GT Player Deals

[TheTechGuy]

In the next few years, a handful of high-level players will be pulling in $1M plus for endorsements/appearances, and the vast majority of players will become low-level instagram salesmen.

Someone will score a TD, pull out a “Manscaping” ad from their sock to show on TV, and we’ll wonder if we’ve gone to far. But I say, if the kids want to hawk gizmos and gadgets, let them do it.

My only question; have the NIL laws or schools installed parameters on the type of product that a player may endorse? Going to be interesting to see what happens when players start advertising for sports gambling sites or more salacious industries with plenty of money.

 

[MGTfan]

In the next few years, a handful of high-level players will be pulling in $1M plus for endorsements/appearances, and the vast majority of players will become low-level instagram salesmen.

Someone will score a TD, pull out a “Manscaping” ad from their sock to show on TV, and we’ll wonder if we’ve gone to far. But I say, if the kids want to hawk gizmos and gadgets, let them do it.

My only question; have the NIL laws or schools installed parameters on the type of product that a player may endorse? Going to be interesting to see what happens when players start advertising for sports gambling sites or more salacious industries with plenty of money.

The answer to your question is “yes”

 

[Technut1990]

I'm mystified that you think the athletes are the greedy ones.

You like to highlight the word free but it's completely irrelevant because nothing is being provided for free. For the stuff the schools provide to the student-athletes to be free would require that the student-athletes not have to do anything in order to get it. It's not FREE. Student-Athletes are not getting something of value for free. They are having to work their asses off for that thing of value (and yes, I agree it does have value). The school is not saying "oh here's a free education and we're just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts and don't want anything from you in return."

The fact that you don't apply the same rationale to the schools as you do to the student-athletes is also very telling. The schools are getting something of value from the student-athletes. They are getting a lot of hard work in practice and a lot of hard work on the field of play. And they are always wanting more and more money. The revenues from TV aren't going down. But they're not greedy? But the student-athletes are the greedy ones for wanting to make money from their own name, image, and likeness? I'm missing something. This whole discussion is about name, image, and likeness. You are commenting in a thread specifically about that.

some of you guys really have a problem with paying attention, perhaps it’s my block style of writing, I’ll admit I use punctuation as a hobby but I’ve said 30 times that BOTH SIDES are greedy. Y’all just pick and choose what you hear. I never separated whose greedy from who isn’t, both want things that aren’t theirs. Y’all are jumping on the SAs hardships, as if they were forced to get a degree without paying for it.

y’all are stuck on payments and students earning their fair share. You act as if they aren’t receiving something of value without paying for it. They are now and have been getting paid, it’s called getting a $ 400,000 education for no exchange of money.

in my very first post in this blog I clearly said the schools have no right to dictate control or ownership of a students image, name or anything else thats personal. I said a student should be able to earn at any job they wish to, how the hell do y’all just ignore plainly typed words ? A student demanding that the school pay them is not personal asset exposure, it’s demanding something that’s not yours. A student could forgo college and go straight to a NFL or college baseball draft or they can take the value of college exposure to enhance their talent. It’s up to them but y’all want it both ways. The student should be paid for the free degree and programs enhancement of their own future ? Why aren’t we all ? dosent a school,benefit from its other programs ? Are the only rich and famous industry people professional athletes ? How much does Tech pull in from having astronauts in the school ? General engineers ? Scientist ? All of them bring value and money into the school why don’t they get degrees without an exchange of money ?

SAs are taking a valued item (education) while not paying for it (free). That education actually cost non students money for which they obtain loans to purchase, scholarship athletes don’t. Both have to work on earning the actual degree either way, free or paid so saying it’s hard for scholarship athletes is a non starter, yes it’s hard for every college student but the athlete is trying to do two things at once by choice. Good for them, I’m sure it takes a special person but their choice to try and go pro benefits themselves just like a non athlete decides to go pro in the medical field, it’s their choice. There is absolutely no difference in career paths - everyone has to do things that enhances their chosen path.

the difference ? Athletes get half of it without paying for a degree that some of you apparently think has no monetary value. Meaning that they are getting something that the other students don’t

 

[Technut1990]

In the next few years, a handful of high-level players will be pulling in $1M plus for endorsements/appearances, and the vast majority of players will become low-level instagram salesmen.

