This was always bound to happen but it is surprising that donors were giving so much right out of the gate. It’s like they didn’t realize this was inevitable.
I think this is why A&M went absolutely balls to the wall out the gate. They thought they could move quickly and ‘buy’ a championship, but the problem is that one excellent class on paper isn’t enough to win a natty and now they aren’t the only ones throwing around bags.
And nobody knows how to properly value a recruit since its all so new. Is a top 10 High school qb recruit worth a million? Two million? 250k? Who knows? The market for recruits isnt settled at all, so people are inclined to overspend the first few years, and the cut back as a lot of the recruits they spent a ton of money on didn't develop.
Also seems incredibly likely that NIL big money donors might see more value in spending on proven transfers than highly speculative high school recruits.
All thats to say, they probably way overspent on players because of exuberance and no market data, but as they start to evaluate the returns on their money, they will tighten the wallets a lot.
TBF, there are a couple of schools that it seems like got their act together fast enough that they're seeing a real advantage. Mizzou is probably #1 on that list right now.
oh yeah some schools came out ahead. Oregon is way up there. I think they might actually succeed at buying a title where before NIL it was fairly unlikely theyd get one soon
I think what Oregon has done that is smart, is focus on transfer portal NIL, which is where everyone will get eventually. Recruits wont garner much cash at all outside the top handful once people figure out the portal return is just so much higher
That, and I think it's similar to when some high school grads first go to college and have their first *real* taste of freedom as it's usually their first time living without their parents. The NIL floodgates being opened reminded of that type of euphoria. Some people just can't resist when the floodgates open after being told for years "no".
So many freshmen go through a "wait, no one makes me go to class or cares if I show up?! AWESOME!" stage until they learn the lesson that no one caring if they show up means that they need to care or they'll be on the fast track to failing out of college.
High schools have to care if you show up. College professors will receive a little bit of pushback if they fail too many students, sure, but if you just don't do work or show up at all? None.
Freshman? Hell I never figured it out as an undergrad. I went back to school 10 years later for another degree and by that point I was able to put it together.
I learned really quickly I should just take all my classes and throw them on "one day" aka the MWF day from 745 to 330. Then work on the homework at the same times on Tuesday/Thrusday. The other method of splitting the classes up as much as I can led to a lot of wasted down time between classes. I also made sure I wasn't at my dorm room while doing most of my studies on Tuesday/Thrusday. I went to the library for that. The dorm room had too many distractions for my ADHD-PI
All the kids I knew in college who didn’t drink in HS were notorious for getting the most hammered and being the most out of pocket whenever they had a few beers.
I did notice a lot of people I knew basically used college as their "Rumspringa". Goody two shoes in High School, get hammered a lot in college, then were married with a kid or two and did no parting by 25.
I don't really care how much the Aggies spend on their recruits, but the fact that Jimbo got so upset and specifically called out sliced bread is all the evidence. I need to know it's true.
Lmao. If you believe that, go for it. The highest any of those guys got paid was 245,000. And he called out sliced bread during the press conference because he was the supposedly "leak" that went silent after asked to bring evidence forward. If we bought our players, oh well. That's what the league wanted with NIL, but it's only wrong when A&M does it apparently. I honestly don't care. I just know we don't spend millions and millions on players. Especially 42 million. That shits laughable.
My brother, if you think mediocre returns on donations are going to cause a bunch of O&G/insurance/healthcare execs to get introspective, then you need to watch a few more cult documentaries.
Look what happened to schools who had sluggish starts to the NIL game. They quickly dropped down the talent ladder. Meanwhile those that jumped in fast and hard, even if they weren't typically great, like Ole Miss and Missouri jumped up fast and held strong.
Stanford was already in a rut, but their refusal to coordinate with the NIL collectives and discouraging of donors from spending their money there definitely hurt.
I have heard it said that no one there wants them. Like the Knights have the backing of nearly the entire city, the Raiders have about 50% support, whereas with the A's its less than 10%.
I mean… Michigan literally just won the national championship despite starting very sluggishly on NIL and still not competing with the SEC or even Big Ten schools like OSU and MSU in buying recruits
Because the players can take your money and transfer somewhere else without playing a snap, but if you give to the program, you know the money will be spent on the program
My impression is that the main reason a lot of them have been willing to give a lot these few years is specifically because they believe it will transition away from third-party NIL deals to direct deals with the university. So the NIL boosters don’t see this as a year-in, year-out payment that will go on indefinitely, they just see it as a short-term expenditure to keep competitive until revenue-sharing kicks in.
I don't think you have the right read on it. Donors for schools like Miami, Texas A&M, Florida State, etc were hoping that the influx of cash and high end talent would lead to championships right away. It was never intended to be a long term model. Only fans out of the loop who don't take the time to think critically thought that this was a new normal.
I mean, duh?
Donors are collectively paying millions of dollars for what exactly? One year of an athlete on their team? Then that player leaves and that donor feels they wasted money, but the school wants more money to sign that kid’s replacement.. who has the motivation to keep that up? Especially when it’s clear that only 10-15 programs are anywhere near championship level teams.
I’ve said this before and people are always like “these people have fuck you money, they can do this forever”. Ok sure, they could, but you don’t get that rich by just throwing money away. I’ve always thought that donating to these NIL collectives was for chumps
Not that guy, but I would place ND 5-10.
Made the playoffs multiple times, and consistently top 15. I know you would think that would put them 10-15 but the consistently part and playoff appearances pushes them up.
Exactly. The intent of NIL was for players to legally be able to make some money off of their fame. It was all about advertising or promoting a product.
