NIL in Kentucky

[GonzoCat90]

I think anyone who is being honest with themselves will realize that at levels we're interested in, the money will be mostly the same.

There's a car dealership or restaurant owner in most college towns who will pay $500 for a Saturday morning of autographs or whatever. That kind of stuff is already happening and has been for decades, just without the autographs.

The kids we're after are going to get Nike money and Gatorade money. Zion Williamson was going to get the same NIL opportunities at Duke and Kentucky and Kansas and Clemson.

All this is really doing is allowing that to rightfully happen. Where schools will set themselves apart will be in the systems they put in place to help guide kids and families through this, etc.

 

[Dablueman]

I think anyone who is being honest with themselves will realize that at levels we're interested in, the money will be mostly the same.

There's a car dealership or restaurant owner in most college towns who will pay $500 for a Saturday morning of autographs or whatever. That kind of stuff is already happening and has been for decades, just without the autographs.

The kids we're after are going to get Nike money and Gatorade money. Zion Williamson was going to get the same NIL opportunities at Duke and Kentucky and Kansas and Clemson.

All this is really doing is allowing that to rightfully happen. Where schools will set themselves apart will be in the systems they put in place to help guide kids and families through this, etc.

It does however make us competitive with the g league and it levels the playing field with the other big time programs. Plus sure the businesses might fork over 500 bucks for the appearance but if 500 people show up wanting autographs 5 to 10 bucks an autograph means that appearance can be worth anywhere from 3 to 5k for a player. Not every college town will have the turn out statewide as our kids will

 

[travisbickle_rivals252984]

I'll try to give you my honest answer. Sports are unlike any other occupation. We created leagues with games to entertain us. No other occupation is dependent on competitive leagues for their survival. For a league to function, fans/customers have to have some belief that their team can compete, that rules allow for each team to win if it has competent leadership. As life long Bengals and Reds fan, if we didn't think the rules allowed us to compete, why would we watch? We blame it on Mike Brown's leadership, not that the rules don't allow small market teams to compete. Leagues, by definition aren't free markets. They have rules in place that limit competition to try and create situations where any team can theoretically win. If they were governed by free market principles, many teams would fold because fan interest would die because of the realization that their team cannot compete. I don't think anti trust laws should apply to sports leagues because they rely on restricting competition between teams to keep and create fan/customer interest. If we are going to say sports leagues violate anti trust and must be run consistent with free market principles, then I would suggest they won't remain popular for very long.

I don’t think competitiveness, real or perceived, is the driving force of success for most college athletics programs.

People want to be entertained, and they want to see high level competition from people who are highly skilled.

Whatever form NIL takes, Bama is going to recruit better than anyone else in football. They already do and they will continue. Very few teams that ever step on the field with Bama have a realistic shot of beating them. Yet those teams and their fans are still here, still coming to the games or still watching them on TV. The SEC west still packs out stadiums every Saturday across the south even though they all know (with rare exceptions) that the playing field has never been level.

College sports will adapt and I for one think NIL is a good thing. I hope the NCAA sets forth a comprehensive program for NIL and, most importantly, enforces and oversees the rules. Something they are not great at right now but maybe they can take this opportunity to get their **** together and make it work.

Wonder how much in endorsements the UK volleyball team could’ve made this season? NIL can be great for non-revenue/Olympic sports. Sure they aren’t going to get rich, but I bet most of those ladies on the national championship team could use $500 or $1000 in their pockets from an autograph signing or a cheesy car commercial.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

The NIL is a continuation of that. The same foundation, exposure and resources that allow a school like us to spend that money and do those things are going to mean more NIL money for a kid who comes here.

Either way, the idea of a level playing field is impossible. There has never been one.

Further, can you explain the difference in allocating resources to hire the best coach but not to recruit the best players?

