Can we stay competitive in the NIL era?

[bobongo]

Alabama played against 10 first round draft picks, 15 if you count UGA twice. I need to get the full playoff numbers which I will.

Tech played against 7 first rounds picks .. one of those was UGA (which had 5). That's what Belichick was referring to.

I dunno about one year. I do know our schedule stacks up against most anybody in the country. There's what Belichick says and there's what Belichick does, and 21 of his players are from non-P-5 schools.

 

[UgaBlows]

it would take some truly special players to get drafted out of hs. the difference in size and speed is enormous and the development that can occur over the first two years can be a lot. the only guys that may have been drafted recently were studs like clowney, trevor lawrence, adrian peterson and very few others. they were seen as generational recruits coming out of hs

I agree, especially lineman but it would become very hard for NFL teams to pass on “can’t miss” type recruits, super-hyped 5-stars, College freshman and sphs that are showing out etc. Sign them to a long-term contract. I believe the nfl would adapt to gobble all that talent up as quickly as possible.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Bill Belechik

Bill Belichick said it best. Playing 4 years against the best players prepares you for the professional game in a way that playing for smaller schools can't.

Again ... the probability is higher that you will play pro ball coming from LSU than Bowling Green.

This has been, for years, one of sa(t)an’s biggest recruiting advantages. He has letters from Belichik & other NFL dignitaries testifying to this. One of the reasons he is frustrated by NIL is that it can be a factor that overcomes that advantage with some kids.

 

[Vespidae]

I dunno about one year. I do know our schedule stacks up against most anybody in the country. There's what Belichick says and there's what Belichick does, and 21 of his players are from non-P-5 schools.

Belichick, in this, is talking about talent. Not schedule.

 

[bobongo]

Belichick, in this, is talking about talent. Not schedule.

The talent is on the teams you play on your schedule.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

The talent is on the teams you play on your schedule.

No, per Belichik, the practices at a place like Bammer, where they face the best against the best over and over is what makes the real difference, and that is why he gave sa(t)an the documents with his signature to assist him with recruiting. Of course, Belichik is not the only NFL person sa(t)an has these from. One of the statements he makes is basically "if you play in this system, it really doesn't matter if you start or play signficantly on gamedays or not, you will get a look by the NFL because we know the depth of talent and the coaching you get at Bammer". (paraphrased)

 

[bobongo]

No, per Belichik, the practices at a place like Bammer, where they face the best against the best over and over is what makes the real difference, and that is why he gave sa(t)an the documents with his signature to assist him with recruiting. Of course, Belichik is not the only NFL person sa(t)an has these from. One of the statements he makes is basically "if you play in this system, it really doesn't matter if you start or play signficantly on gamedays or not, you will get a look by the NFL because we know what the depth of talent and the coaching you get at Bammer". (paraphrased)

There might be a small advantage there, but the main thing is your talent. He has 21 players on his team who didn't play P-5 football.

 

[JacketOff]

There might be a small advantage there, but the main thing is your talent. He has 21 players on his team who didn't play P-5 football.

You keep bringing up those 21. Considering there are 65 P5 schools, and 255 total schools that play D1 FBS or FCS football, that means 35 of Belichick’s 56 players come from just over 25% of D1 schools. Those ratios don’t really add up to helping your argument. It’s like when people say there are more 3-star recruits in the NFL than 5-stars. Well yeah, considering there are literally thousands more of them, it’s not all that surprising.

 

[JacketFan137]

You keep bringing up those 21. Considering there are 65 P5 schools, and 255 total schools that play D1 FBS or FCS football, that means 35 of Belichick’s 56 players come from just over 25% of D1 schools. Those ratios don’t really add up to helping your argument. It’s like when people say there are more 3-star recruits in the NFL than 5-stars. Well yeah, considering there are literally thousands more of them, it’s not all that surprising.

it would also require a deeper look into the actual roster to really make a point. are the 21 guys actual lineman, WRs, qb, etc or are they punters, long snappers, special teams gunners etc.

the vast, vast majority of talent in the nfl is p5. in 2020 67% of players came from p5.

 

[iceeater1969]

The Ohio State head coach says they need $13,000,000 for NIL.

When I last looked our Donations and Ticket sales were about $21,000,000.

We are winning lower than the level of alumni commitment, but not much lower.

 

[bobongo]

You keep bringing up those 21. Considering there are 65 P5 schools, and 255 total schools that play D1 FBS or FCS football, that means 35 of Belichick’s 56 players come from just over 25% of D1 schools. Those ratios don’t really add up to helping your argument. It’s like when people say there are more 3-star recruits in the NFL than 5-stars. Well yeah, considering there are literally thousands more of them, it’s not all that surprising.

Players who are NFL caliber on non-P-5 rosters are far fewer and farther between than on P-5 rosters.
My point is that the few who are NFL caliber have the same chance to make it as the players who are NFL caliber on P-5 rosters.
The fact that 67% of NFL players come from P-5 schools only proves there are more NFL caliber players at those schools, mainly owing to the fact that by and large the best players out of high school sign with P-5 schools to begin with.

 

[Vespidae]

My point is that the few who are NFL caliber have the same chance to make it as the players who are NFL caliber on P-5 rosters.

