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

[bobongo]

I had the same question. Maybe he really believes it was “more pure” back in his day but 60 Minutes supposedly has the reputation of asking tough questions. “So, Mr Barkley, what were you promised when you chose Auburn and was there any compensation of any kind?”

Maybe he’s telling the truth. I have no information one way or the other.

Charles Barkley Once Admitted That He Took Money Under The Table During His College Days

Charles Barkley openly admitted that he took $20,000 when he was still in college. Until 2006, there were two major ways to get into the NBA. A player could either enter the league straight out of high school, or they could complete their college career and then declare for the NBA Draft.

www.yardbarker.com

"I think the most I took was like $20,000. I’m not talking about a million dollars. It made me stay in school another year. $20,000, that’s not a lot of money, but I was able to do some stuff for my mother and grandmother, and I had some spending money. OK, I’m cool. I don’t have to go into the real world or the NBA after one college season."

 

[CEB]

I had the same question. Maybe he really believes it was “more pure” back in his day but 60 Minutes supposedly has the reputation of asking tough questions. “So, Mr Barkley, what were you promised when you chose Auburn and was there any compensation of any kind?”

Maybe he’s telling the truth. I have no information one way or the other.

Fair point made by you and @kg01 ... I wasn't paying attention to Auburn basketball recruiting back then (was anyone?), but Charles said he didn't graduate in the same interview. He attended summer school to pass his last class. I have no idea what his transcript looked like, but I would suspect in those days the academic exceptions made were pretty valuable to him. I'm sure they took care of him in a lot of ways.
One thing I will say is that the guy is honest and says what he means. I'm sure he would've answered honestly if asked.

 

[Techster]

But I think the factories could have done more previously and didn't for fear of getting reckless and being caught (what little fear they might have had). Now they can deploy more capital and more influence legally, and they will. If anything, I think it has created an environment where every D-1 prospect expects to get something. When there were rules, lower to middling players would still talk to schools who followed rules and didn't pay... now those guys are leaving or looking for a better deal if a school doesn't come up with NIL (or enough NIL). I'm guessing that a 2nd or 3rd conversation isn't happening for a lot of recruits if the 1st convo doesn't lay out the prospect of compensation.

I don't see the field as leveled, its just that the whole thing moved into daylight.

Oh, it's certainly not leveled from a "numbers" standpoint. Factories are always going to win the outspending game. However, other schools can now compete to pay players without having to hide it.

 

[RonJohn]

I think that no matter what, programs will abuse the system.

I think that what should be looked at is what is in the best interest of the student-athletes. For a long time, SAs were prevented from making money even if they had the ability to do it without needing their college athletics to provide it. Olivia Dunne was famous and had ability to make millions per year BEFORE she started college athletics at LSU. Why should she be forced to ignore the ability to make millions per year in order to compete in college athletics? There was a kicker on the football team at UCF that had a YouTube channel that was monetized. He was told originally that he could not have a monetized YouTube channel and play college football. Then the NCAA backtracked and told him he could keep the channel if he never said anything about football or about UCF. He left football, kept the YouTube channel, and the latest report I saw said that he is making more than $1 million per year from YouTube.

I understand and agree with the desire to keep NCAA athletics from becoming professional sports. However, for a long time the NCAA had pushed things so far that SAs were required to depend on the NCAA schools. Why should Olivia Dunne have to choose between an incredibly successful venture into IG marketing and a dream of competing in college athletics? The NCAA for a long time has explicitly ignored major programs paying high rated players who ended up making lots of money in professional leagues, while at the same time preventing players who had zero chance at making professional leagues from being entrepreneurial, like the UCF kicker. The NCAA and the member institutions knew this for a very long time and tried to sweep it under the rug. The NCAA and member institutions knew for several years that laws were going to require them to change, but did nothing until the laws actually took effect.