They do spend resources to recruit players. They just can't buy players. Although many won't like this answer, universities should be about education and not sports. Education is their mission. Sports should be played by kids who are there to get an education. Any league will have to limit competition for it to work. Free market principles are not compatible with sports leagues. I say that because fans watch sports because they have a belief that the rules allow their teams to win if they have competent leadership. Free market principles would allow wealthy teams to completely dominate leagues. Every league, professional or amateur, works to prevent that from happening. Facilities and coaches are no different than classrooms, dorms, and professors. It's part of the campus atmosphere. However, paying players is not. To me there is a clear distinction.

 

[GonzoCat90]

It does however make us competitive with the g league and it levels the playing field with the other big time programs. Plus sure the businesses might fork over 500 bucks for the appearance but if 500 people show up wanting autographs 5 to 10 bucks an autograph means that appearance can be worth anywhere from 3 to 5k for a player. Not every college town will have the turn out statewide as our kids will

That's true. I'm just saying that if a kid is inked to a $500k Nike deal, an extra $1500 in autograph money doesn't move the needle much.

With the kind of cheating that's been going on forever, putting ten or fifteen $100 bills in the shoebox the next time a new shipment of practice gear comes in is easy peasy and totally untraceable.

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

One has to wonder how long these top shelf players will still have to take classes. The NIL era just further exposes what has been the case for decades - elite players in major college sports are not amateurs. Forcing them to take classes to perpetuate this illusion is a joke and actually insulting. That's the linchpin of this whole house of cards. I get the traditionalists longing for the 'good ole days' but in reality it's been a ruse for a long time.

 

[GonzoCat90]

They do spend resources to recruit players. They just can't buy players. Although many won't like this answer, universities should be about education and not sports. Education is their mission. Sports should be played by kids who are there to get an education. Any league will have to limit competition for it to work. Free market principles are not compatible with sports leagues. I say that because fans watch sports because they have a belief that the rules allow their teams to win if they have competent leadership. Free market principles would allow wealthy teams to completely dominate leagues. Every league, professional or amateur, works to prevent that from happening. Facilities and coaches are no different than classrooms, dorms, and professors. It's part of the campus atmosphere. However, paying players is not. To me there is a clear distinction.

What did Jared Butler major in at Baylor?

The kids who played for Rupp came to play for him at Kentucky.

This hasn't been about education since they started keeping score. They sell jerseys in the book store on campus that just happen to have the number of the best players in that given year.

And there are dozens and dozens of programs across the country playing in empty gyms with no televised games, with fan bases who know they'll never ever win a title. Ole Miss knows it isn't happening this year. Hofstra isn't building a contender. Washington State isn't making a final four run.


None of these things are currently or have ever been the case. Letting kids who are already making illegal money get their share of the revenue from jersey sales in the book store isn't making that worse.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I don’t think competitiveness, real or perceived, is the driving force of success for most college athletics programs.

People want to be entertained, and they want to see high level competition from people who are highly skilled.

Whatever form NIL takes, Bama is going to recruit better than anyone else in football. They already do and they will continue. Very few teams that ever step on the field with Bama have a realistic shot of beating them. Yet those teams and their fans are still here, still coming to the games or still watching them on TV. The SEC west still packs out stadiums every Saturday across the south even though they all know (with rare exceptions) that the playing field has never been level.

College sports will adapt and I for one think NIL is a good thing. I hope the NCAA sets forth a comprehensive program for NIL and, most importantly, enforces and oversees the rules. Something they are not great at right now but maybe they can take this opportunity to get their **** together and make it work.

Wonder how much in endorsements the UK volleyball team could’ve made this season? NIL can be great for non-revenue/Olympic sports. Sure they aren’t going to get rich, but I bet most of those ladies on the national championship team could use $500 or $1000 in their pockets from an autograph signing or a cheesy car commercial.

I think that depends on how NIL is regulated and the approach that other schools take. I believe in a large city, such as Los Angeles, smart leadership could create very dominant football, baseball, and basketball teams. I understand the argument about pro sports in those cities, but those cites are large enough that there will be a huge number of people who would love to see UCLA get back to winning championships. All it would take is good leadership at the university to go out in the community and round up wealthy boosters who are willing pay large NIL contracts to UCLA recruits. Now maybe the school doesn't care enough to put effort into it, but any school in a large metropolitan area who wants to succeed should be able to find enough money from alums to become successful. I think you are wrong if you believe the status quo isn't about to change in college athletics.