Someone will score a TD, pull out a “Manscaping” ad from their sock to show on TV, and we’ll wonder if we’ve gone to far. But I say, if the kids want to hawk gizmos and gadgets, let them do it.

My only question; have the NIL laws or schools installed parameters on the type of product that a player may endorse? Going to be interesting to see what happens when players start advertising for sports gambling sites or more salacious industries with plenty of money.

absolutely right, and half of the ‘kids should get something’ folks will advocate stopping some of these chosen advertisements. All of a sudden it won’t be about personal image rights it will be about representing the schools brand

 

[jojatk]

Don't quibble over the meaning of the words. Everyone in the discussion knows that "free education" means that the student is not paying for their matriculation and Room&Board with money.

Actually I think the distinction is extremely relevant and it's not quibbling over words. This entire discussion is about money. The word free means something quite specific and if a person is going to throw it around and emphasize it then that person should do so properly.

 

[augustabuzz]

Actually I think the distinction is extremely relevant and it's not quibbling over words. This entire discussion is about money. The word free means something quite specific and if a person is going to throw it around and emphasize it then that person should do so properly.

Money

 

[jojatk]

some of you guys really have a problem with paying attention, perhaps it’s my block style of writing, I’ll admit I use punctuation as a hobby but I’ve said 30 times that BOTH SIDES are greedy. Y’all just pick and choose what you hear. I never separated whose greedy from who isn’t, both want things that aren’t theirs. Y’all are jumping on the SAs hardships, as if they were forced to get a degree without paying for it.

y’all are stuck on payments and students earning their fair share. You act as if they aren’t receiving something of value without paying for it. They are now and have been getting paid, it’s called getting a $ 400,000 education for no exchange of money.

in my very first post in this blog I clearly said the schools have no right to dictate control or ownership of a students image, name or anything else thats personal. I said a student should be able to earn at any job they wish to, how the hell do y’all just ignore plainly typed words ? A student demanding that the school pay them is not personal asset exposure, it’s demanding something that’s not yours. A student could forgo college and go straight to a NFL or college baseball draft or they can take the value of college exposure to enhance their talent. It’s up to them but y’all want it both ways. The student should be paid for the free degree and programs enhancement of their own future ? Why aren’t we all ? dosent a school,benefit from its other programs ? Are the only rich and famous industry people professional athletes ? How much does Tech pull in from having astronauts in the school ? General engineers ? Scientist ? All of them bring value and money into the school why don’t they get degrees without an exchange of money ?

SAs are taking a valued item (education) while not paying for it (free). That education actually cost non students money for which they obtain loans to purchase, scholarship athletes don’t. Both have to work on earning the actual degree either way, free or paid so saying it’s hard for scholarship athletes is a non starter, yes it’s hard for every college student but the athlete is trying to do two things at once by choice. Good for them, I’m sure it takes a special person but their choice to try and go pro benefits themselves just like a non athlete decides to go pro in the medical field, it’s their choice. There is absolutely no difference in career paths - everyone has to do things that enhances their chosen path.

the difference ? Athletes get half of it without paying for a degree that some of you apparently think has no monetary value. Meaning that they are getting something that the other students don’t

Speaking of paying attention... I actually said the education has value. I didn't even have a lot of words in my post yet you seemed to miss that. I agree they are getting things other students don't. I was a student at GT. I tutored high-level student-athletes at GT. I spent some time in and around the GTAA while I was there in various capacities. I have a pretty good idea that they student-athletes get things other students don't. And they also have to do things in return that other students don't. I, for example, did not have to go to practice. I did not have to go to workouts. I did not have to suit up in a uniform and go play for GT. I paid money to GT for what I received. The athletes work for it. That's not free. But I'll repeat it again just in case it wasn't clear. I agree that what the SAs are getting has value. I agree that it has tremendous value and that education itself is more than just going to classes and that it benefits you years beyond when you receive the actual training. I get it. I think we agree on that part.

