Insanity!

[Augustus]

Gee...if only somebody could have seen this coming.

The college football of yore is gone, and it ain't coming back. Stick a fork in it.

[91catAlum]

Gee...if only somebody could have seen this coming.

Exactly! When NIL came up many of us said that it would create college free agency with the portal and most of the know-it-alls said nope, that's not gonna happen.
And here we are.

[rivercat]

Players are finally getting their cut. Its a perfect example of a free market and I have zero issues with it.

You post plenty bitching about the Cats. Since you are such a laissez-faire capitalist regarding college sports, I assume you are giving substantial $ to the NIL collective. If not, quit bitching.

[CodyCat]

Players are finally getting their cut. Its a perfect example of a free market and I have zero issues with it.

You post plenty bitching about the Cats. Since you are such a laissez-faire capitalist regarding college sports, I assume you are giving substantial $ to the NIL collective. If not, quit bitching.

Because he posted and agrees with the free market automatically makes it a requirement he donates money to MSU/Bobcat Collective. That seems like a stretch.

[ThoughtUKnew14]

Players are finally getting their cut. Its a perfect example of a free market and I have zero issues with it.

You post plenty bitching about the Cats. Since you are such a laissez-faire capitalist regarding college sports, I assume you are giving substantial $ to the NIL collective. If not, quit bitching.

Damn, someone woke up in a bad mood. To answer your question…Yes, I have been a financial supporter of the Cats and the Collective. The word “substantial” is very subjective so I can only hope my contributions help the overall goal.

[kennethnoisewater]

What happened to the value of getting an academic scholarship with all of your tuition, books food, housing and extra expenses covered?

WHen you get on here and say "free market" are you saying you don't believe in necessary restrictions to prevent monopolies?

Any "free market" needs to have boundaries..Guard rails, Regs. Whatever you want to call it.

If you think tuition and books is sufficient for what Div I football players go through while the institutions and the NCAA rake in millions on their backs you are just plain wrong. It's time the athletes got thier share.
Your point about unchecked capitalism running amok is spot on and it was the point I was sarcasticly making. The endgame of that is what we are approaching in this country currently.

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

While I'm at it, do we really have an accounting of where all this money goes? If a university gets $100M from TV, tickets, sponsorships and other revenue, who gets rich off that? I mean obviously the head coach is doing well and maybe a couple assistants are making fat salaries. I really don't know--do university presidents get a big chunk? Are all that many people getting wealthy, or does it just pay the massive expenses associated with running a huge operation like that? And how much of it is going to fund other programs at the university?

There's a ton of money involved, and I know somebody is getting rich. But who? Yes a handful of coaches...who else? I literally have no idea and I'd like to chase those people down. I just don't feel like we're going after the right money--does that make sense? I can get behind telling Universities to pay their fair share if there's something left to give, but we're saying that, and the university gets to pass the buck to somebody else to pay THEIR fair share. Am I naive?

[MSU01]

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

Precisely, this was one of the big arguments in past years for paying players on top of what they get from their academic scholarships. You had a system in which coaches were getting signed to multi-million dollar contracts and the players who were the ones truly generating a lot of that revenue were getting none of that money. NIL started because the NCAA got sued by a group of players and the players won. One could argue that we'd be in a better place right now if the NCAA hadn't fought so hard against paying players for so many years.

[onceacat]

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

Precisely, this was one of the big arguments in past years for paying players on top of what they get from their academic scholarships. You had a system in which coaches were getting signed to multi-million dollar contracts and the players who were the ones truly generating a lot of that revenue were getting none of that money. NIL started because the NCAA got sued by a group of players and the players won. One could argue that we'd be in a better place right now if the NCAA hadn't fought so hard against paying players for so many years.

Yeah, the NCAA botched this big time on a bunch of different levels. One of the cases that lead to this situation was the O'Bannon case, where the NCAA licensed his name on a video game and prevented him from receiving a cut. ON HIS OWN NAME.

It was a really simple legal case for O'Bannon to win. The real problem is that the NCAA never figured out how to treat players fairly, then when it lost the O'Bannon & Alston cases, it just sort of collapsed.

The NCAA could easily control all of this by creating a system similar to the NFL or NBA (i.e. controlling entry/exit into the league, revenue sharing, etc) , but it has chosen not to.