I don't like where things are now, but I also don't like how restrictive the NCAA was previously towards SAs doing their own thing. The NCAA could have not been so restrictive towards SAs' ability to earn money. The NCAA could have been more even handed in punishments towards programs that openly flouted the rules. Instead, the NCAA ignored the big guys (like Duke), while they hammered down and were extremely restrictive on average college kids who also played sports. If you want to be mad or blame someone, look no further than the NCAA and member institutions.

 

[CEB]

Oh, it's certainly not leveled from a "numbers" standpoint. Factories are always going to win the outspending game. However, other schools can now compete to pay players without having to hide it. getting penalized for it.

Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe.

I fixed the above point to something I can agree with.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Charles Barkley Once Admitted That He Took Money Under The Table During His College Days

Charles Barkley openly admitted that he took $20,000 when he was still in college. Until 2006, there were two major ways to get into the NBA. A player could either enter the league straight out of high school, or they could complete their college career and then declare for the NBA Draft.

www.yardbarker.com

"I think the most I took was like $20,000. I’m not talking about a million dollars. It made me stay in school another year. $20,000, that’s not a lot of money, but I was able to do some stuff for my mother and grandmother, and I had some spending money. OK, I’m cool. I don’t have to go into the real world or the NBA after one college season."

So the difference would be the “small” amount of money and that it was not a policy of the school to pay players. But he got what he needed to stay in school.

This seems like more of an argument in favor of NIL than against it.

 

[RamblinRed]

I'd like to hear your thoughts on what kinds of guardrails would be effective yet allow players to capitalize on their images and likenesses.

I wish I had a bright idea for that but I don't.

The basic issue is that NIL is not being used for what is was created to be used for (not that this should surprise anyone).
It isn't really being used for NIL, it is being used for pay-to-play.

If you wanted to make an analogy to professional sports NIL would be like a group of fans/season ticket holders for a team saying to a player - if you sign a contract with the team we root for, and are willing to sign a few basketballs or footballs, then we will give you $x millions of guaranteed money. It clearly has nothing to do with doing a Subway commercial or a print ad.

I have no issue with any student receiving compensation for NIL - but right now that isn't really what is happening for some of these students.
The NIL collectives being set up by schools (including GT) have really nothing to do with NIL, they are just pay-for-play setups.

 

[Jim Prather]

I wish I had a bright idea for that but I don't.

The basic issue is that NIL is not being used for what is was created to be used for (not that this should surprise anyone).
It isn't really being used for NIL, it is being used for pay-to-play.

If you wanted to make an analogy to professional sports NIL would be like a group of fans/season ticket holders for a team saying to a player - if you sign a contract with the team we root for, and are willing to sign a few basketballs or footballs, then we will give you $x millions of guaranteed money. It clearly has nothing to do with doing a Subway commercial or a print ad.

I have no issue with any student receiving compensation for NIL - but right now that isn't really what is happening for some of these students.
The NIL collectives being set up by schools (including GT) have really nothing to do with NIL, they are just pay-for-play setups.

Here is an idea... I'll admit there are issues with it, but it may be a starting point. Originally NIL was supposed to be sponsoring a player independent of the school he attends, but we have seen that is not the way it has played out. Therefore, we either need to put rules in place that any NIL agreement must remain in place with a player if that player transfers to a different school OR, we the school should get a percentage of the NIL agreement since that player is not purely getting paid for their likeness -rather they are getting paid for their likeness IN CONJUNCTION with an association to a given school.
Again, I readily admit that there are holes in this idea large enough to drive a truck through, but it may be a starting point...

 

[awbuzz]

Ask Chuck if he got paid to go to auburn. ...

I knew that one was coming!

 

[Techster]

I wish I had a bright idea for that but I don't.

The basic issue is that NIL is not being used for what is was created to be used for (not that this should surprise anyone).
It isn't really being used for NIL, it is being used for pay-to-play.

If you wanted to make an analogy to professional sports NIL would be like a group of fans/season ticket holders for a team saying to a player - if you sign a contract with the team we root for, and are willing to sign a few basketballs or footballs, then we will give you $x millions of guaranteed money. It clearly has nothing to do with doing a Subway commercial or a print ad.