If you give me something and I'm not required to do anything in return then that is free. If you give me something and I am required to do something in return then it's not free. There is a cost associated with receiving the scholarship and therefore the scholarship is not free in any sense of the word. This really is very simple.

I think we disagree on the precise value of what's provided to the SAs but I'm not advocating that they get paid directly by the school. So that's something of a moot point and not relevant to the deals they are getting now that they can make money from their name, image, and likeness (which is what this topic on the board is about, right?).

This entire discussion is about athletes being able to use their name, image, and likeness. If that's not what you're commenting about then why are you commenting in this thread? That's a real question, not snark. I don't get why you're commenting in a thread about something that you're not talking about.

 

[Technut1990]

You still seem to be struggling with the word free. How do you earn something that is free? That’s not how free works.

This is America. 95% of the population is greedy. This does nothing to improve your argument.

And again, the vast majority of the athletes that could actually make money don’t care about their “educational value.”

Of course they would. They provide no value. Nobody would pay to come watch them sit in class.

im sure I’ll get yelled at for responding to each point but ……

I understand what free is, it’s a common word used by most people to say payment isn’t given. Athletes don’t pay so there’s that fact

Greed isn’t a good thing, so if you don’t think defining 95% of AMERICA as greedy is bad, we’ll that’s your character trait. The value in calling someone greedy is in the fact that it identifies motive, generally meaning they want something they themselves didn’t earn. And no going to a free program for free access and exposure that isn’t given to others in their career paths isn’t earning

not caring about educational,value is exactly the point. You are right, they are exploiting the schools value for something other than education and it’s free, my point exactly.

and again u r correct, nobody would pay to watch them sit in class so the school pays the athlete his or hers value by not charging them to sit in the classroom they occupy. And last I checked the value is overrated, 3/4ths of these athletes never see the field. Excellent deal if you are on the 3rd string, free college degree and you don’t even play.

again “free” meaning monetary exchange

BTW none of us do anything for free, a concentration of effort is in everything and generated value of outcome isn’t always compensated - in any field. It’s where the concept of ‘it takes hard work to get what you want’ comes from

 

[Lotta Booze]

and again u r correct, nobody would pay to watch them sit in class so the school pays the athlete his or hers value by not charging them to sit in the classroom they occupy. And last I checked the value is overrated, 3/4ths of these athletes never see the field. Excellent deal if you are on the 3rd string, free college degree and you don’t even play.

Probably going to regret jumping into this but...oh well.

How are you determining "value is overrated". If the player wasn't worth the scholarship they wouldn't offer it to them. Even without seeing the field they are providing depth, playing a role in practice, helping teammates get better, being a part of the larger program. If they weren't performing their role they could be dismissed from the team. Sure, some recruits don't pan out as hoped but that happens in everything.

I don't think the polarity of some of the positions in this discussion are accurate. You can't really make an argument and say the players are "completely interchangeable" and "people come for the name on the front, not the back". There is some truth to the fact that fans will support their school regardless of which players are playing for them but there is also a lot of truth to success bringing more attention, fans, and money to a program. And a significant part of achieving that success is bringing in talented players.

I was listening to a podcast a couple weeks ago and a professor was studying real estate trends and found some interesting activity in real estate prices in Starkville, MS and some correlation to the success they had in the 2014 season. A big part of that success was having Dak Prescott at QB. So having Dak Prescott as their QB elevated real estate prices in Starkville, MS. That's of course a theory and it's likely impossible to prove direct causation but that is the power some of these players can wield and bring to a program. Within that realm Dak brought far more value to that not only that school abut that whole city than what his scholarship was worth.

There is a reason thousands and thousands of dollars (allegedly) were thrown around to get Cam Newton to Auburn. He practically carried that team to a national championship. And when they are recruiting him to their school they are risking sanctions to pay that player for the privilege of representing their school.

 

[Skeptic]

In the next few years, a handful of high-level players will be pulling in $1M plus for endorsements/appearances, and the vast majority of players will become low-level instagram salesmen.

Someone will score a TD, pull out a “Manscaping” ad from their sock to show on TV, and we’ll wonder if we’ve gone to far. But I say, if the kids want to hawk gizmos and gadgets, let them do it.

