices?
When did the flip switch "We want to spend more money. We don't have that money. Let's guilt our most loyal fans into giving us extra money. Prey upon their love for the university."

Why didn't they just raise prices like every other industry and spread the cost to all consumers?

It's really unseemly when you start to dig into the psychology of it.

 

[yesrutgers01]

NIL went to hell from day one when there were no real rules put into place.

The only way it could have worked is if players shared in monies earned through things like jersy's sold with their names on them, shoe deals that coaches used to profit on, madden type games that their likeness are on...Should have been just a % of those monies shared with all scholarship players. It would have been perfect as all players would be getting some good cash and it would all be even.

 

[Shelby65]

Have said it before- in what other job is someone paid millions to be mediocre or to suck at their job, and then get paid a 3 plus year severance for sucking so bad to go away? It's ludicrous.

a better example....an 8 year contract, extended halfway through for another 6 with a $ 2M salary bump for mediocre at best results. sound familiar ?

 

[RUScrew85]

Fatigue will set in with programs that are not awash in cash…some programs, even IN top conferences, (RU comes to mind) will not be able to compete all that well. Imagine a top RB or WR at RU has an amazing year (like Heisman level good) and here comes Michigan or Georgia offering him a sack of cash…everyone of us would bolt in a nanosecond.

THAT will be the final straw for many RU fans.

 

[RUScrew85]

No, not really. Having thought about all of this lunacy with the money pouring in, I'm done. Maybe I was naive in thinking that the big media $$$ would cure all of Rutgers Athletics' money ills. It only seems to spawn a bigger and greedier monster. To be clear, I don't like the idea of the collectives and their operating under a veil of secrecy. For me, if I am going to give money, I'd like to know where it's going. Like if I gave to Tunnels to Towers- 95% goes to building homes for wounded veterans and families of military and emergency services that have died in the line of duty. THAT is worthy.
Expectation? I have none. They will probably continue to spend money with reckless abandon. If we choose to keep season tickets, we will be contributing some through mandatory donations, and that's enough.
To be clear, I'm not mad, nor am I blowing off steam. I'm just fatigued after thinking it all over the last several months and seeing the media rights money coming in, the continued bloated salaries and contracts for coaches and now the NIL tab to pay. Just fatigued. Don't expect to recover any time soon.

Amen.

 

[JayDogSmooth]

I love it
Honestly, it’s the only way we can ever hope to compete
There is no chance we were ever going to be elite in football or basketball before this, there’s at least somewhat of a chance

 

[WhoRU?]

Over time it will be difficult for the old-school boosters to keep up with true NIL. Back when boosters were giving $500 handshakes, they knew they were giving their schools a competitive advantage. Giving directly to players is no longer an advantage. If you aren't doing it, you are already behind.

We're not far from Dr. Pepper giving the winning team in a conference championship several million in NIL (and the players will need to do commercials). NIL was intended to be a marketing expense for large corporations, that's where this is headed. If there is value in doing it for corporations they will, and it will be difficult for individual donors to justify the expense on an ongoing basis. If schools think they can catch lightning in a bottle, they may be able to convince individuals to pony up for a year or two, but leaning on them indefinitely is a difficult ask.

 

[mildone_rivals]

The NIL decision was always going to be disruptive. And so it is.

But the courts couldn't decide otherwise without violating college athletes' rights; without unfairly inhibiting their individual freedoms. The decision is done and there's no going back.

The system will have to adapt. And that adaptation will likely take at least a couple decades or more.

The great news is that none of us can be compelled to participate in NIL funding. It's a 100% optional, purely voluntary thing and opting out is trivially simple.

Go forth, exercise your freedom of choice and be glad of it.

Because the repetitive whining? It's fatiguing.

 

[Retired711]

The NIL decision was always going to be disruptive. And so it is.

But the courts couldn't decide otherwise without violating college athletes' rights; without unfairly inhibiting their individual freedoms. The decision is done and there's no going back.

The system will have to adapt. And that adaptation will likely take at least a couple decades or more.

The great news is that none of us can be compelled to participate in NIL funding. It's a 100% optional, purely voluntary thing and opting out is trivially simple.

Go forth, exercise your freedom of choice and be glad of it.

Because the repetitive whining? It's fatiguing.

Forgive me for being a persnickety lawyer, but there never was an NIL decision. The Supreme Court in the Alston case upheld a district court decision saying that the NCAA rules limiting the educational benefits that schools could offer athletes was an unreasonable restraint on trade and so was a violation of the federal antitrust laws. The issue of whether the NCAA's rules forbidding NIL are an antitrust violation has not been fully litigated. Rather, the NCAA dropped most of its restrictions on NIL after Alston. It figured, apparently, that it would lose in court. In addition, there were already states allowing NIL and those state laws would stay in place even if the NCAA convinced the federal courts that its NIL rules didn't violate the antitrust laws.

As for the whining . .. change is hard for all of us.