 

[Dablueman]

That's true. I'm just saying that if a kid is inked to a $500k Nike deal, an extra $1500 in autograph money doesn't move the needle much.

With the kind of cheating that's been going on forever, putting ten or fifteen $100 bills in the shoebox the next time a new shipment of practice gear comes in is easy peasy and totally untraceable.

I agree one hundred percent. The people who keep thinking that this somehow puts us at disadvantage because our state isnt a big population rich state don't understand advertising at all. Hell Zion Williamson could have made 7 figures as a senior in highschool based off of his YouTube following alone. Yet some of our fan base think that the local car dealer is the only place this money will come from

 

[SpamburgerHamburger_rivals101482]

One has to wonder how long these top shelf players will still have to take classes. The NIL era just further exposes what has been the case for decades - elite players in major college sports are not amateurs. Forcing them to take classes to perpetuate this illusion is a joke and actually insulting. That's the linchpin of this whole house of cards. I get the traditionalists longing for the 'good ole days' but in reality it's been a ruse for a long time.

NIL only has to do with athletes being able to make money themselves. The NCAA still requires classes and a minimum GPA, that won't change. Now, we all know how much actual class and class work most of these high major athletes do, and that won't change either.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

What did Jared Butler major in at Baylor?

The kids who played for Rupp came to play for him at Kentucky.

This hasn't been about education since they started keeping score. They sell jerseys in the book store on campus that just happen to have the number of the best players in that given year.

And there are dozens and dozens of programs across the country playing in empty gyms with no televised games, with fan bases who know they'll never ever win a title. Ole Miss knows it isn't happening this year. Hofstra isn't building a contender. Washington State isn't making a final four run.


None of these things are currently or have ever been the case. Letting kids who are already making illegal money get their share of the revenue from jersey sales in the book store isn't making that worse.

You are making my point to certain degree. Kids came to play for Rupp. That is hiring a coach kids want to play for. That's not paying players.

There are dozens of kids playing to mostly empty gyms and there are for more athletic programs that operate in the red than in the black. Eventually, there is a tipping point where it is no longer worth it to have athletic programs that operate at a loss and that no one follows. I agree that we are already in a situation where schools pay under the table, etc. I just don't think this helps what the league is trying to accomplish. I hope I am wrong. I will be very happy if you are correct and college sports continue on pretty much as it always has. I just have my doubts.

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

NIL only has to do with athletes being able to make money themselves. The NCAA still requires classes and a minimum GPA, that won't change. Now, we all know how much actual class and class work most of these high major athletes do, and that won't change either.

But what's the point? Making these elite players (and many other players, for that matter) go to class serves one purpose; to create the illusion of amateurism that is needed to support their model. A model designed primarily to put decision authority and power with the NCAA. It's arbitrary and makes no sense really and can't be defended. The supreme court essentially just confirmed that and now the NCAA is on life support.

 

[travisbickle_rivals252984]

They do spend resources to recruit players. They just can't buy players. Although many won't like this answer, universities should be about education and not sports. Education is their mission. Sports should be played by kids who are there to get an education. Any league will have to limit competition for it to work. Free market principles are not compatible with sports leagues. I say that because fans watch sports because they have a belief that the rules allow their teams to win if they have competent leadership. Free market principles would allow wealthy teams to completely dominate leagues. Every league, professional or amateur, works to prevent that from happening. Facilities and coaches are no different than classrooms, dorms, and professors. It's part of the campus atmosphere. However, paying players is not. To me there is a clear distinction.

I do agree that college is about education, but education doesn’t mean the same thing to everyone.

The talents and interests of some students make them desire a career in mechanical engineering. The very best of the best “recruits” that want jobs in that field apply to the top schools with mechanical engineering programs. Those schools have massive endowments (that’s what she said) and use them to fund the best labs and hire the best professors.

