Who is paying top dollar?

[Ranchdawg]

https://247sports.com/college/texas...ook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm

 

[thatsbaseball]

Simply put, the rich are about to get richer. I'm curious where we will eventually end up in this new landscape.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

Simply put, the rich are about to get richer. I'm curious where we will eventually end up in this new landscape.

How? It's not even possible for them to get richer than they already are. They are as rich as rich can be.

The game is still played on the field.

The only thing that could happen is that programs in bigger cities with more marketing opportunities, might gain ground. Like a Miami. But I think even that is overblown, I mean Miami was already a known commodity. If others were going to rise up they'd have done it already. Memphis already gets a ton of Fedex money, they aren't going to suddenly get better. Same with Houston, or a UCF, etc.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

I hope this dilutes talent. You’d also probably see variation year to year depending on if big boosters are going to pay. Hope it also results in bad team dynamics at rich schools.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

I hope this dilutes talent. You’d also probably see variation year to year depending on if big boosters are going to pay. Hope it also results in bad team dynamics at rich schools.

Yep. What if Bo Nix gets cocky with his Milo's deal and the line decides 17 him?

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The coaches benefitted from overinflated salaries for years, now they are going to have to earn that money. Whole other level of 'managing' the locker room, but they kinda had to do that anyway. You still need high character players to avoid that drama.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

You have to reduce scholarships to 55 to avoid 5 stars in the 3 deep. And no NIL unless you’re on scholarship.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

Will be interesting too if someone signs a multi year deal with an advertiser then bails and owes them a bunch of money. Or shows up to practice and doesn’t try until released from contract. Or takes a big payment then “prepares for the draft”

 

[Russ Wheeler]

You have to reduce scholarships to 55 to avoid 5 stars in the 3 deep. And no NIL unless you’re on scholarship.

And the difference between last year and this year is what again???? Did Bama not have 5 stars in the 3 deep? This is so overblown, the kids just want to play football and make it to the NFL. This little bit of money isn't changing much for the 3 deepers. ???

And dude, you obviously don't understand NIL. It was a restriction put on the players BECAUSE they were on scholarship (or really just an NCAA athlete). If you're not on scholarship and an NCAA athlete (athletic, by the way, not any other type), you have all the ability to market you want.

 

[DAWG61]

You are, thanks Ranch

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

And the difference between last year and this year is what again???? Did Bama not have 5 stars in the 3 deep? This is so overblown, the kids just want to play football and make it to the NFL. This little bit of money isn't changing much for the 3 deepers. ???

And dude, you obviously don't understand NIL. It was a restriction put on the players BECAUSE they were on scholarship (or really just an NCAA athlete). If you're not on scholarship and an NCAA athlete (athletic, by the way, not any other type), you have all the ability to market you want.

So bama can pay a non-scholarship player 100k per year to walkon?

 

[anon1787432961]

Texas is urbanized

 

[GloryDawg]

I imagine A&M has more rich alumni than the other ones on that list.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

So bama can pay a non-scholarship player 100k per year to walkon?

What? Do you not understand anything? Before now, no, they couldn’t.

Now, they can. But they won’t.

 

[Ranchdawg]

Simply put, the rich are about to get richer. I'm curious where we will eventually end up in this new landscape.

NIL is simply icing on the cake for blue chip players. The boosters will still offer the cash but the NIL will get them to look at programs in big demographic areas like LA, Miami, Dallas, etc. We may see the resurgence of programs like USC and UCLA. Ohio State with their huge alumni base. Our demographic really hurts us for NIL.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

What? Do you not understand anything? Before now, no, they couldn’t.

Now, they can. But they won’t.

Obviously you don’t know bama. Before scholarships caps how many players did the bear sign?

 

[Bill Shankly]

How? It's not even possible for them to get richer than they already are. They are as rich as rich can be.

The game is still played on the field.

The only thing that could happen is that programs in bigger cities with more marketing opportunities, might gain ground. Like a Miami. But I think even that is overblown, I mean Miami was already a known commodity. If others were going to rise up they'd have done it already. Memphis already gets a ton of Fedex money, they aren't going to suddenly get better. Same with Houston, or a UCF, etc.

There are a lot of people who would not participate in under the table stuff. Now they can contribute too. The rich will absolutely get richer.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

There are a lot of people who would not participate in under the table stuff. Now they can contribute too. The rich will absolutely get richer.

The same schools will finish in the Top 25 of recruiting, and that's what matters.