I have no issue with any student receiving compensation for NIL - but right now that isn't really what is happening for some of these students.
The NIL collectives being set up by schools (including GT) have really nothing to do with NIL, they are just pay-for-play setups.

Even if NIL was used as intended, someone will still try to find a loophole.

Say an alumni owns "Johnny's HVAC Service". Well, other alumni's can pool their money together and funnel it through "Johnny's HVAC Service" for marketing expenses to pay an SA. I'm sure it would be an extra step instead of a NIL pool that's currently being used, but someone will always try to find a way.

In the end, it will always be the same. The bigger schools with the largest fanbase or most affluent fanbase will always outspend the smaller schools...some way.

IMO, either put a "salary cap" on every school, or turn it into a no hold's barred wild wild west sh!tshow. Let's stop with the pretenses.

 

[awbuzz]

Fair point made by you and @kg01 ... I wasn't paying attention to Auburn basketball recruiting back then (was anyone?), but Charles said he didn't graduate in the same interview. He attended summer school to pass his last class. I have no idea what his transcript looked like, but I would suspect in those days the academic exceptions made were pretty valuable to him. I'm sure they took care of him in a lot of ways.
One thing I will say is that the guy is honest and says what he means. I'm sure he would've answered honestly if asked.

True, nothing that he hasn't owned up to already..

 

[FightWinDrink]

Ask Chuck if he got paid to go to auburn. NIL ain't perfect but college sports left amateurism long ago.

Bingo college sports as we know it are living on borrowed time. It’s just cheaper for the nfl to use it as the developmental league instead of making a minor league. Basketball you’re seeing more money and players trend towards the G-League.

Eventually the money will go crazy and they’ll switch to just letting kids go to developmental leagues after high school and we might see an actual return to student athletes but who knows. The money is already huge

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I don't see the field as leveled, its just that the whole thing moved into daylight.

 

[CEB]

Even if NIL was used as intended, someone will still try to find a loophole.

Say an alumni owns "Johnny's HVAC Service". Well, other alumni's can pool their money together and funnel it through "Johnny's HVAC Service" for marketing expenses to pay an SA. I'm sure it would be an extra step instead of a NIL pool that's currently being used, but someone will always try to find a way.

In the end, it will always be the same. The bigger schools with the largest fanbase or most affluent fanbase will always outspend the smaller schools...some way.

IMO, either put a "salary cap" on every school, or turn it into a no hold's barred wild wild west sh!tshow. Let's stop with the pretenses.

A "cap" is interesting but since it is technically not supposed to be associated with said school / sports program, how do you establish it? You can't cap one individual's outside earnings because a teammate is making too much already.

I don't know the answer and I am not really sure anyone does at this point. The NCAA is still here and empowered to some degree, but the stranglehold they had on "amateur athletics" is now gone. That was the card they held closest to the vest, thinking it justified their existence, so it seems a matter of time before the house of cards goes with it. I don't see the conferences (especially not the factory school conferences) leading the charge or even facilitating discussion on the matter. I think we are in for the wild wild west for the foreseeable future. I think everyone is watching to see just how far it will go and thinking that a point of diminishing returns will be the ultimate guardrail.... for the moment, no one knows where those returns are diminished.

For what it's worth, the topic of the thread is "NIL 'killing' the beauty of college sports." I think most are treating NIL as a symptom (or reaction) to what has been killing college sports for a long time and that is why there is no real urgency in a "fix."

 

[Root4GT]

A "cap" is interesting but since it is technically not supposed to be associated with said school / sports program, how do you establish it? You can't cap one individual's outside earnings because a teammate is making too much already.

I don't know the answer and I am not really sure anyone does at this point. The NCAA is still here and empowered to some degree, but the stranglehold they had on "amateur athletics" is now gone. That was the card they held closest to the vest, thinking it justified their existence, so it seems a matter of time before the house of cards goes with it. I don't see the conferences (especially not the factory school conferences) leading the charge or even facilitating discussion on the matter. I think we are in for the wild wild west for the foreseeable future. I think everyone is watching to see just how far it will go and thinking that a point of diminishing returns will be the ultimate guardrail.... for the moment, no one knows where those returns are diminished.