Would anyone complain if Texas Instruments gave out a $20 million dollar endorsement TI-89 calculator deal to the John Wall of math when the kid was 18 years old? Would that ruin the educational experience? And would it be unfair for MIT or CalTech to tell that kid “we can get you the most money if you bring your brilliance in calculating eigenvectors to our campus”?

John Wall’s brilliance wasn’t math (maybe he’s good at math, I don’t know). The education he needed was how to perform on the basketball court at the highest level. UK had an advantage of a long history of success and unmatched passion and he chose us.

I don’t know if John Wall ever contemplated the writings of Nietzsche or saw the beauty of a mathematical proof while at UK. But he got an education that fit him and his gifts the best, so I think the college experience for him was well-suited and he received a world class education in his chosen field of study. And he probably generated a good deal of money that is now in the form of a new building or piece of equipment somewhere on UK’s campus. JMHO

 

[sk73]

Worked their asses off? They’re teenagers. I played varsity basketball (all 8th region) and also ran for a scholarship in college. They didn’t “work” any harder than you or I.

Obviously, they have more talent to work with.

 

[travisbickle_rivals252984]

I think that depends on how NIL is regulated and the approach that other schools take. I believe in a large city, such as Los Angeles, smart leadership could create very dominant football, baseball, and basketball teams. I understand the argument about pro sports in those cities, but those cites are large enough that there will be a huge number of people who would love to see UCLA get back to winning championships. All it would take is good leadership at the university to go out in the community and round up wealthy boosters who are willing pay large NIL contracts to UCLA recruits. Now maybe the school doesn't care enough to put effort into it, but any school in a large metropolitan area who wants to succeed should be able to find enough money from alums to become successful. I think you are wrong if you believe the status quo isn't about to change in college athletics.

I agree that the success of NIL will be dependent upon how it is executed.

I disagree about the status quo. I agree that NYC or LA or other large urban markets have the capacity to pour resources in that would be tough to match. But they could’ve done that already anyway, through spending more money on facilities or hiring better coaches. They haven’t because they have other things they care about more.

If the status quo you refer to is that Bama in football, or UK or Duke or Kansas in basketball will continue to recruit the best, then I think the status quo will be maintained. About 5 schools can recruit at that level because they care enough to put the resources in to do it. I don’t think that is going to change.

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I do agree that college is about education, but education doesn’t mean the same thing to everyone.

The talents and interests of some students make them desire a career in mechanical engineering. The very best of the best “recruits” that want jobs in that field apply to the top schools with mechanical engineering programs. Those schools have massive endowments (that’s what she said) and use them to fund the best labs and hire the best professors.

Would anyone complain if Texas Instruments gave out a $20 million dollar endorsement TI-89 calculator deal to the John Wall of math when the kid was 18 years old? Would that ruin the educational experience? And would it be unfair for MIT or CalTech to tell that kid “we can get you the most money if you bring your brilliance in calculating eigenvectors to our campus”?

John Wall’s brilliance wasn’t math (maybe he’s good at math, I don’t know). The education he needed was how to perform on the basketball court at the highest level. UK had an advantage of a long history of success and unmatched passion and he chose us.

I don’t know if John Wall ever contemplated the writings of Nietzsche or saw the beauty of a mathematical proof while at UK. But he got an education that fit him and his gifts the best, so I think the college experience for him was well-suited and he received a world class education in his chosen field of study. And he probably generated a good deal of money that is now in the form of a new building or piece of equipment somewhere on UK’s campus. JMHO

I think you make an interesting point. Right now I don't think your analogy works. In other words, the $20 million deal to the math student is based on education. No one is watching him compete in math against other college math kids, so there is no reason to limit those benefits to maintain a competitive math league. What I think is interesting is should/could colleges create a sports degree for people who aspire to play pro sports or coach? Would that be consistent with their mission or is that not really related to academia? I could see it at a trade school for sure. I'm not sure how it fits within the mission of a university. It's an interesting question though.

 

[Dablueman]

I agree that the success of NIL will be dependent upon how it is executed.