My only question; have the NIL laws or schools installed parameters on the type of product that a player may endorse? Going to be interesting to see what happens when players start advertising for sports gambling sites or more salacious industries with plenty of money.

Clemson has issued what seems to be a comprehensive list of do's and don't's. It remains to be seen whether the athletes will abide by them or decide on America's favorite solution, sue. I think there are going to be real team splits when football linemen, punters, special teams, etc., see all the endorsements going to the glamor positions. They will not be happy. Good luck, coaches.

 

[Technut1990]

Speaking of paying attention... I actually said the education has value. I didn't even have a lot of words in my post yet you seemed to miss that. I agree they are getting things other students don't. I was a student at GT. I tutored high-level student-athletes at GT. I spent some time in and around the GTAA while I was there in various capacities. I have a pretty good idea that they student-athletes get things other students don't. And they also have to do things in return that other students don't. I, for example, did not have to go to practice. I did not have to go to workouts. I did not have to suit up in a uniform and go play for GT. I paid money to GT for what I received. The athletes work for it. That's not free. But I'll repeat it again just in case it wasn't clear. I agree that what the SAs are getting has value. I agree that it has tremendous value and that education itself is more than just going to classes and that it benefits you years beyond when you receive the actual training. I get it. I think we agree on that part.

If you give me something and I'm not required to do anything in return then that is free. If you give me something and I am required to do something in return then it's not free. There is a cost associated with receiving the scholarship and therefore the scholarship is not free in any sense of the word. This really is very simple.

I think we disagree on the precise value of what's provided to the SAs but I'm not advocating that they get paid directly by the school. So that's something of a moot point and not relevant to the deals they are getting now that they can make money from their name, image, and likeness (which is what this topic on the board is about, right?).

This entire discussion is about athletes being able to use their name, image, and likeness. If that's not what you're commenting about then why are you commenting in this thread? That's a real question, not snark. I don't get why you're commenting in a thread about something that you're not talking about.

your concept of working is odd. So you consider it “working” when you decide to play football ? Did you “work” on your degree ? Did you not do things that others didn’t have to do ? As a mentor were you giving back without payment ? Why weren’t you paid to tutor ? Or were you ? Is there a high demand for tutors to be paid or put on scholarship ? Why not ? You gave something of value That others didn’t.

you conflate personal choice with value. You think that because a football player has to take care of his body he’s doing something extra. You can’t be serious when you say he has to go to practice are you ? Do you understand that the entire college experience is a de facto “practice”. What were you going to classes for ? I would think you were conditioning your mind in your chosen endeavor. You practiced concepts didn’t you ? Did you put theory into “practice“.

as far as commenting goes. This entire blog topic is essentially about student compensation. You can parse it if it helps you state your opinion if you like but it’s all about compensation. There is no other business transaction in the world that demands access for no money AS you exploit property and facilities for personal gain. These players are free to exploit their value all they can, God bless them. Denying that what they are exploiting is in part provided by the school is a denial of reality. How much value does any athlete have to exploit if he/she isn’t in college where the competition is ? Where the value is created. College enhances an athlete’s ability to showcase themselves and it provides the competition to which they compare their value. They can take off the branding, the helmets and the free (that word again) equipment, go buy their own and sell themselves all they wish but as soon as they post a pic of themselves scoring a TD in a uniform or wearing the teams tag line they are benefitting from the schools value not their own and that value wasn’t generated by them it was generated by 10,000 other athletes, ADs and yes even taxpayers.

one more thing. I talk like I talk if my long winded posts bother you then simply dont read them, odd that you argue for student value and freedom AS you complain about my writing or talking style, you obviously don’t value everyone and their individual traits. I speak like I do because I’ve found that in life you have to beat the point into peoples heads over and over because they dont listen, which was exactly what you didn’t do when I first posted that both sides were greedy.

value isn’t determined only in monetization sometimes it’s actually in character. Nobody yet has disproven my original statement, both sides are greedy plain and simple

 

[Technut1990]

Probably going to regret jumping into this but...oh well.