 

[SheltonChoked]

How many will take the NIL money and not see the field like under bear? Or, transfer out after a year?

 

[Russ Wheeler]

How many will take the NIL money and not see the field like under bear? Or, transfer out after a year?

No more than before. If someone turns down a scholarship at MSU or anywhere else to walk-on at Bama plus some minimal NIL, then you have to kinda wonder about their IQ level.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

No more than before. If someone turns down a scholarship at MSU or anywhere else to walk-on at Bama plus some minimal NIL, then you have to kinda wonder about their IQ level.

Bama osu Lsu Michigan doesn’t minimal anything

 

[Russ Wheeler]

Bama osu Lsu Michigan doesn’t minimal anything

You do realize that a Bama walk-on is not going to get Cam Newton money, right?

Hey man, if you want to be cynical and miserable, go ahead.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Logically, it seems a contributing player will earn more NIL money than a player that does not see the field.


It's not 1950. Players leave programs that don't let them play.

NIL combined with the new transfer rule will make recruiting during the season important...

 

[Russ Wheeler]

It's not 1950. Players leave programs that don't let them play.

Yep - it's still about football first and foremost. And to add to that, most players that are playing are not going to want to transfer either. So many act like Dak would have left to go to Alabama or wherever, well, no, not without some major coaching change or whatever.

College sports will continue to churn on, and all the NIL and transfer portal haters will forget in a few years.

 

[johnson86-1]

You do realize that a Bama walk-on is not going to get Cam Newton money, right?

Hey man, if you want to be cynical and miserable, go ahead.

I'm not worried about the Bama walk-on. I'm worried about a rich Bama booster establishing a practice of giving every Bama freshman a 2 year NIL deal worth $25k a year. That's $1.25M a year. After two years, people that are getting playing time and exposure stand to make more. People that aren't can look to transfer if they want or continue playing for "just" a scholarship or get some other NIL deal from boosters that isn't as lucrative.

I don't think Bama, Auburn, or LSU would have trouble finding boosters that would commit to that much money, and I'm not sure they couldn't find that much incremental money just from boosters that wanted to do their part but didn't want to be involved in anything that violates NCAA rules or exposes them to tax issues.

Now, they've mostly been winning those recruiting battles anyway, but we still win enough of them for it to be a game changer if we start losing them. If LSU comes in at the last second and offers Dak not just a scholarship, but $50k in guaranteed NIL money, does he still stay loyal? If having the option to pay above the table gives blue bloods more money available because boosters aren't worried about NCAA blowback or tax issues, do we stay competitive in bidding wars for any players? Even if it's a prized recruit for us and the person they have rated as their 25th best scholarship player to offer, I'm not sure they don't keep us with us in any bidding.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

I'm not worried about the Bama walk-on. I'm worried about a rich Bama booster establishing a practice of giving every Bama freshman a 2 year NIL deal worth $25k a year. That's $1.25M a year. After two years, people that are getting playing time and exposure stand to make more. People that aren't can look to transfer if they want or continue playing for "just" a scholarship or get some other NIL deal from boosters that isn't as lucrative.

I don't think Bama, Auburn, or LSU would have trouble finding boosters that would commit to that much money, and I'm not sure they couldn't find that much incremental money just from boosters that wanted to do their part but didn't want to be involved in anything that violates NCAA rules or exposes them to tax issues.

Now, they've mostly been winning those recruiting battles anyway, but we still win enough of them for it to be a game changer if we start losing them. If LSU comes in at the last second and offers Dak not just a scholarship, but $50k in guaranteed NIL money, does he still stay loyal? If having the option to pay above the table gives blue bloods more money available because boosters aren't worried about NCAA blowback or tax issues, do we stay competitive in bidding wars for any players? Even if it's a prized recruit for us and the person they have rated as their 25th best scholarship player to offer, I'm not sure they don't keep us with us in any bidding.

Yep - Russ is living in fantasy land. It’s not cynicism jr!

 

[Russ Wheeler]

I'm not worried about the Bama walk-on. I'm worried about a rich Bama booster establishing a practice of giving every Bama freshman a 2 year NIL deal worth $25k a year. That's $1.25M a year. After two years, people that are getting playing time and exposure stand to make more. People that aren't can look to transfer if they want or continue playing for "just" a scholarship or get some other NIL deal from boosters that isn't as lucrative.