I disagree about the status quo. I agree that NYC or LA or other large urban markets have the capacity to pour resources in that would be tough to match. But they could’ve done that already anyway, through spending more money on facilities or hiring better coaches. They haven’t because they have other things they care about more.

If the status quo you refer to is that Bama in football, or UK or Duke or Kansas in basketball will continue to recruit the best, then I think the status quo will be maintained. About 5 schools can recruit at that level because they care enough to put the resources in to do it. I don’t think that is going to change.

Plus in those larger markets you have multiple pro teams and multiple p5 colleges competing for those resources. To me as a potential advertiser especially a national one. The size of the fan base their national following the pro potential of their players will play a much bigger role in where the big bucks advertising will go. So your right it will not change much when it comes to the haves and the have nots

 

[cat_in_the_hat]

I agree that the success of NIL will be dependent upon how it is executed.

I disagree about the status quo. I agree that NYC or LA or other large urban markets have the capacity to pour resources in that would be tough to match. But they could’ve done that already anyway, through spending more money on facilities or hiring better coaches. They haven’t because they have other things they care about more.

If the status quo you refer to is that Bama in football, or UK or Duke or Kansas in basketball will continue to recruit the best, then I think the status quo will be maintained. About 5 schools can recruit at that level because they care enough to put the resources in to do it. I don’t think that is going to change.

I think potentially you are right. I think it depends on the leadership at each school. Building facilities often means convincing state governments to okay bonds. That might be problematic for some schools. Putting together very lucrative NIL contracts might be much easier. I could see schools that never wanted to put large sums of money into facilities decide that they can now compete without doing that. I don't know if it will happen. But if attracting players becomes a bidding war based on which school can put together to best NIL contracts, I wouldn't assume that we won't see new players that we haven't seen before. All it would really take is a few boosters to approach the school. I'm not concerned about how it will impact UK or other high profile teams. I'm more concerned that it just changes college sports from what we have today with some teams cheating to a system where different teams cheat but it's no better and maybe worse than it is today.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I think anyone who is being honest with themselves will realize that at levels we're interested in, the money will be mostly the same.

There's a car dealership or restaurant owner in most college towns who will pay $500 for a Saturday morning of autographs or whatever. That kind of stuff is already happening and has been for decades, just without the autographs.

The kids we're after are going to get Nike money and Gatorade money. Zion Williamson was going to get the same NIL opportunities at Duke and Kentucky and Kansas and Clemson.

All this is really doing is allowing that to rightfully happen. Where schools will set themselves apart will be in the systems they put in place to help guide kids and families through this, etc.

That has never been the issue, its the deep pocket boosters. Just wait til Texas and A&M get cranked up on this. They'll buy whomever they want.

 

[GonzoCat90]

That has never been the issue, its the deep pocket boosters. Just wait til Texas and A&M get cranked up on this. They'll buy whomever they want.

Will they?

Because those people are already shoveling money into the programs and have very little success. Texas can't even get the football coach they want.

What NIL package are these hypothetical boogeymen going to put together that keeps prospects from going to Bama or Ohio State to play football or Kentucky or Carolina to play basketball?

The kids worth that much are already going to be making national endorsement money. If you're making a million dollars from Nike/Gatorade/FitBit, $10k from Cletus Cardealer isn't moving the needle.

 

[bucsrule8872]

That has never been the issue, its the deep pocket boosters. Just wait til Texas and A&M get cranked up on this. They'll buy whomever they want.

True.

Good thing they only want football players.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Will they?

Because those people are already shoveling money into the programs and have very little success. Texas can't even get the football coach they want.

What NIL package are these hypothetical boogeymen going to put together that keeps prospects from going to Bama or Ohio State to play football or Kentucky or Carolina to play basketball?

The kids worth that much are already going to be making national endorsement money. If you're making a million dollars from Nike/Gatorade/FitBit, $10k from Cletus Cardealer isn't moving the needle.

10K, lol. You'll be dealing with billionaires. We'll see but it will have little to do with Cletus' dealership.

 

[GonzoCat90]

10K, lol. You'll be dealing with billionaires. We'll see but it will have little to do with Cletus' dealership.

