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

[Richard7125]

Let me see if I got this right…

NCAA makes rule restricting transfers.

People complain it’s too strict.

NCAA amends rule to allow exceptions.

People complain it’s too arbitrary.

NCAA eliminates rule.

People complain it’s the Wild West.

NCAA amends rule to make it more strict.

Hahaha. No doubt. Normally that’s the kind of decision making the NCAA makes in a vacuum, but there was this little thing called NIL that was introduced during these stages.

Tampering has become a massive issue in college football and basketball. If you don’t think it’s a problem or if you think it’s relatively minor, these types of changes won’t be suitable for you. Personally, I don’t think it goes far enough because it still won’t prevent the Jordan Addison (Pitt receiver) or Jahmyr Gibbs scenarios, but it should slow some of the tampering. The fact the NCAA moved this quickly on anything tells you how big of a problem they think it is.

 

[roadkill]

Hahaha. No doubt. Normally that’s the kind of decision making the NCAA makes in a vacuum, but there was this little thing called NIL that was introduced during these stages.

Tampering has become a massive issue in college football and basketball. If you don’t think it’s a problem or if you think it’s relatively minor, these types of changes won’t be suitable for you. Personally, I don’t think it goes far enough because it still won’t prevent the Jordan Addison (Pitt receiver) or Jahmyr Gibbs scenarios, but it should slow some of the tampering. The fact the NCAA moved this quickly on anything tells you how big of a problem they think it is.

What frustrates me about this situation is that, seemingly in response to NIL changing the entire landscape of football, the NCAA removed one of the few tools it had to discourage tampering. An analogy would be if, during the recent spate of wildfires in California, the state decided to eliminate fire departments.

 

[CEB]

What frustrates me about this situation is that, seemingly in response to NIL changing the entire landscape of football, the NCAA removed one of the few tools it had to discourage tampering. An analogy would be if, during the recent spate of wildfires in California, the state decided to eliminate fire departments.

I think this is a valid point and at the same time I kind of think transfers (at least one) should be available to student athletes without penalty. We see the high profile transfers and rail against them because of tampering and NIL money, etc. Reality is that the transfers we all talk about are probably a very small percentage of total transfers and it ticks me off that high profile guys in the spotlight would be given an exception while some D-II kid would be denied (for any reason, really). NCAA has a track record of smacking around people / programs when it won’t draw a lot of scrutiny, unfortunately and that’s why I like an across the board approach for the first one. Multiple transfers should be subject to some additional scrutiny, though. I wish the NCAA would be even handed about it; but I don’t suspect that will be the case.
In short, I feel like one free course correction is appropriate, even though I know there will be those who use it for financial gain and those who exploit it to cherry pick athletes. Maybe I’m being defeatist, but I don’t think what ails big time college athletics is going to be corrected by any measures taken by the NCAA.

 

[Richard7125]

What frustrates me about this situation is that, seemingly in response to NIL changing the entire landscape of football, the NCAA removed one of the few tools it had to discourage tampering. An analogy would be if, during the recent spate of wildfires in California, the state decided to eliminate fire departments.

I don't understand what you mean

 

[roadkill]

I don't understand what you mean

The point I was attempting to convey was in response to your comments about tampering, and in particular the timing of the NCAA's rule changes.
While I agree the most recent rule change limiting some transfers may slow tampering down a bit, I found it frustrating that the previous rule change, which essentially eliminated prior transfer restrictions, came about at a time when NIL exploded on the scene. Assuming NIL led to more tampering when this started to happen, the NCAA chose to eliminate the one rule that could discourage it. That just didn’t make any sense to me. However, this boneheaded timing could be explained if in fact the NCAA was simply reacting to its inability to process the influx of waiver requests, rather than doing it as a response to NIL. After all, they have a history of being a reactive organization, rather than trying to get out in front of issues.

Although my earlier post about the history of the NCAA’s rule changes around transfers was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, the bigger issue is that this is a symptom of ineffective leadership in the organization leading to totally reactive and often too-late responses to issues. This in turn often leads to multiple course corrections as we’ve seen with transfer rules. I recognize that part of the problem is the NCAA is not set up to have much real power – they serve the universities that have chosen to join the organization and are reluctant to upset the major powers in the revenue sports. The real power to control the revenue sports, and make enforceable rules, has been trending more and more toward the conferences.