I dunno. Maybe. But a top talent is FAR more likely to be drafted in the first round coming from a top program than say, Bowling Green or the University of Lower Slobodia. And that means $$$. Lots and lots of $$$.

 

[slugboy]

Players who are NFL caliber on non-P-5 rosters are far fewer and farther between than on P-5 rosters.
My point is that the few who are NFL caliber have the same chance to make it as the players who are NFL caliber on P-5 rosters.
The fact that 67% of NFL players come from P-5 schools only proves there are more NFL caliber players at those schools, mainly owing to the fact that by and large the best players out of high school sign with P-5 schools to begin with.

I’m a similar vein, a study of students accepted to Ivy League schools found that the students accepted to Harvard and Yale (etc) had the same lifetime earnings whether they actually went to Harvard or they decided to stay home at Iowa.
But, while the student succeeded wherever they went, and about at the same level, students who get accepted to the ivies usually go there—because most of them feel they’re in their own crowd. I think it’s the same with the high 4* and 5* players—they want to be in a crowd going to the NFL instead of being a lone wolf.

 

[bobongo]

I dunno. Maybe. But a top talent is FAR more likely to be drafted in the first round coming from a top program than say, Bowling Green or the University of Lower Slobodia. And that means $$$. Lots and lots of $$$.

I can see that. Terrell Owens went to Chattanooga, and they never had a winning record while he was there. He went third round. Probably goes 1st round if he's out of a big school.
Calvin Johnson went 1st round, though, and although we're P-5 we aren't exactly Alabama.
But NFL scouts are going to find you no matter where you played if you have the talent IMO.
And the guys you're playing against here are the same competition level as the guys you'd be playing against at 'Bama.

 

[bobongo]

I’m a similar vein, a study of students accepted to Ivy League schools found that the students accepted to Harvard and Yale (etc) had the same lifetime earnings whether they actually went to Harvard or they decided to stay home at Iowa.
But, while the student succeeded wherever they went, and about at the same level, students who get accepted to the ivies usually go there—because most of them feel they’re in their own crowd. I think it’s the same with the high 4* and 5* players—they want to be in a crowd going to the NFL instead of being a lone wolf.

No doubt most do, but I've always had a special admiration for a guy who wanted to go somewhere he could make a difference instead of glomming onto a team that will win whether he's there or not.
And I wonder if he might actually sometimes gain an advantage by going to a school where he stands out, as long as it's at least P-5.
But as far as the NIL discussion goes, yeah, lots more money playing for a factory than a nerd school like Tech.

 

[GT_05]

I’m late to this thread but I would like to see NIL changed. How about one of these two scenarios:

1) All NIL money goes into one pot at the NCAA and it is redistributed equally to all NCAA athletes in all sports.

2) All NIL money goes into one pot at the university and it is redistributed equally to all university athletes in all sports.

I think number 1 is the best for college sports but either option would dampen the effect of big money effectively buying a team and this would allow athletes to still get some $$$.

 

[4shotB]

I’m late to this thread but I would like to see NIL changed. How about one of these two scenarios:

1) All NIL money goes into one pot at the NCAA and it is redistributed equally to all NCAA athletes in all sports.

2) All NIL money goes into one pot at the university and it is redistributed equally to all university athletes in all sports.

I think number 1 is the best for college sports but either option would dampen the effect of big money effectively buying a team and this would allow athletes to still get some $$$.

While I 100% agree that NIL and how it is handled needs to change, I am philosophically opposed to equal distribution of NIL money, whether it be globally across the NCAA or locally at each individual university or school. Neither the goalie on the soccer team nor the balance beam gymnast produces the revenue for the school that the star QB, RB, DE or point guard does. While this might not be "fair" I have no issue with dividing the pie proportional to revenue generated.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Yes, I don't have a fix for the NIL situation; and most likely, there really isn't one. But, the whole point is to allow kids to earn the $$ when their name, image, or likeness is used to profit others. This has to be done individually, not as a "collective", or it would definitely be illegal I believe. (if not illegal, then unethical to take from one who earns due to their notoriety and gives to one who has no following)

But, with that said, there are all kinds of examples in our country of taking from producers and giving to those who choose not to produce or cannot produce for some reason. I don't like it, but IIWII.

 

[ChicagobasedJacket]

I’m late to this thread but I would like to see NIL changed. How about one of these two scenarios:

1) All NIL money goes into one pot at the NCAA and it is redistributed equally to all NCAA athletes in all sports.

2) All NIL money goes into one pot at the university and it is redistributed equally to all university athletes in all sports.

I think number 1 is the best for college sports but either option would dampen the effect of big money effectively buying a team and this would allow athletes to still get some $$$.

Courts would immediately reject either of these proposals.

 

[GT_05]

Yes, I don't have a fix for the NIL situation; and most likely, there really isn't one. But, the whole point is to allow kids to earn the $$ when their name, image, or likeness is used to profit others. This has to be done individually, not as a "collective", or it would definitely be illegal I believe. (if not illegal, then unethical to take from one who earns due to their notoriety and gives to one who has no following)

But, with that said, there are all kinds of examples in our country of taking from producers and giving to those who choose not to produce or cannot produce for some reason. I don't like it, but IIWII.

The skill positions can’t do anything without the big uglies. They all produce but I haven’t heard any of the big uglies making 7 figures. I believe the current way NIL is handled is terribly unfair.