IMO

[TomCat88]

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

Precisely, this was one of the big arguments in past years for paying players on top of what they get from their academic scholarships. You had a system in which coaches were getting signed to multi-million dollar contracts and the players who were the ones truly generating a lot of that revenue were getting none of that money. NIL started because the NCAA got sued by a group of players and the players won. One could argue that we'd be in a better place right now if the NCAA hadn't fought so hard against paying players for so many years.

Yeah, the NCAA botched this big time on a bunch of different levels. One of the cases that lead to this situation was the O'Bannon case, where the NCAA licensed his name on a video game and prevented him from receiving a cut. ON HIS OWN NAME.

It was a really simple legal case for O'Bannon to win. The real problem is that the NCAA never figured out how to treat players fairly, then when it lost the O'Bannon & Alston cases, it just sort of collapsed.

The NCAA could easily control all of this by creating a system similar to the NFL or NBA (i.e. controlling entry/exit into the league, revenue sharing, etc) , but it has chosen not to.

IMO

Could it be working for the NCAA?

[onceacat]

What happened to the value of getting an academic scholarship with all of your tuition, books food, housing and extra expenses covered?

WHen you get on here and say "free market" are you saying you don't believe in necessary restrictions to prevent monopolies?

Any "free market" needs to have boundaries..Guard rails, Regs. Whatever you want to call it.

If you think tuition and books is sufficient for what Div I football players go through while the institutions and the NCAA rake in millions on their backs you are just plain wrong. It's time the athletes got thier share.
Your point about unchecked capitalism running amok is spot on and it was the point I was sarcasticly making. The endgame of that is what we are approaching in this country currently.

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

While I'm at it, do we really have an accounting of where all this money goes? If a university gets $100M from TV, tickets, sponsorships and other revenue, who gets rich off that? I mean obviously the head coach is doing well and maybe a couple assistants are making fat salaries. I really don't know--do university presidents get a big chunk? Are all that many people getting wealthy, or does it just pay the massive expenses associated with running a huge operation like that? And how much of it is going to fund other programs at the university?

There's a ton of money involved, and I know somebody is getting rich. But who? Yes a handful of coaches...who else? I literally have no idea and I'd like to chase those people down. I just don't feel like we're going after the right money--does that make sense? I can get behind telling Universities to pay their fair share if there's something left to give, but we're saying that, and the university gets to pass the buck to somebody else to pay THEIR fair share. Am I naive?

One of the great ironies of the situation is that the companies funding this (TV networks, ESPN, etc) are losing a ton of money on trying to stream content. Its also more than a bit ironic that so many athletics programs run in the red, requiring significant taxpayer support.

But to answer the question: lots of people are getting a 'little bit' rich even if only a few are getting super rich. Obviously, coaches, like you mentioned. But also university presidents & the big pooh-bahs at the NCAA. University administrators & ADs. The contractors who build new stadiums. The businesses that run concessions. Sports agents. Media industry executives.

[onceacat]

Alright I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just don't know if I understand how all of this works. The institutions and the NCAA are raking in millions, but the "new" money in all of this doesn't come from that cut, right? So if XXX University makes $100M off of football and the NCAA takes whatever their cut of that is, the players still aren't getting any of that, right? So the money players are getting is from a new pot of money that wasn't supposed to exist before NIL started. In some cases, people were dying to use that pot of money, and in others that pot of money didn't exist.

Precisely, this was one of the big arguments in past years for paying players on top of what they get from their academic scholarships. You had a system in which coaches were getting signed to multi-million dollar contracts and the players who were the ones truly generating a lot of that revenue were getting none of that money. NIL started because the NCAA got sued by a group of players and the players won. One could argue that we'd be in a better place right now if the NCAA hadn't fought so hard against paying players for so many years.

Yeah, the NCAA botched this big time on a bunch of different levels. One of the cases that lead to this situation was the O'Bannon case, where the NCAA licensed his name on a video game and prevented him from receiving a cut. ON HIS OWN NAME.

It was a really simple legal case for O'Bannon to win. The real problem is that the NCAA never figured out how to treat players fairly, then when it lost the O'Bannon & Alston cases, it just sort of collapsed.