 

[Richard7125]

The point I was attempting to convey was in response to your comments about tampering, and in particular the timing of the NCAA's rule changes.
While I agree the most recent rule change limiting some transfers may slow tampering down a bit, I found it frustrating that the previous rule change, which essentially eliminated prior transfer restrictions, came about at a time when NIL exploded on the scene. Assuming NIL led to more tampering when this started to happen, the NCAA chose to eliminate the one rule that could discourage it. That just didn’t make any sense to me. However, this boneheaded timing could be explained if in fact the NCAA was simply reacting to its inability to process the influx of waiver requests, rather than doing it as a response to NIL. After all, they have a history of being a reactive organization, rather than trying to get out in front of issues.

Although my earlier post about the history of the NCAA’s rule changes around transfers was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, the bigger issue is that this is a symptom of ineffective leadership in the organization leading to totally reactive and often too-late responses to issues. This in turn often leads to multiple course corrections as we’ve seen with transfer rules. I recognize that part of the problem is the NCAA is not set up to have much real power – they serve the universities that have chosen to join the organization and are reluctant to upset the major powers in the revenue sports. The real power to control the revenue sports, and make enforceable rules, has been trending more and more toward the conferences.

Got it. In my opinion, the previous transfer rule changes were most likely in process for many years before they were enacted. It just think it was incredibly bad timing that it coincided with the introduction of NIL. Yes, NIL was in the works too, but the NCAA was also incompetently myopic on the interaction of these two issues.

 

[slugboy]

Got it. In my opinion, the previous transfer rule changes were most likely in process for many years before they were enacted. It just think it was incredibly bad timing that it coincided with the introduction of NIL. Yes, NIL was in the works too, but the NCAA was also incompetently myopic on the interaction of these two issues.

The NCAA has “no tampering” rules. It also has “no pay for play” rules. It’s not enforcing them, or even trying to investigate as far as I can tell.
Maybe the NCAA would try to enforce the rules against a small school, but at this point the lack of any enforcement has set years of precedent that those rules aren’t “real”.
It didn’t have to be like this. Mark Emmert’s tenure as commissioner was a disaster, and Charlie Baker hasn’t done much to repair the damage.
The only excuse I know if is the very threat that the SEC and B1G have made that they’d leave the NCAA if it went too far. Now, it’s just the organization that sets up basketball, volleyball, and baseball tournaments.

 

[bobongo]

The NCAA has “no tampering” rules. It also has “no pay for play” rules. It’s not enforcing them, or even trying to investigate as far as I can tell.
Maybe the NCAA would try to enforce the rules against a small school, but at this point the lack of any enforcement has set years of precedent that those rules aren’t “real”.
It didn’t have to be like this. Mark Emmert’s tenure as commissioner was a disaster, and Charlie Baker hasn’t done much to repair the damage.
The only excuse I know if is the very threat that the SEC and B1G have made that they’d leave the NCAA if it went too far. Now, it’s just the organization that sets up basketball, volleyball, and baseball tournaments.

The NCAA still enforces some rules (the ones that more attention is paid to, like their relaxed transfer rules). Rules that attract less public attention it enforces on a sliding scale depending on how much money is generated by each school. Against ones with the biggest revenue, it just looks the other way. Case in point is Georgia, which is paying off traffic fines incurred by its players. The only response by the NCAA is crickets. But I'm stating the obvious. We all know what's going on here.

 

[GTJohn70]

One day, the Oline and Dline players who are not getting the big NIL dollars will realize that if they miss a few blocks or tackles, drop a few passes, the big NIL players may not be worth near as much. Then the NIL playing field starts to level a bit and the NIL starts to get spread around. This whole NIL thing has a great deal of settling to take place and it could get ugly before it gets better.

 

[GT33]

One day, the Oline and Dline players who are not getting the big NIL dollars will realize that if they miss a few blocks or tackles, drop a few passes, the big NIL players may not be worth near as much. Then the NIL playing field starts to level a bit and the NIL starts to get spread around. This whole NIL thing has a great deal of settling to take place and it could get ugly before it gets better.

It isn't like that in pro sports, what makes you think college will be any different?

 

[takethepoints]

I think a blind man can see where this is going: Congress will step in. I also think that faced with that the big conferences will either fold (my guess) or separate from the NCAA and go their way. The consequences of the later - no NCAA sanctioned bowls or championship games, etc., etc. - will be enough to convince everybody to sit down, think NIL through, and come up with ways to control it. Some kind of voluntary controls would be best until the situation calms down.

Of course, I may be underestimating the leverage the big conferences have - it might also depend on how the tv gods tilt - but like I used to tell my students, "Who would you rather deal with: 50 monkeys or King Kong?" My moneys on Kong in these circumstances.