How are you determining "value is overrated". If the player wasn't worth the scholarship they wouldn't offer it to them. Even without seeing the field they are providing depth, playing a role in practice, helping teammates get better, being a part of the larger program. If they weren't performing their role they could be dismissed from the team. Sure, some recruits don't pan out as hoped but that happens in everything.

I don't think the polarity of some of the positions in this discussion are accurate. You can't really make an argument and say the players are "completely interchangeable" and "people come for the name on the front, not the back". There is some truth to the fact that fans will support their school regardless of which players are playing for them but there is also a lot of truth to success bringing more attention, fans, and money to a program. And a significant part of achieving that success is bringing in talented players.

I was listening to a podcast a couple weeks ago and a professor was studying real estate trends and found some interesting activity in real estate prices in Starkville, MS and some correlation to the success they had in the 2014 season. A big part of that success was having Dak Prescott at QB. So having Dak Prescott as their QB elevated real estate prices in Starkville, MS. That's of course a theory and it's likely impossible to prove direct causation but that is the power some of these players can wield and bring to a program. Within that realm Dak brought far more value to that not only that school abut that whole city than what his scholarship was worth.

There is a reason thousands and thousands of dollars (allegedly) were thrown around to get Cam Newton to Auburn. He practically carried that team to a national championship. And when they are recruiting him to their school they are risking sanctions to pay that player for the privilege of representing their school.

you are 100% correct. My point is value is a two way street. Dak probably obtained more value going forward based on his choice of schools. Would he had been as valued coming out of SW Montana Technical School ? Again value is relative. Did Bill Curry bring value to Tech football ? John Dewberry ? Does anyone think Hershel Walker obtained the same value that Trevor Lawrence has already obtained ? Lawrence hasn’t played a pro down and he’s a multi millionaire based on his college access alone. As far as the value of a 3rd stringer, wouldn’t you say a education at a top school without a requirement for monetary payment equates to his personal value to the school ?

 

[Technut1990]

Clemson has issued what seems to be a comprehensive list of do's and don't's. It remains to be seen whether the athletes will abide by them or decide on America's favorite solution, sue. I think there are going to be real team splits when football linemen, punters, special teams, etc., see all the endorsements going to the glamor positions. They will not be happy. Good luck, coaches.

but remember, according to some, value is value. Clemson would be a QBs dream college even if they didn’t have linemen and punters right ? Those positions surely didn’t help Lawrence get relegated to his winning reputation did they ? Once again money for nothing is the theme song. Yeah sure I incurred no monetary liability for my education but damn it I had to go to practice ! and ESPN watches me practice so that’s too stressful, those linemen don’t have to go through my life !
How much do we need to see ruined before we figure it out ?

we already see it in society as a whole, we’ve become so valuable we won’t do anything for no money, even if it helps us. Come to think of it my wife should pay me I’m a valuable husband, it’s not like I wanted a good supportive person who loves me !

 

[Lotta Booze]

As far as the value of a 3rd stringer, wouldn’t you say a education at a top school without a requirement for monetary payment equates to his personal value to the school ?

Sure, that is the transaction at play. How you determine what that player's value is to the program goes far beyond how much they see the field in my mind. Their compensation is less than that of a graduate assistant helping the football team. Whether that is worth the value would certainly depend on the quality of the player and the quality of the GA if you're comparing the two.

 

[Lee]

“95% of the population is greedy.”

Source?

America. Maybe not worldwide.

Don’t want to get into a philosophical debate, but we’re all hardwired to look out for ourselves first. There are genuine good people in this world and my number might be a little high.

But it takes effort and a lot of help to be selfless. It’s not natural. If it were, there would be a lot more peace in this world. Instead look around.

The vast majority of the population (US) is out for themselves first and foremost.

 

[Root4GT]

tell ya what, sometimes I wonder if some of your parents taught y’all any manners. There simply is no need for this response.

perhaps if you read Lee’s response to me you would see that I addressed his points.

The clear point is greed, do you get it now ? Greed. When a person is getting something of value for free but wants more it’s greedy.

I never said anything about the issue of name and image, you did, but thanks for your input on something I never talked about.