The NCAA could easily control all of this by creating a system similar to the NFL or NBA (i.e. controlling entry/exit into the league, revenue sharing, etc) , but it has chosen not to.

IMO

Could it be working for the NCAA?

Oh, I think its clearly working for the NCAA...at least the executives in charge of the NCAA.

[tetoncat]

NAIA, D2, D3, and JC kids face same issues with injury and time commitments. No huge money coming there way. I get that athletes deserve some. The problem with revenue sharing is that as an organization a college or university is using funds from revenue sports to fund non or low revenue sports. If you paid out profits from one the others will likely go away. That creates the issues with equal scholarships.

Now throw in NIL. Purpose wasn't to pay players to just show up and play. It was to pay them for using their identity to create income on jerseys, promo items, advertisements, etc. Doesn't seem like that part would be that hard for NCAA and their me.bers to put controls in place.

[catatac]

NAIA, D2, D3, and JC kids face same issues with injury and time commitments. No huge money coming there way. I get that athletes deserve some. The problem with revenue sharing is that as an organization a college or university is using funds from revenue sports to fund non or low revenue sports. If you paid out profits from one the others will likely go away. That creates the issues with equal scholarships.

Now throw in NIL. Purpose wasn't to pay players to just show up and play. It was to pay them for using their identity to create income on jerseys, promo items, advertisements, etc. Doesn't seem like that part would be that hard for NCAA and their me.bers to put controls in place.

Speaking of this, how long will it take before this thing is 100% commercialized? Star player trots out there with "Geico" on his Jersey because they paid him $1,000,000.

[AFCAT]

NAIA, D2, D3, and JC kids face same issues with injury and time commitments. No huge money coming there way. I get that athletes deserve some. The problem with revenue sharing is that as an organization a college or university is using funds from revenue sports to fund non or low revenue sports. If you paid out profits from one the others will likely go away. That creates the issues with equal scholarships.

Now throw in NIL. Purpose wasn't to pay players to just show up and play. It was to pay them for using their identity to create income on jerseys, promo items, advertisements, etc. Doesn't seem like that part would be that hard for NCAA and their me.bers to put controls in place.

Speaking of this, how long will it take before this thing is 100% commercialized? Star player trots out there with "Geico" on his Jersey because they paid him $1,000,000.

Won't happen unless the team allows it to. The players wear gear that MSU gives them and the Cats own the rights to the logos. The team could possibly have "Geico" put on the jerseys someday. That's why you don't see players wearing Bobcat gear in their commercials or advertisements.

MSU should start working with the players on some NIL opportunities. The bookstore could use and pay the players to help sell licensed products, like jerseys, caps, snow globes, etc.

[Hi-Line Bobcat]

NAIA, D2, D3, and JC kids face same issues with injury and time commitments. No huge money coming there way. I get that athletes deserve some. The problem with revenue sharing is that as an organization a college or university is using funds from revenue sports to fund non or low revenue sports. If you paid out profits from one the others will likely go away. That creates the issues with equal scholarships.

Now throw in NIL. Purpose wasn't to pay players to just show up and play. It was to pay them for using their identity to create income on jerseys, promo items, advertisements, etc. Doesn't seem like that part would be that hard for NCAA and their me.bers to put controls in place.

This is probably the best post I have read on BN in a long time. It’s exactly how I feel and you laid out the original purpose of the NIL nicely.

The NIL now has turned into a fund, where investors/donors pool their money to buy the best available talent. There is absolutely a return on investment if the NIL you contributed to brings in athletes that help deliver championships to your university. The rich universities will get richer off this NIL stuff and the little guys will get fukced. It’s a bad bad deal. If the players want to work to promote their brand or school or if they want to sell merchandise with their names on it, I’m all for that. I’m all for them being able to transfer to, what I think is ****** is paying athletes to come to your college or paying a transfer more money so he picks your school over others. Thats crap and it is professional sports, which absolutely suck in my eyes.

Might as well start signing players to two year contracts and when they are up, release them, and go to the portal and sign another player for two years. And while you’re at it, put a salary cap on it so all schools can play. It’s going to be a disaster.

[Bobcat4Ever]

The NCAA should be ashamed of themselves. This whole thing is out of control.