 

[Skeptic]

Agree. That's one of the aspects of the current situation that make it difficult to predict and a challenge to resolve.

Normally, the "market" will find an equilibrium point that in the business world would result in some level of equity for most participants in a league. As I see it, there are wild cards such as boosters that have created a deeply unbalanced landscape. Boosters have no profit motive, they just want to win.

Swinney "adjusted" his top assistants and one such adjustment was for $70,000. Another for $50,000. No telling where they would go without a board of trustees to oversee it. On the other hand, out-of-state appliications have skyrocketed as well.

 

[bobongo]

NCAA hit with antitrust lawsuit over student-athlete payments

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) was sued in California federal court on Tuesday in a proposed class action that alleges thousands of current and former student athletes were denied annual cash payments for academic achievement in violation of U.S. antitrust law. Two former...

www.yahoo.com

 

[UgaBlows]

I think a blind man can see where this is going: Congress will step in. I also think that faced with that the big conferences will either fold (my guess) or separate from the NCAA and go their way. The consequences of the later - no NCAA sanctioned bowls or championship games, etc., etc. - will be enough to convince everybody to sit down, think NIL through, and come up with ways to control it. Some kind of voluntary controls would be best until the situation calms down.

Of course, I may be underestimating the leverage the big conferences have - it might also depend on how the tv gods tilt - but like I used to tell my students, "Who would you rather deal with: 50 monkeys or King Kong?" My moneys on Kong in these circumstances.

Why do you think the big conferences would fold? If legislation is passed to govern nil everyone will have to follow the law whether they are in a conf or the ncaa or whatever right?

 

[takethepoints]

Why do you think the big conferences would fold? If legislation is passed to govern nil everyone will have to follow the law whether they are in a conf or the ncaa or whatever right?

Well, yes, if Congress actually passes a law. But I don't think anybody actually wants that. If the threat of Congressional action is there, then the interested parties will have a strong incentive to take action themselves, solely to keep Kong out of college sports. Now, if the parties are shortsighted in the face of an active threat of new federal law on NILs (and God alone knows what else) then they'll get it. Most of the members of Congress are from states/districts where their constituents are largely against the increasing inequalities in athletic recruiting and the marginalization of the programs they follow. If the ball starts rolling down hill there won't be anybody too eager to stop it.

I suspect everybody now benefiting from the NIL boondoggle feel they have no choice but to continue policies that they must know are ultimately dangerous to the independence of college sports. We'll have to see what happens in the next few years. (Btw, this is a bipartisan issue if ever there was one.)

 

[UgaBlows]

Well, yes, if Congress actually passes a law. But I don't think anybody actually wants that. If the threat of Congressional action is there, then the interested parties will have a strong incentive to take action themselves, solely to keep Kong out of college sports. Now, if the parties are shortsighted in the face of an active threat of new federal law on NILs (and God alone knows what else) then they'll get it. Most of the members of Congress are from states/districts where their constituents are largely against the increasing inequalities in athletic recruiting and the marginalization of the programs they follow. If the ball starts rolling down hill there won't be anybody too eager to stop it.

I suspect everybody now benefiting from the NIL boondoggle feel they have no choice but to continue policies that they must know are ultimately dangerous to the independence of college sports. We'll have to see what happens in the next few years. (Btw, this is a bipartisan issue if ever there was one.)

The problem there is that there is seemingly no way to govern NIL without laws. The ncaa is a toothless joke, and the boosters cannot be controlled at this point. The SC decision pretty much guarantees failure to anyone who tries. I know congress is a Horrible mess but I'm of the opinion that this is something that could be worked out in a bi-partisan fashion, i do wonder from which parties involved the most lobbyist money will come from to shape it lol?

 

[slugboy]

Decent interview with Lane Kiffin about life with the transfer portal

https://footballscoop.com/news/lane-kiffin-explains-why-he-doesnt-preach-a-family-atmosphere-at-ole-miss

 

[Techster]

 

[UgaBlows]

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Here comes the bureaucracy so many on this site warned about.

Hopefully, we can avoid the “hurry up and do something” syndrome and be more thoughtful. Hopefully take a little time and figure this out. Would be nice if there is an answer that…..

Respects the rights of individual athletes to control their own earnings potential.

Protects players from exploitation.

Doesn’t make a mockery of the “student” in “student athlete.”

Keeps larger “brand” football factories from forming a monopoly.

Protects the health and wellbeing of athletes.