What I heard on talk radio. U$C wants to offer Jordan Addison from Pitt as an NIL deal. Wow! Guess he hadn't hit the portal and the talk was not OK. I think Bush got ripped!
$2 million and a house?
- Thread starter froropmkr72
- Start date
RIP, college athletics.
This is absurd.
This is absurd.
Pitt cannot cry tampering if there are no rules against tampering.
Cut the rosters to 70 players. No walk ons. This will end fast as there simply won’t be enough spots to take all the talent.
Cut the rosters to 70 players. No walk ons. This will end fast as there simply won’t be enough spots to take all the talent.
2 year scholarships in basketball and 3 year schollies for football with some serious teeth if you breach.
For every transfer you take you give up 2 scholarships. How bout that?
Wait…I thought NIL deals were supposed to come from sponsors/vendors outside the university? The schools aren’t supposed to be paying them directly, are they?
They aren't. Its the booster group making the deal. The college has noooooooooooooothing to do with it.
When Kirby Smart poaches one of sabans players , Alabama will lead the charge to have the big five govern NIL money . The whole paying college athletes was to help the deprived kids who barely can eat. Nil doesn’t accomplish that . Nil money goes into a pool . If you are the face you get 40 cents on the dollar . The other money is spread to your 85 man roster teammates .
Trust me nil is a coach killer . It kills you if you are great at developing talent , Nevada let’s say, and if you are jumbo fisher and your alums just dropped 30 mil on a class and you go 7-5 you are done .
F your socialism. Dumbest idea ever. Will the coaching staff do likewise? The university has nothing to do with the NIL $. How do you enforce the payouts when you aren’t in control of the $?
The roster size is the problem. 85 scholarship players with as many walk ons as you want? Cut it to 70 total. Don’t let teams stockpile talent. Make coaches develop kids. Put enormous value on being on a roster at all. You will see talent spread out fast when the SEC can’t take 25 kids per school every year.
How bout every transfer you take is worth 2 scholarships. Take 10 transfers? Costs you 20 scholarships.
There are ways to slow it down. The NCAA has punted on all of it. They will watch it burn down.
I think that's an excellent point. The 3 LB's drafted out of Wyoming over the last 3 years spend their last 1-2 years at U$C after "word on the street" says they "may" have $150,00 waiting for them according to one of contacts as an incentive to enter the portal. Interesting times.
It doesn’t kill you, it just doesn’t let you advance. If you’re at Nevada and you’re good at finding and developing talent that Bama and Clemson poach thru the portal, Bama and Clemson want you to stay at Nevada.
Good grief … the conference spreads bowl money 12 ways . You call that “capitalism”? WSU takes money from other schools? What is that ? The school takes money from the state. The whole enterprise is socialism .
A reason why you don’t see JC coaches moving up… Guys are fine with them where they are at.
If you limit the roster spots you make the Bama’s and Clemson’s of college football be very selective with who they take. They aren’t gonna be able to take all the 4-5 star HS talent and poach other teams. Not enough seats.
I’ll go you one further. Say Bama poaches a player from WSU. Bama gives the kid his scholarship to get him on board, and they give up one penalty scholarship for taking someone else’s player. Same model you suggest. But, in addition…Bama’s penalty scholarship is transferred to WSU for the number of years of eligibility the poached player had remaining at the time of transfer.
Sorry … not understanding what coaches have to do with it . You talked about socialism … I simply point out that all of college sports are based on socialism, sharing revenue , not earning your own way.
The school gets money , has an nil fund, that is how you govern it . That’s the easy part .
Anotter solution is simply to pay the players . If a full ride is 100k , that is what they get. They get taxed on it and they get to choose to spend the money as they wish . If they buy a new car and don’t pay for schooling then they are gone .
Or just have the conference create bylaws that don’t allow nil deals . The ncaa can, the conference can create their own rules and put it in the scholie .
Or change the portal dates . Bball players have to enter the portal no later than Feb 1. That means if a player plays for a school in an ncaa run they have to announce their transfer by the conference tourney . That way the nil and back door deals better already be in place
Sure. Lose one, gain two.
It is amazing to me how college football doesn’t see how much $ is in the NFL and refuses to see how it is done. Competitiveness drives revenue. Blowouts don’t make $. Bodybag games don’t make $.
The $ is in competitive games that end with a kicker making or missing a field goal as time runs out.
If the blue blood schools want to create their own league, let them. But…. everyone left out needs to create their own league too. The first by law being “no games in any sport will be scheduled with Blue Blood League.” If they want their league of 20 teams, they are gonna find out real quick how hard it is to schedule 30 basketball games with only 20 opponents. Might not have the same record they’re used to. What does baseball look like?
Why do you think the players should be forced to pool their paydays but coaches, admin, everyone else involved doesn’t? And offering this dumb reason that leagues pool money? gtfo. This is about $ in pockets. And with your idiot logic everyone gets a check based on their position or ability but the kids. Stop with your lunacy.
This should turn into a fantastic thread on sustainable business models and organizational management.
The GTFO money in pocket approach appears to have a vocal supporter with deep economic expertise.
The GTFO money in pocket approach appears to have a vocal supporter with deep economic expertise.
WokeEd like the system where the elites get more money and flexibility to do as they please and all others end up getting scraps. It matches his politics.