The Supreme Court told them several times to “leave the players and the schools alone.” They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Bear Spray II]

Capitalism? What's next? Demanding to get paid to play for my church softball team? I mean, hey, they take up an offering every Sunday and I should get my cut right? It's a free market.

What happened to the value of getting an academic scholarship with all of your tuition, books food, housing and extra expenses covered?

WHen you get on here and say "free market" are you saying you don't believe in necessary restrictions to prevent monopolies? Because that's what will happen in a completely unregulated "free market." There will be a handful of schools in what ever conference or Division who will have billionaires and will go out and buy up their team so they can acheive their "MANHOOD." I don't know how much money Washington has but would you be okay with him paying millions so his beloved Griz can buy the best talent in the FCS?

Any "free market" needs to have boundaries..Guard rails, Regs. Whatever you want to call it. College football right now is a runaway train going straight to hell. At least in the NFL you have rules that regulate draft picks, etc. This current college model is unsustainable. THat should be clear to any reasonable person.

It's one thing for a wealthy individual like Washington to donate money for facilities, etc. In fact, I BELIEVE they fund the UM softball program and if anyone was willing to do the same at MSU we would probably have a softball program also. However, to basically purchase the players is something altogether different. Plus you have this wide open no penalty transfer where you can make lateral transfers within your division without having to sit out a year as you once had to.

If I had it my way a college coach could not get paid more than the highest paid professor at that college. If the coach doesn't like that then fine, he/she can go to the pros. Anyway, it is a total mess and the NCAA better start figuring it out. They could at least begin by not allowing penalty free transfers.

You're a radical, liberal, fanatical, criminal! The NCAA has to place a total limit a University can compensate any one player, and a total limit a team can spend annually on NIL. Then they need to pool all the NIL money and distribute it EVENLY among the universities. NIL was supposed to give financial aid & compensation to student athletes, not destroy recruiting and promote the 'what can I get' attitude. Grow some stones NCAA!

[nanacat]

If this whole NIL thing started because a college used a players name, image, likeness, without compensation for that, then either the NCAA better rein it in back to that, or it should be called what it's become-College Free Agency/Pay to Play. It will destroy college sports probably faster than we think.
I can appreciate the fact that players commit time, effort, etc, to play/perform and make money for the school they play for but that was their CHOICE, no one made them play a college sport. Those that do, and get a scholarship, also get alot more than tuition, clothing, books, and room and board. They also get weight/strength training & coaching, dietary/nutrition coaching, let alone the hours their position coaches spend making them better. On top of that, in order to stay eligible they must keep their grades up, so there is tutoring available to them at a different level than your standard college student. And now, NIL for the standout players.
I saw something the other day that I wish I had saved regarding the percentage of HS athletes who get to play college sports at all, let alone a scholarship to play. Then another percentage of those who become starters, then the percentage who make it into the pros. Needless to say the percentages were super low. The purpose of the post had to do with encouraging kids towards reality, like an education that will provide a living income, prioritizing friends, family, etc.
I think this whole deal is setting up more entitlement. When reality finally hits that they're not as good as they thought they were, or the NFL/Pro opportunities don't come pouring in, there will be many young people very sad and regretful that will have to figure out how to live a normal life like the rest of us.

[Cledus]

Imagine being the kid wanting 4.5 million, getting it, everyone knowing you got it, and having and ass season. They will have it all, being rich and hated.

Good, maybe that will stop this whole leave-them-alone-they're-just-kids canard. I'm just guessing, but I suspect the top FCS schools are paying players more than what entry-level military enlistment pays.

[onceacat]

NAIA, D2, D3, and JC kids face same issues with injury and time commitments. No huge money coming there way. I get that athletes deserve some. The problem with revenue sharing is that as an organization a college or university is using funds from revenue sports to fund non or low revenue sports. If you paid out profits from one the others will likely go away. That creates the issues with equal scholarships.

Now throw in NIL. Purpose wasn't to pay players to just show up and play. It was to pay them for using their identity to create income on jerseys, promo items, advertisements, etc. Doesn't seem like that part would be that hard for NCAA and their me.bers to put controls in place.

I dont think this is remotely true. TV football contracts pay for facilities & coaches, not for a swim or cross country team.

My kid runs D1 cross country but the school doesnt even have a football team. Hard to argue that somehow football pays for that.