You think billionaires became billionaires by throwing millions at teenagers who won't return any profit for them?

You also have to assume this will be monitored and regulated. Giving a kid $500k for a photo op probably won't be allowed, right?

And if your argument is that they'll ignore that regulation, there's nothing stopping them from doing it now, is there? Except this way you go from being totally invisible to having to publicly document that you gave some money while trying to hide the rest.

 

[NickB86]

It’s over

 

[Dablueman]

You think billionaires became billionaires by throwing millions at teenagers who won't return any profit for them?

You also have to assume this will be monitored and regulated. Giving a kid $500k for a photo op probably won't be allowed, right?

And if your argument is that they'll ignore that regulation, there's nothing stopping them from doing it now, is there? Except this way you go from being totally invisible to having to publicly document that you gave some money while trying to hide the rest.

Exactly will be an IRS paper trail. Seems to me it would be much easier to just do it under the table if they are willing. Now tho we are gonna have guys handing out money more lucrative than mosts first NBA contracts?

 

[BlueWorldOrder74]

basketball will morph into some abomination like the G league or backwater semipro league. Every entitlement program in the land will want a cut. The biggest markets will dominate..

The funniest part will be the proponents will declare victory in the first two years. They will be off the map when the **** hits the fan.

just kidding man. Just kidding.

 

[BigKari]

So glad voters saved Kentucky from Matt Bevin. Get rid of McConnell and Paul and the state will absolutely thrive.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Exactly will be an IRS paper trail. Seems to me it would be much easier to just do it under the table if they are willing. Now tho we are gonna have guys handing out money more lucrative than mosts first NBA contracts?

I just don't think that kind of money is there for local businesses, even if the owners are rich.

It makes sense for Nike to gamble on a young guy who might blow up and be the next mega star. There's potential payoff there.

But a guy trying to promote his restaurant as the UK-friendly place? It makes sense to pay a player per week to be there for autographs or whatever. But there's just no recoupment of that money beyond a certain point.

The only people really in a position like that are the Phil Knights of the world, but even then, he's absolutely not about to mess up his Nike money to buy Oregon titles.

 

[Dablueman]

I just don't think that kind of money is there for local businesses, even if the owners are rich.

It makes sense for Nike to gamble on a young guy who might blow up and be the next mega star. There's potential payoff there.

But a guy trying to promote his restaurant as the UK-friendly place? It makes sense to pay a player per week to be there for autographs or whatever. But there's just no recoupment of that money beyond a certain point.

The only people really in a position like that are the Phil Knights of the world, but even then, he's absolutely not about to mess up his Nike money to buy Oregon titles.

Oh I agree forgot to use the sarcasm font! I was agreeing with your point that some of these top 10 kids are command anywhere fr 250 to 500k minimum but are gonna have billionaire boosters throwing around that kinda money with no real marketing from the player available. What are they gonna say? "I hired him to come to my 35 year old son's bday party? Lol

 

[UK-Chulo]

I just don't think that kind of money is there for local businesses, even if the owners are rich.

It makes sense for Nike to gamble on a young guy who might blow up and be the next mega star. There's potential payoff there.

But a guy trying to promote his restaurant as the UK-friendly place? It makes sense to pay a player per week to be there for autographs or whatever. But there's just no recoupment of that money beyond a certain point.

The only people really in a position like that are the Phil Knights of the world, but even then, he's absolutely not about to mess up his Nike money to buy Oregon titles.

Knight’s enticements will just be routed though some other business.

 

[Dablueman]

Knight’s enticements will just be routed though some other business.

Then that business will have to justify to the IRS how they could afford to do that

 

[kybassfan]

How? You think the games will stop being televised and fans will stop going?

Biggest markets how? Like New York and Los Angeles or the biggest college markets?

Why will they declare victory the first two years? Will it go well at the beginning? What will cause the **** to hit the fan and how long will it take?

Ok, repeat sentence as a question boy. Come up with something that implies intellect and we will talk.

 

[kybassfan]

Entitlement program?