The more I think about this model, the more I like it. I'm adding one more rule though - when your transfer leaves and you get your 2 scholarships back, they cannot be used on another transfer. They must be used on a HS recruit.
This would really finish off the transition to free agency in CFB. Teams can go sign 2-3 transfer players that are immediate needs, and then go finish a recruiting class. Or they can go get 6-8 transfers and load up for a title run. The first option might be sustainable for a while. The second option is going to tank your depth and probably sabotage your record 3 years from now.
Theoretically, it ends up where the blue bloods grab the most talented individuals, but to do it they sacrifice depth. The teams who lose the talent gain the depth. In theory, as injuries add up, the teams with more talent see a bigger dropoff than the teams with less, and over the course of a season that starts to balance out.
The NBA playoffs have been fantastic this year without LeBron spouting his non-sports related nonsense.
They have to find a way to stop teams from absorbing all the talent. A roster cap, a scholarship hit, something has to be in place. Even if the day does come where the blue blooded programs move into their own league there will still be issues. The NFL is the highest league possible and teams still screw it up even with policies in place to help them.
The focus should be on making the BCS the most competitive league, the most dramatic games, the biggest interest in the playoff. Imo that is where the big $$$ is.
There are many things that could be done with this fiasco. Some major, some minor. But there are very few potential solutions that are BOTH simple and easy to apply across the board. Cutting the roster size is one way to do it. Is 70 with zero walk ons the right number? That can be debated. Maybe you allow 5 or 10 walk ons, maybe you don't. Maybe you go with 65, or 70, or 75 scholies. Maybe you monkey with the 25/year number to fully account for all portal, transfers, etc. Maybe you even mess with the rules on grad transfers, though that is one area where free enterprise probably ought to hold sway. Regardless of the numbers, the concept is to shrink down the number of kids in a program so the big money programs can't suck up all the talent, and won't have the space to poach more than a relatively limited number of kids each year. And one way or the other the limit has to include walk-ons, or the big money folks will simply pay them more when they run out of scholies.
Cause the whole reason for additional “pay” was scholies wasn’t considered enough . Maybe if they don’t want to pay into the system , they should play for an enterprise that has all kinds of subsidies… something they haven’t “earned”. Maybe they should do what high school players do after school. Go to the minor leagues … wait there isn’t a minor league system .
For now.
When Roe is overturned the NBA will put logos of aborted babies on their courts.
There's a political talk thread, go comment there if you're really pining to discuss. Thanks.
The NBA has salary cap rules in place to make it lucrative for the stars to stick with a franchise which is a damn good business model. Of course that only works up to a point if someone is willing to take a pay cut for a title but they are on the right track.
You eliminate the walk ons so boosters cant hide otherwise scholarship players paying their own way to go to school with the $1m NIL $. You use this to prevent schools from gobbling up the talent.
I came to the number of 70 for a few reasons. Some private schools already run with 85 kids and very few if any walk ons and win games. If you keep everyone to 85 what does that do? Does Bama miss a beat? No. If you cut the 85 to 75 what does that do? If you took the bottom 10 kids at Bama do they still have enough 4-5 stars to win titles? Yes. If the goal is to spread talent, slow the portal and make the games more competitive you have to make it tight. At 70 kids teams have a 3 deep, kicker, punter, maybe a couple extra. Coaches have to coach ball and not just out talent teams. Roster spots will have enormous value and may drive down the price on NIL deals.
FWIW I dont think the answer is conferences. I think the answer is one big conference. Like the NFL.
Yes you are correct . How do you think wsu stays afloat . Revenue sharing . Now time with the nil to revenue share or don’t get an opportunity to show your stuff . Seems simple to me
Man you really have a tough time to get me in a political box don’t you? The system is set up to revenue share- think fo it like socialized medicine . Where everyone pays a share and those who can’t afford it get health care as well .
The poor, like wsu are afforded a seat at the table cause of usc, usc , uw etc . We also get a seat at the table because of tax dollars helping fund the university .
i made no claim about the rich getting richer . I said when the rich and powerful, Alabama gets stung by the nil dollars something will change .
Ridiculous. No one is taking a pay cut to make sure the 3rd string LB gets his cut of the $ while never seeing the field.
Ummm… usc could say “we aren’t taking a pay cut to prop up wsu”. You get the nil only works if these kids have a place to show off their talents . You act like ten schools and conferences have zero leverage . Again.. the whole idea was to help all the kids cause there wasn’t enough money from their scholies.
I think there can be a mixed solution here. NLI money is individual and private. It's reasonable to me that that money is not shared. There's no reason the star QB who signs some endorsement deal should share that money with the 3rd string freshman DT.
But merchandising money - sales of jerseys, hats, sweatshirts, etc. - TV money, and similar funds are not individual. A piece of that could easily be divided up and shared with the entire roster. And here's where I'd be open to mixing with NLI - the stars who have NLI deals can have their piece of the shared funds reduced by the amount of their NLI.
In the NFL guys get paid to play football. Any sponsorship deal they sign (NIL) is there’s. Why would the team or other players dictate or take a cut of someone’s off the field money? I wouldnt mix anything. I agree, no reason for bench warmers to get a piece of qbs check. If the guys with NIL deals wanna be a sport and forego their cut of the apparel $, fine. Honestly I don’t see there being a day the schools willingly write checks to players. They are just fine pushing that bill onto the boosters.
