NIL, Transfers, and Stratospheric Salaries. What Is the Future of GT Football and College Football in General?

[Techster]

 

[Richard7125]

I recently chatted with a highly recruited D1 player whose time was in the 80's.

He suggested that NIL was not the problem, the transfer portal was the problem. Coaches have to create entirely new teams every year now and there's nowhere near the comradery or development there used to be (his opinion).

He is also a coach and made this suggestion: You are recruited by a college team, say University A. And your first year there is 2024, aka Year 1. You will now receive a payout of a percentage of ALL NIL generated that year by the 2024 class and its distributed according to some calculation, but preferably more is held so that it pays out more over time, rather than all at once. If you stay all four years, you get all of it (Class 2024 and earn years for Years 1-4). But ...

If you enter the portal, now you are in Year 1 of the new school. University B. Your pro rata share of you old school is now zero. And now you are entitled a percentage of the 2025 class and the only way to get more is to stay in school and meet certain standards (e.g., credit hours, academic progress, etc.).

He believed students do need to earn something, but ... its more important to reduce the constant transfers. I thought it was an interesting concept but not sure where it goes. He is active with the NCAA, so perhaps they are thinking of something.

He did say, it's pointless to pay by position. Highly paid QB's are worthless without a line. That needs to be addressed in someway .. perhaps 60/40, 55/45, etc.

I love the novelty of this idea, but that isn’t paying someone for their Name, Image and Likeness. That’s just paying everyone money. Not everyone warrants being on the cover of an EV video game. Those people deserve the money they get for their Name, Image and Likeness.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I love the novelty of this idea, but that isn’t paying someone for their Name, Image and Likeness. That’s just paying everyone money. Not everyone warrants being on the cover of an EV video game. Those people deserve the money they get for their Name, Image and Likeness.

Since the allowing of NIL to college athletes, very little of the money flowing to football and basketball players has anything to do with actual Name, Image, and Likeness.

 

[cpf2001]

I suspect a lot of powerful folks in D1/FBS *enjoy* being able to get players paid in the open while being able to blame it on the courts instead of having to answer questions about why they reversed their own longstanding policy.

 

[UgaBlows]

Stopping the penalty-free transfers would help more than anything imo

 

[Richard7125]

Since the allowing of NIL to college athletes, very little of the money flowing to football and basketball players has anything to do with actual Name, Image, and Likeness.

I understand that NIL is being perverted, but the novel idea posted by Vespidae (which I thought was creative), doesn’t solve unfettered NIL payments which lure players from one school to another. You can argue paying all SAs $50k/year will make them less likely to transfer, but the exceptional players (eg Jordan Addison and Jahmyr Gibbs types) will still get big dollars. The exceptional players that warrant being on Wheaties boxes or video game covers will still warrant that. The courts ruled you can’t stop student-athletes from benefiting from their Name, Image and Likeness.

In other words, this doesn’t prevent the super-rich schools like Texas AM from paying $500k to $1.0m+ for a roster full of 5* players disguised as Name, Image and Likeness. This simply increases the level at which you start (ie the Big Blind was raised).

 

[Richard7125]

Stopping the penalty-free transfers would help more than anything imo

I agree with this 100%. I have no problem with players being able to transfer to any school they wish, whenever they want. I also have no problem that they would need to sit out a year. I don’t understand why that seems to be so egregious.

 

[orientalnc]

If players are students who happen to be playing a sport, then their status as students must have priority in the relationship the school has with the student-athlete. Otherwise the model has no basis. When the NCAA said students' mental health should not be a reason to waive sitting out a year for a second transfer, it made sense for the student first policy. But, when UNC threatened to sue, the NCAA backed down. It's the inconsistent application of rules that dooms the NCAA in every controversy.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I agree with this 100%. I have no problem with players being able to transfer to any school they wish, whenever they want. I also have no problem that they would need to sit out a year. I don’t understand why that seems to be so egregious.

Again, Genie out of bottle / horse out of barn thing. So many players had hardships and “special situations” that it’s hard now to go back and have one blanket rule.

One of the things I never hear is the question of academics. I took a long time to graduate from college and a long time to get my post graduate degrees. Would be embarrassed to tell you how many times I transferred and/or changed majors. Sure, schools wanted my money and my “special talents” but that did not stop them from giving me the 3rd degree in an interview that would determine whether or not they “had room for me.”