I don't think Bama, Auburn, or LSU would have trouble finding boosters that would commit to that much money, and I'm not sure they couldn't find that much incremental money just from boosters that wanted to do their part but didn't want to be involved in anything that violates NCAA rules or exposes them to tax issues.

Now, they've mostly been winning those recruiting battles anyway, but we still win enough of them for it to be a game changer if we start losing them. If LSU comes in at the last second and offers Dak not just a scholarship, but $50k in guaranteed NIL money, does he still stay loyal? If having the option to pay above the table gives blue bloods more money available because boosters aren't worried about NCAA blowback or tax issues, do we stay competitive in bidding wars for any players? Even if it's a prized recruit for us and the person they have rated as their 25th best scholarship player to offer, I'm not sure they don't keep us with us in any bidding.

How much money do you think these people are willing to truly give? There is a limit to what most folks will do if it doesn't directly help them turn a profit.

 

[johnson86-1]

How much money do you think these people are willing to truly give? There is a limit to what most folks will do if it doesn't directly help them turn a profit.

I think that's a real unknown.

On the one hand, a lot of alumni are probably not willing to do anything for players. Just like a lot of people object to paying players period, there are probably plenty of big dollar alumni who have no problem forking over $50k a year for premium seats but view that as a purchase/donation, and like to be oblivious to recruiting payments and wouldn't give anything for player "NIL" deals.

Other alumni probably don't want to be involved in under the table recruiting payments, but if they can pay players and it be a "marketing expense" for their business, they'd be happy to do it.

It's hard for me to fathom spending lots of money on recruiting, so I'm not the right person to give a good guestimate as far as how much money is potentially out there. I do think that whatever money is available for us, there is going to be ten times as much available for LSU, Bama, UGA, etc. to spend.

I also think in the short term, the big winners are going to be schools with rich individual alumni that can make splashy NIL payments right out of the gate. In the medium term, it's going to be schools that can figure out a way to organize their small and medium boosters in a way that effectively aggregates money to use for NIL deals.

Somewhere a school is going to have somebody start a business just for recruiting that can just barely pass muster as legitimate. They'll do something like start an LLC that is in the business of creating NFT's for college athletes for X school. They can just keep paying players every year to do private shoots or something to use to generate NFT's, and make the argument that eventually, some of these player swill be starts and their Freshman year NFT's will be something like rookie cards and very valuable. Probably would need to be set up as the equivalent of an open ended fund or something. If they can figure out a way to do that without having to limit it to accredited investors, it will be pretty effective for raising money for recruiting.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

I think that's a real unknown.

On the one hand, a lot of alumni are probably not willing to do anything for players. Just like a lot of people object to paying players period, there are probably plenty of big dollar alumni who have no problem forking over $50k a year for premium seats but view that as a purchase/donation, and like to be oblivious to recruiting payments and wouldn't give anything for player "NIL" deals.

Other alumni probably don't want to be involved in under the table recruiting payments, but if they can pay players and it be a "marketing expense" for their business, they'd be happy to do it.

It's hard for me to fathom spending lots of money on recruiting, so I'm not the right person to give a good guestimate as far as how much money is potentially out there. I do think that whatever money is available for us, there is going to be ten times as much available for LSU, Bama, UGA, etc. to spend.

I also think in the short term, the big winners are going to be schools with rich individual alumni that can make splashy NIL payments right out of the gate. In the medium term, it's going to be schools that can figure out a way to organize their small and medium boosters in a way that effectively aggregates money to use for NIL deals.

Somewhere a school is going to have somebody start a business just for recruiting that can just barely pass muster as legitimate. They'll do something like start an LLC that is in the business of creating NFT's for college athletes for X school. They can just keep paying players every year to do private shoots or something to use to generate NFT's, and make the argument that eventually, some of these player swill be starts and their Freshman year NFT's will be something like rookie cards and very valuable. Probably would need to be set up as the equivalent of an open ended fund or something. If they can figure out a way to do that without having to limit it to accredited investors, it will be pretty effective for raising money for recruiting.

It's even more important now that we continue to focus on the football portion of this thing (i.e. Air Raid, getting guys to the NFL, DLU, etc.), since MSU most certainly will be behind the 8-ball when it comes to paying big money to players for NIL deals, in general. I suspect that the programs that go all into NIL, like Miami, probably will create more distractions (and ultimately neglect football in a way) than an 'all-in' focus on winning games, and the whole thing will fall.

But there were always be money involved, just as it always has been. Donors may have to decide what they will support - facilities, coaches, players?