For what it's worth, the topic of the thread is "NIL 'killing' the beauty of college sports." I think most are treating NIL as a symptom (or reaction) to what has been killing college sports for a long time and that is why there is no real urgency in a "fix."

A possibility for the NCAA is to require reporting all NIL to the school and on to the NCAA. No capping what individuals can make nor how much any team's players can collectively make. However set bands for NIL totals for teams where at any given amount a school gets x number of scholarships for the sport. The higher the collective team's NIL is the fewer scholarships the team gets. Food for thought.

 

[RonJohn]

A possibility for the NCAA is to require reporting all NIL to the school and on to the NCAA. No capping what individuals can make nor how much any team's players can collectively make. However set bands for NIL totals for teams where at any given amount a school gets x number of scholarships for the sport. The higher the collective team's NIL is the fewer scholarships the team gets. Food for thought.

I don't think that would be any kind of detriment. A large school with a lot of support could have zero official scholarship players, and just increase the NIL amount by whatever it costs the players to attend school. FBS schools are limited to 105 players, and 85 scholarships. (I believe and without any modifications for COVID years) Such a school could go to zero scholarship players, but 105 players who receive more than enough NIL to pay for school, something like psuedo-scholarship players. I think that most rule setting/changing would probably have more unintended consequences that actually help out the schools that try to skirt the rules and hurt the people who try to do the right thing.

Even with large schools, I can remember a few situations that are mind-boggling with the NCAA rules and enforcement (or attempted enforcement of them). (My memory might be incorrect) Auburn got in trouble because when the apartment of a player with a family burned down, the coach allowed the player to stay for a short time in his cabin. A Clemson player who had to take care of his pre-teen brother because his mother was an addict was prevented from working and from accepting donations to care for his family -- until the NCAA caught hell about it and made an exception. With such silly "enforcement" happening, nothing was done about players' families living in rent-free houses close to Duke. The way to have a system in which many or most try to obey the rules is to have agreement on rules that actually make sense, and then to enforce those rules. The NCAA has never done either of those.

 

[Techster]

A "cap" is interesting but since it is technically not supposed to be associated with said school / sports program, how do you establish it? You can't cap one individual's outside earnings because a teammate is making too much already.

I don't know the answer and I am not really sure anyone does at this point. The NCAA is still here and empowered to some degree, but the stranglehold they had on "amateur athletics" is now gone. That was the card they held closest to the vest, thinking it justified their existence, so it seems a matter of time before the house of cards goes with it. I don't see the conferences (especially not the factory school conferences) leading the charge or even facilitating discussion on the matter. I think we are in for the wild wild west for the foreseeable future. I think everyone is watching to see just how far it will go and thinking that a point of diminishing returns will be the ultimate guardrail.... for the moment, no one knows where those returns are diminished.

For what it's worth, the topic of the thread is "NIL 'killing' the beauty of college sports." I think most are treating NIL as a symptom (or reaction) to what has been killing college sports for a long time and that is why there is no real urgency in a "fix."

I should have been more specific with the salary cap idea.

Let's stop all pretenses about schools paying athletes. We all know it's been going on in some form or another as far back as college sports was being played. Let the schools pay the SAs directly from a salary cap that evens the playing field more than the "NIL". NIL as it's being used today is just another way for the school to pay players without having to get their hands in mud. The schools want the benefit of the money coming from the NIL, without the responsibility (SAs being employees, liabilities, etc.).

Will there still be disparities? Of course. Will there still be schools trying to play outside of the system to their benefit? Of course.

When it comes to true marketing opportunities for the SAs, there needs to be an impartial "clearinghouse" for these marketing contracts. It needs to be from real businesses or corporations that have an operating history.

There isn't an easy answer to any of this. The NCAA had decades to deal with this, but they waited until the flood waters were at the doorsteps before acknowledging the tide coming in was a real threat.