“And what was the issue with your last school, Mr Mortimer Snurdly?” “Which major at our school are you interested in and what are your plans upon graduation?”
“How do we know you won’t drop out of our school after taking the spot of another student?” “What is the evidence that suggests (fill in name of school) is right for you?” “Would you be prepared to take additional credit hours so that the name on your degree realistically reflects the experience and philosophy of our institution?”

I could go on but I think you get the point. Schools are about degrees and education, philosophy and pedagogy. Don’t call me naive for suggesting that even with all the special treatment and extreme privileges athletes receive there should still be an expectation that acceptance at a university implies an education.

The dilemma remains. Are these “student athletes” or are these semi-pro players. I can honestly go either way but the rules have to follow accordingly. If these are semi-pro players then a governing body would have the right to limit scholarships, cap NIL for teams, and even limit how many 5 star recruits a team could stockpile. If these are student athletes then an entirely different approach is in order that limits transfers, eligibility, and even requires students to pay back funds if the terms of their acceptance to a school are violated.

Trying to have it both ways is a scam that the factories have perpetuated for generations.

 

[orientalnc]

So many players had hardships and “special situations” that it’s hard now to go back and have one blanket rule.

This is where I disagree. It's not hard if your student-athlete model says the "student" comes before the "athlete." Transfers happen everyday with college students. You & I transferred. Credit hours are lost in the process. If the school can only enroll a finite number of students, then, at least theoretically, a potential student is denied enrollment for every transferred in athlete who has no desire to be a student. It's a nontrivial fact in every transfer. Unless the eligibility of the "athlete" is more important in the student-athlete model than the "student" being on track to graduate.

The NCAA could (if they had at least one set of balls) make every transfer a sit out transfer. No waivers. No exceptions. Effective now. If a player gets "processed" by a coach to make room for another player, require the school to honor his scholarship until the "student" graduates. Don't force him to transfer. If he transfers, he sits a year to make up those lost credit hours.

It's not hard. If you have a reason for the model other than the PR thread that says these are students first.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

This is where I disagree. It's not hard if your student-athlete model says the "student" comes before the "athlete." Transfers happen everyday with college students. You & I transferred. Credit hours are lost in the process. If the school can only enroll a finite number of students, then, at least theoretically, a potential student is denied enrollment for every transferred in athlete who has no desire to be a student. It's a nontrivial fact in every transfer. Unless the eligibility of the "athlete" is more important in the student-athlete model than the "student" being on track to graduate.

The NCAA could (if they had at least one set of balls) make every transfer a sit out transfer. No waivers. No exceptions. Effective now. If a player gets "processed" by a coach to make room for another player, require the school to honor his scholarship until the "student" graduates. Don't force him to transfer. If he transfers, he sits a year to make up those lost credit hours.

It's not hard. If you have a reason for the model other than the PR thread that says these are students first.

We don’t disagree. I was couching this in the context of “neither fish nor foul.”

If we only pretend that this is about education then it’s hard. We haven’t officially decided if these are semi-pro players but every decision so far points that way. I would love to return to the student athlete model but we currently aren’t there.

 

[CEB]

We don’t disagree. I was couching this in the context of “neither fish nor foul.”

If we only pretend that this is about education then it’s hard. We haven’t officially decided if these are semi-pro players but every decision so far points that way. I would love to return to the student athlete model but we currently aren’t there.

College football missed that exit years ago. It’s hurtling toward something, but that sure ain’t it!

 

[awbuzz]

Since the allowing of NIL to college athletes, very little of the money flowing to football and basketball players has anything to do with actual Name, Image, and Likeness.

Dead on

I literally have said that several times during discussions this year. Right now it is pay for anticipated play.

 

[UgaBlows]

Again, Genie out of bottle / horse out of barn thing. So many players had hardships and “special situations” that it’s hard now to go back and have one blanket rule.

just don’t allow ANY hardships or exceptions

 

[g0lftime]

If players are students who happen to be playing a sport, then their status as students must have priority in the relationship the school has with the student-athlete. Otherwise the model has no basis. When the NCAA said students' mental health should not be a reason to waive sitting out a year for a second transfer, it made sense for the student first policy. But, when UNC threatened to sue, the NCAA backed down. It's the inconsistent application of rules that dooms the NCAA in every controversy.

University of Florida has or has threatened to sue the NCAA based on the UNC decision. They have a player who was forced to sit.