Like Title IX. That’s not specifically applicable but any demographic group that wants paying.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Title IX has to do with how schools treat people. It doesn't and won't require private businesses to spend advertising dollars equally. Stop making up things to be scared of.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Ok, repeat sentence as a question boy. Come up with something that implies intellect and we will talk.

Lol so you don't have anything to back up your doomsday prediction. That's what I thought.

Maybe read the rest of the thread where people are having intelligent discourse on the subject. I've posted several times. If you can't hang, it's okay to just read.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Like Title IX. That’s not specifically applicable but any demographic group that wants paying.

So your example isn't an example and you can't give another specific one that is?

 

[Sparky285]

One has to wonder how long these top shelf players will still have to take classes. The NIL era just further exposes what has been the case for decades - elite players in major college sports are not amateurs. Forcing them to take classes to perpetuate this illusion is a joke and actually insulting. That's the linchpin of this whole house of cards. I get the traditionalists longing for the 'good ole days' but in reality it's been a ruse for a long time.

I like the emphasis to remain on education as 99% of players aren’t set for life pros, I would like to see a major created for players that are almost certainly going to be professional players.

So that players don’t have to go through the charade of sitting in a calculus class, they could take classes that prepare them for a life as a professional athlete.

Those players could take specialized classes: taxes, negotiations, team psychology, life planning, player relations, coaching.

College is really just meant to prepare young adults for life, why would creating a highly specialized major to prepare people that don’t need a traditional education for life, be such a problem ?

I don’t think it’s dumbing down the institution or the sanctity of college, I think it’s preparing athletes for life, instead of making them pretend like they care about calculus.

 

[loublue22_rivals308424]

Why do people act like this won't immediately translate to directly paying for players? Even people whose opinion I respect like Russillo can't seem to see the forest for the trees.

NIL is actually worse than schools just directly paying players out of revenue. While that would also be stupid for a variety of reasons, it would at least be easier to monitor, and schools and conferences could probably come to some agreements to maintain competitive balance. NIL is literally a complete free for all. Any athlete can get money for any reason. Every recruit we lose out on from now on, the lament will be about money. We'll have threads about how UK can organize boosters and local businesses to put up money so we can sign more 5 stars. Or speculation that Nike is giving more money to UNC and Duke guys instead of us. And on and on. This is BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS, but everyone seems to think this is just about streaming on twitch or something.

These rules exist for a reason.

 

[gossie21_rivals69805]

Why do people act like this won't immediately translate to directly paying for players? Even people whose opinion I respect like Russillo can't seem to see the forest for the trees.

NIL is actually worse than schools just directly paying players out of revenue. While that would also be stupid for a variety of reasons, it would at least be easier to monitor, and schools and conferences could probably come to some agreements to maintain competitive balance. NIL is literally a complete free for all. Any athlete can get money for any reason. Every recruit we lose out on from now on, the lament will be about money. We'll have threads about how UK can organize boosters and local businesses to put up money so we can sign more 5 stars. Or speculation that Nike is giving more money to UNC and Duke guys instead of us. And on and on. This is BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS, but everyone seems to think this is just about streaming on twitch or something.

These rules exist for a reason.

I can only speak for myself. But I'm not worried about any of that because I have trust in the free market. Will some boosters try to buy players? Absolutely. And is in no way different than the current system. So why is a change that makes it more open and fair for the players bad?

But the real money is going to be out there from the national companies. Addidas was willing to pay Brian Bowen $100K to play for UofL. Deandre Ayton reportedly got $200K to play for Arizona. Even poor little Silvio de Sousa got $40k from both Under Armor and then Addidas. With payments being legal we will start to see these contracts go into the millions. I would not be at all shocked to see Banchero and Duren both sign million dollar contracts with Nike. And good for them, if signing them brings value to Nike then that should be allowed.

 

[kybassfan]

Lol so you don't have anything to back up your doomsday prediction. That's what I thought.

Maybe read the rest of the thread where people are having intelligent discourse on the subject. I've posted several times. If you can't hang, it's okay to just read.

No I just don’t bother with idiots that repeat questions as sentences. Very low brow.