 

[Root4GT]

I don't think that would be any kind of detriment. A large school with a lot of support could have zero official scholarship players, and just increase the NIL amount by whatever it costs the players to attend school. FBS schools are limited to 105 players, and 85 scholarships. (I believe and without any modifications for COVID years) Such a school could go to zero scholarship players, but 105 players who receive more than enough NIL to pay for school, something like psuedo-scholarship players. I think that most rule setting/changing would probably have more unintended consequences that actually help out the schools that try to skirt the rules and hurt the people who try to do the right thing.

Even with large schools, I can remember a few situations that are mind-boggling with the NCAA rules and enforcement (or attempted enforcement of them). (My memory might be incorrect) Auburn got in trouble because when the apartment of a player with a family burned down, the coach allowed the player to stay for a short time in his cabin. A Clemson player who had to take care of his pre-teen brother because his mother was an addict was prevented from working and from accepting donations to care for his family -- until the NCAA caught hell about it and made an exception. With such silly "enforcement" happening, nothing was done about players' families living in rent-free houses close to Duke. The way to have a system in which many or most try to obey the rules is to have agreement on rules that actually make sense, and then to enforce those rules. The NCAA has never done either of those.

While that might be the case I think there are a lot of players who would be uncomfortable without a real scholarship. I am not sure how transfer rules would impact that either. Toss in that the NIL could be pulled at anytime and the athlete is now not on scholarship and is no longer getting NIL money.

There is no quick or easy solution. I wouldn't toss out any ideas off hand. Any idea clearly needs lots modification and review.

 

[CuseJacket]

Ask Chuck if he got paid to go to auburn. NIL ain't perfect but college sports left amateurism long ago.

Also

When Charles Barkley tried to recruit Dirk Nowitzki to Auburn

Nowitzki decided to go straight to the NBA. It worked out pretty well for him.

nba.nbcsports.com

Barkley called Nike and made a strong push to get to Nowitzki through any channel, legal or not. “Just tell him, anything he wants, we’ll get it done,” Barkley recalled in 2012. “Just give him anything he wants; he’s got to go to Auburn.”

Strangely, Cam Newton had no idea…

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I should have been more specific with the salary cap idea.

Let's stop all pretenses about schools paying athletes. We all know it's been going on in some form or another as far back as college sports was being played. Let the schools pay the SAs directly from a salary cap that evens the playing field more than the "NIL". NIL as it's being used today is just another way for the school to pay players without having to get their hands in mud. The schools want the benefit of the money coming from the NIL, without the responsibility (SAs being employees, liabilities, etc.).

Will there still be disparities? Of course. Will there still be schools trying to play outside of the system to their benefit? Of course.

When it comes to true marketing opportunities for the SAs, there needs to be an impartial "clearinghouse" for these marketing contracts. It needs to be from real businesses or corporations that have an operating history.

There isn't an easy answer to any of this. The NCAA had decades to deal with this, but they waited until the flood waters were at the doorsteps before acknowledging the tide coming in was a real threat.

I remember one of Stoudamire's first interviews he was asked about how he would handle NIL and he said that it was like the NBA salary cap where you had to manage payroll. Of course for NCAA, the salary cap is whatever a school (sic) can provide, but there will be some limit to funds which a school will provide to different sports.

Stoudamire also said something to the effect that paying players has been going on for a while and NIL just brought it into the open. Fortunately he wasn't asked if he ever got paid since we have nice reporters asking questions. But as they say in Casablanca, "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"

For the important sport of college baseball it's there too; Tommy Tanks was bought by LSU from NC State's CWS team. The only difference is that in baseball, there is probably less money that football or basketball. I naively think that there has been less pay for play for college baseball in past years; being able to be drafted out of HS by MLB makes a difference. Now though, baseball players can make a lot in NIL and then get the MLB signing bonus. Shortening the time in the minors should be every players goal since the working conditions and post bonus pay suck there.

I think the SEC slogan should be "The SEC, it just costs more."