NCAA loses more power... again...
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...: To answer your questions:
-
No, none of KU’s issues involved NIL stuff.
-
No, very few people will make enough from NIL deals to want to stay in school longer. If someone is good to turn pro early, that’s going to be more money than staying in school.
-
Someone will end up as the poster child of how not to balance academic/athletic/NIL responsibilities
-
Most NIL based deals will be relatively small and from local businesses. The NIL deal will have minimal impact on KU’s recruiting unless the athletic department totally botches how they handle and promote NIL opportunities to kids.
I would think there’s a strong enough relationship between NIL and KU’s case that it may have some impact? E.g. If NIL existed then perhaps KU wouldn’t have done this or that (allegedly)?
Also for the marginal kids, the ones who may or may not make money by declaring, perhaps NIL would give them the incentive they needed to return?
NIL has absolutely nothing to do with KU’s case. New NIL regulations won’t change how Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour operate at the grassroots level funneling kids to specific programs. A $2,500 endorsement deal isn’t going to stop Nike or Adidas from funneling $25,000 to a recruit’s family (more money the higher ranked the recruit is).
Your second point is just flat out bad business. NIL is going to have no impact on whether a player stays or goes pro because there’s no restrictions on endorsements as a pro so players would get any NIL endorsement money on top of their professional salary. If a kid chooses to return to school solely because of NIL, then that kid needs to take a financial literacy class because that kid is dumb and financially illiterate.
Depends on the specifics. If a particular booster is willing to go above and beyond any reasonable rate to retain someone, could be the case. To my knowledge, Devon Dotson doesn’t have any lucrative NIL deals. Maybe on shoes? And makes ok money as a 2 way. A booster could theoretically (if NIL was passed 18 months ago) say, “yo Devon. I’ll give you a $750k deal to endorse my insurance product.” Total compensation would be about equal. Is this likely to happen? No. But at big time college programs like KU basketball and Nebraska football with rabid fanbases and great booster support, it’s quite possible.
-
-
@FarmerJayhawk said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...: To answer your questions:
-
No, none of KU’s issues involved NIL stuff.
-
No, very few people will make enough from NIL deals to want to stay in school longer. If someone is good to turn pro early, that’s going to be more money than staying in school.
-
Someone will end up as the poster child of how not to balance academic/athletic/NIL responsibilities
-
Most NIL based deals will be relatively small and from local businesses. The NIL deal will have minimal impact on KU’s recruiting unless the athletic department totally botches how they handle and promote NIL opportunities to kids.
I would think there’s a strong enough relationship between NIL and KU’s case that it may have some impact? E.g. If NIL existed then perhaps KU wouldn’t have done this or that (allegedly)?
Also for the marginal kids, the ones who may or may not make money by declaring, perhaps NIL would give them the incentive they needed to return?
NIL has absolutely nothing to do with KU’s case. New NIL regulations won’t change how Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour operate at the grassroots level funneling kids to specific programs. A $2,500 endorsement deal isn’t going to stop Nike or Adidas from funneling $25,000 to a recruit’s family (more money the higher ranked the recruit is).
Your second point is just flat out bad business. NIL is going to have no impact on whether a player stays or goes pro because there’s no restrictions on endorsements as a pro so players would get any NIL endorsement money on top of their professional salary. If a kid chooses to return to school solely because of NIL, then that kid needs to take a financial literacy class because that kid is dumb and financially illiterate.
Depends on the specifics. If a particular booster is willing to go above and beyond any reasonable rate to retain someone, could be the case. To my knowledge, Devon Dotson doesn’t have any lucrative NIL deals. Maybe on shoes? And makes ok money as a 2 way. A booster could theoretically (if NIL was passed 18 months ago) say, “yo Devon. I’ll give you a $750k deal to endorse my insurance product.” Total compensation would be about equal. Is this likely to happen? No. But at big time college programs like KU basketball and Nebraska football with rabid fanbases and great booster support, it’s quite possible.
Your proposed scenario would likely never happen because that would be a major rules violation that could ruin a program. NIL legislation restricts athletes from signing NIL deals with companies associated with boosters so unless a school wants the NCAA handing out punishment, your proposed scenario will never happen.
-
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@FarmerJayhawk said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@chriz said in NCAA loses more power... again...: To answer your questions:
-
No, none of KU’s issues involved NIL stuff.