Your false assumption is players getting something for free. They don’t, they work and receive education compensation in return for their work. Saying it’s free is simply BS.

 

[Lee]

If 90% of the top talent went to the NFL minor league, that would just move talent ceiling for all of CFB down. Sure, Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, etc would get most of the top talent that stayed in CFB, but all the other teams would be way less outclassed just based on talent. If there are only 50 (current) 4-5* players to go around, then a bigger portion of Alabama's team would be filled by (current) 3* players. This would then lead to fewer complete blowout games, more reliance on coaching and talent development, more innovation on schemes, and more competitive games. If only supporting the most talent players was all that mattered, then the fanbases of all the teams ranked outside the top 40 would start to disappear. People generally watch CFB to hope their team wins.

This is a solid argument. I don’t think fandom would disappear, I do think it would take a hit if something legit were to surface.

There’s not much point in arguing this point though because it’s never going to change. At least not anytime soon. Money is too good for the ones pulling the strings.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Speaking of paying attention... I actually said the education has value. I didn't even have a lot of words in my post yet you seemed to miss that. I agree they are getting things other students don't. I was a student at GT. I tutored high-level student-athletes at GT. I spent some time in and around the GTAA while I was there in various capacities. I have a pretty good idea that they student-athletes get things other students don't. And they also have to do things in return that other students don't. I, for example, did not have to go to practice. I did not have to go to workouts. I did not have to suit up in a uniform and go play for GT. I paid money to GT for what I received. The athletes work for it. That's not free. But I'll repeat it again just in case it wasn't clear. I agree that what the SAs are getting has value. I agree that it has tremendous value and that education itself is more than just going to classes and that it benefits you years beyond when you receive the actual training. I get it. I think we agree on that part.

If you give me something and I'm not required to do anything in return then that is free. If you give me something and I am required to do something in return then it's not free. There is a cost associated with receiving the scholarship and therefore the scholarship is not free in any sense of the word. This really is very simple.

I think we disagree on the precise value of what's provided to the SAs but I'm not advocating that they get paid directly by the school. So that's something of a moot point and not relevant to the deals they are getting now that they can make money from their name, image, and likeness (which is what this topic on the board is about, right?).

This entire discussion is about athletes being able to use their name, image, and likeness. If that's not what you're commenting about then why are you commenting in this thread? That's a real question, not snark. I don't get why you're commenting in a thread about something that you're not talking about.

Well, you say the athletes “work” for everything they get. How do we judge this work? In that case let’s hold them to the same “work” standards of others then. If you are successful then obviously you are working, but if you fail the you are obviously not working. None of us know if they are really working or just going thru the motions. So, just like the real world you should be judged by the results unless we want to consider them government employees. But we all know, if we tied the payment of their scholarships to results there would be an outcry of ”that’s not fair”. GT brings in way more money due to their overall academic reputation than they ever bring in from sports. So, as someone pointed out shouldn’t GT give money back to every engineer and other student who built the reputation?

 

[Lee]

generally meaning they want something they themselves didn’t earn. And no going to a free program for free access and exposure that isn’t given to others in their career paths isn’t earning

Please explain how the athletes didn’t earn their scholarship. You also changed your argument from free education to exposure. Interesting.

it’s a common word used by most people to say payment isn’t given.

Can one only pay with currency? Is there no other way to earn something.

Did you pay your wife to marry her? Or did you EARN her trust, treat her well, and EARN her love over time?

Free is something given with no expectations of anything in return. I love my kids freely. Nothing they can do will change that.

Jesus freely gave His life for all of humanity. Nothing we can do to earn His love. It’s freely give.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

America. Maybe not worldwide.

Don’t want to get into a philosophical debate, but we’re all hardwired to look out for ourselves first. There are genuine good people in this world and my number might be a little high.

But it takes effort and a lot of help to be selfless. It’s not natural. If it were, there would be a lot more peace in this world. Instead look around.

The vast majority of the population (US) is out for themselves first and foremost.

Perhaps. But there are some good sociological studies that might surprise you about how much empathy and selflessness are hardwired into human existence. Of course, a difficult or abusive childhood can hardwire you the other way.