-
No, very few people will make enough from NIL deals to want to stay in school longer. If someone is good to turn pro early, that’s going to be more money than staying in school.
-
Someone will end up as the poster child of how not to balance academic/athletic/NIL responsibilities
-
Most NIL based deals will be relatively small and from local businesses. The NIL deal will have minimal impact on KU’s recruiting unless the athletic department totally botches how they handle and promote NIL opportunities to kids.
I would think there’s a strong enough relationship between NIL and KU’s case that it may have some impact? E.g. If NIL existed then perhaps KU wouldn’t have done this or that (allegedly)?
Also for the marginal kids, the ones who may or may not make money by declaring, perhaps NIL would give them the incentive they needed to return?
NIL has absolutely nothing to do with KU’s case. New NIL regulations won’t change how Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour operate at the grassroots level funneling kids to specific programs. A $2,500 endorsement deal isn’t going to stop Nike or Adidas from funneling $25,000 to a recruit’s family (more money the higher ranked the recruit is).
Your second point is just flat out bad business. NIL is going to have no impact on whether a player stays or goes pro because there’s no restrictions on endorsements as a pro so players would get any NIL endorsement money on top of their professional salary. If a kid chooses to return to school solely because of NIL, then that kid needs to take a financial literacy class because that kid is dumb and financially illiterate.
Depends on the specifics. If a particular booster is willing to go above and beyond any reasonable rate to retain someone, could be the case. To my knowledge, Devon Dotson doesn’t have any lucrative NIL deals. Maybe on shoes? And makes ok money as a 2 way. A booster could theoretically (if NIL was passed 18 months ago) say, “yo Devon. I’ll give you a $750k deal to endorse my insurance product.” Total compensation would be about equal. Is this likely to happen? No. But at big time college programs like KU basketball and Nebraska football with rabid fanbases and great booster support, it’s quite possible.
Your proposed scenario would likely never happen because that would be a major rules violation that could ruin a program. NIL legislation restricts athletes from signing NIL deals with companies associated with boosters so unless a school wants the NCAA handing out punishment, your proposed scenario will never happen.
It absolutely doesn’t prohibit that. From the NCAA document, "12. Can individuals enter into NIL agreements with boosters?
Yes, provided the activity is in accordance with state laws and school policy, is not an impermissible inducement and it does not constitute pay-for-play."
-
-
-
I’m not smart enough to be able to wrap my brain around all the particulars of the NIL thing and I haven’t had the time to study any of it, but my gut tells me this is going to spiral out of control very quickly and there are going to be lots of unintended consequences.
-
@BigBad I saw that and was going to post bit forgot.
tip of the iceberg.
-
@BigBad said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
Very misleading and click bait-y title.
From the article:
“Players can earn up to $6,000 a year by promoting the gyms through social media, personal appearances and other marketing tactics.”
That’s not money that’s going to influence anyone to stay an extra year.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
That’s not money that’s going to influence anyone to stay an extra year.
Maybe not, but that’s certainly money that might influence someone to go to Miami over another school. Not everyone is likeable and marketable. Not everyone is cream-of-the-crop talent-wise or the “loveable loser” that endears someone to the public at large. Someone who would normally fall through the NIL cracks is now guaranteed to get a shot at some cash. I think that’s a pretty big deal.
Also, this is notable because it’s the first instance (as far as I know) of a company taking an entire team under its wing. In my opinion that will certainly turn some heads in the recruiting game.
-
@tis4tim You got it. The mid-major or small schools are going to be left holding the empty bag. For example, do you think that what Gonzaga has become could’ve happened had there been NIL? I doubt it. And there probably won’t be another one. This thing has slippery slope written all over it.
-
Gonzaga never happens if Mark Few leaves. He is the reason that program is what it is. Has nothing to do with NIL. Everything to do with a coach who found ways to get top end talent to his school. He recruited abroad better than anyone else. He took transfers. He developed well.
-
@Kcmatt7 that he did. But would it have happened now? I say no.
-
@Marco time will tell. I think the transfer rules have hurt mid-majors far more than the NIL will.
-
Gonzaga is no longer a mid major, of course. I mean technically they are but they are a big boy, deep into the game with the bags to keep it going.
-
@Kcmatt7 They will both hurt.
-
You know, after giving it more thought, I’m good with NIL. When it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise and those that are delivering the product are paid nothing - yet when a player gets caught being paid something both them and their school are punished, how is that even close to being cool? In point of fact, it sounds downright un-American.
-
@Marco said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
You know, after giving it more thought, I’m good with NIL. When it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise yet those that are delivering the product are paid nothing, and if when they are paid something and their school gets caught that school is and or might be put on probation, how is that even close to being cool? In point of fact, it sounds downright un-American.
US history would like to have a word with you on that.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 “Un-American” usually means contrary to America’s purported ideals, which as you point out certainly can seldom be found to have been followed in our history.
Or, more succinctly, American history is pretty damned un-American.
-
Just the beginning. Mark my word… there will be a million past athletes wanting back into D1 soon. I expect this to litigate or the NCAA bends quickly to this.
-
@drgnslayr said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
Just the beginning. Mark my word… there will be a million past athletes wanting back into D1 soon. I expect this to litigate or the NCAA bends quickly to this.
There may be plenty of people wanting back in, but unless they still have eligibility and value to a program, they’re going to be out of luck. And no, courts will not side with athletes on that issue.
-
Meh - Don’t see it happening at all.
NCAA will end up with a class action lawsuit that pays out a ton of money to former athletes for lost earnings. But that will be the end of that.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
There may be plenty of people wanting back in, but unless they still have eligibility and value to a program, they’re going to be out of luck. And no, courts will not side with athletes on that issue.
For sure. I think they will start putting pressure on the NCAA to change eligibility. Question then… is that fair to high school players coming in? This could be argued that it will help more players earn degrees.
-
@drgnslayr said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
There may be plenty of people wanting back in, but unless they still have eligibility and value to a program, they’re going to be out of luck. And no, courts will not side with athletes on that issue.
For sure. I think they will start putting pressure on the NCAA to change eligibility. Question then… is that fair to high school players coming in? This could be argued that it will help more players earn degrees.
The NCAA isn’t changing anything in that regard because the people you’re talking about have zero leverage to make the NCAA change anything because a court can’t force a school to take back a kid in that situation because athletic scholarships are only good for one year and a school can say we’re choosing not to renew so and so’s scholarship. If anything happens, maybe records get restored for players who had previous NIL violations, but that’s it.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@drgnslayr said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
There may be plenty of people wanting back in, but unless they still have eligibility and value to a program, they’re going to be out of luck. And no, courts will not side with athletes on that issue.
For sure. I think they will start putting pressure on the NCAA to change eligibility. Question then… is that fair to high school players coming in? This could be argued that it will help more players earn degrees.
The NCAA isn’t changing anything in that regard because the people you’re talking about have zero leverage to make the NCAA change anything because a court can’t force a school to take back a kid in that situation because athletic scholarships are only good for one year and a school can say we’re choosing not to renew so and so’s scholarship. If anything happens, maybe records get restored for players who had previous NIL violations, but that’s it.
The Big 12 and other P5 leagues adopted multi year guaranteed scholarships years ago. https://big12sports.com/news/2014/12/1/209788901.aspx
-
@FarmerJayhawk said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@drgnslayr said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
@Texas-Hawk-10 said in NCAA loses more power... again...:
There may be plenty of people wanting back in, but unless they still have eligibility and value to a program, they’re going to be out of luck. And no, courts will not side with athletes on that issue.
For sure. I think they will start putting pressure on the NCAA to change eligibility. Question then… is that fair to high school players coming in? This could be argued that it will help more players earn degrees.
The NCAA isn’t changing anything in that regard because the people you’re talking about have zero leverage to make the NCAA change anything because a court can’t force a school to take back a kid in that situation because athletic scholarships are only good for one year and a school can say we’re choosing not to renew so and so’s scholarship. If anything happens, maybe records get restored for players who had previous NIL violations, but that’s it.
The Big 12 and other P5 leagues adopted multi year guaranteed scholarships years ago. https://big12sports.com/news/2014/12/1/209788901.aspx
Not across the board and the situation @drgnslayr is far more likely to be relevant at lower level schools that only do 1 year scholarships.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 I wasn’t referring to U.S. history, which I know more than my share of. I am talking about free people having the ability to make money, any money.