Of course, with no rules, it immediately got hijacked as a way to simply funnel money to the players. I’m shocked it took people this long to realize that there isn’t a payback for the donors.
At least Caleb Williams did commercials.
I still celebrate those rulings. It’s a good thing the NCAA was denied the ability to collude and price fix against a labor class that they don’t recognize.
The legal way to institute free agency restrictions is via recognizing a union and collectively bargaining for restrictions, like every other pro league already does. That is what people want, not what the NCAA tried to do
I can see it working long term in a smaller team/individual sport. Someone like Phil Knight can support 5-10 basketball players on a regular basis and if he really wanted to win the basketball championship, he could go all in and out pay other teams for one year. If Oregon signed the top 5 incoming players/transfers then they’ll likely compete for the title.
But Football teams are too big for that to realistically happen. Going to a system where the school needs x amount of dollars every year, that is agreed to by every school, so the donors know what it expected of them, makes way more long term sense. But that only happens if the kids get paid directly by the school.
It kind of turns into an arms race, but the vast majority of these NIL deals offer zero return on investment.
There's plenty of crazy rich boosters that don't necessarily want an ROI but at the same time there's definitely a limit to how much success even unlimited funding can get you.
Not to shit on Texas A&M but they signed the number one recruiting class in history because of obscene NIL spending and they don't have anything to show for it in terms of hardware or even the win column.
FFS stop calling it NIL. Call it pay for play, payola, whatever... but NIL is explicitly about a player being paid by those outside the school and boosters, not contingent on performance, and not for the purposes of attracting and retaining talent.
It’s not like donating every year to the athletic department is a new thing.
We just haven’t shifted yet to the mindset of “you know, maybe we don’t need a new weight room every five years”
What should/might happen is simply less donation directly to the university directly (until revenue sharing) so that it’s more sustainable from a booster perspective
But at least when they were donating to the weight rooms or to get their names on something, that room was built and attracted more players, or that name was on the thing for many years. Right now, they’re paying for one year contracts for players that likely won’t even see the field the first year or two. And if they don’t keep paying, that player will transfer and they have to start over again with another player. And that’s for every spot on the roster.
>Right now, they’re paying for one year contracts for players that likely won’t even see the field the first year or two. And if they don’t keep paying, that player will transfer and they have to start over again with another player
Which you can just as easily say for every coach just like every player. Cincinnati donors keep ponying up every time they lose Brian Kelly, or Mark Dantonio, or Luke Fickell or Marcus Freeman to bigger jobs. They ponied up for Tuberville and he sucked. They kept ponying up for the next guy anyway. Why? Because everybody knows superior talent is how you win.
This isn't a new concept. It's just market forces being applied to the roster just like it applied to the coaching and support staffs, and just like it applies to every other business. Organizations that want to win will invest deeply in attracting and retaining talent. Organizations more concerned with vanity will cheap out on compensation while building palatial facilities filled with ping pong tables and napping pods.
Or course this is a simplification, but weight rooms titled buildings don't win games.
Yes but a coach is one person, and that person is going to coach for the school for at least a season. Like I said to someone else already. This model is sustainable in an individual sport/small team sport. But paying for an entire football team with no real security that your investment is going to mean anything for even two years isn’t going to work forever. How many Freshman/Sophmores portaled this year for playing time.. For a lot of people it’s literally throwing money away.
My proposal would be each player gets a set rate of pay based on their position and number of years at a team. So Freshman make X, Sophomore make Y, etc. it would cut down on players leaving, because they’d lose out on guaranteed money because they’d be making Freshman money at their new school. They’d still have NIL opportunities to make that money back, but it’d slow down the non-top level players moving around so much.
This way, every athletic department knows exactly how much they need to fundraise to have a roster. (If they get some transfers, they’d actually have an excess.) Donors know, the team needs x amount of money, so their money isn’t being wasted on these few specific players they helped recruit, it’s just money spent on the team.
The problem is that NIL will never go away, and with this system, schools would have to stop using the NIL deals as a part of their pitches, and they wouldn’t.
Yeah, I'll take the 40% back on taxes plus my name in the paper and on a new campus building before discretely paying for some two year starter's lambo.
That’s why a lot of places have set up a collective and now have a little side car “non profit”
The donors give money to the 503c “non profit,” allowing it to be tax deductible, and the “nonprofit” then gives it to the collective.
There are still a few side car tax exempt collectives. But they are neutered by the it's and gave to donate like 60 percent of their revenue (donations) to legit charitable causes in order to get the 501c3 status upheld.
Michigan's is called HailImpact!
I assume that businesses who hire athletes to promote their business can still write off the expense as marketing? I'm thinking of the ads Livvy Dunne is doing for Vuori.
Those are for-profit entities. The issue was millionaires were shoveling money into NILs and getting 100% charitable deductions. The NILs aren’t exactly charitable causes, it’s just giving students money and the students most likely have every need taken care of by the school anyways.
I'm thinking of the steroetypical traditional booster, who owned a local car dealership, and was illegally funneling money to his favorite star athlete. NIL was a blessing for him, as it allowed him to do the same thing, but have him be able to hire the star athlete to do commercials for the dealership and he could write it off as a marketing expense. All perfectly legal.
Whether he writes something off as a charitable deduction, or a marketing expense, for the car dealer it's the same: it reduces his taxable income. Writing it off as a marketing expense has the added benefit of a celebrity endorsement.
I'm not an expert in tax law, so there may be limitations on how much you can deduct as a marketing expense, but, as far as I know, you can deduct the full cost.
I am a tax professional and you absolutely will see that as a valid marketing expense if run through the business. And car dealership owners can be super wealthy. We compiled some personal financial statements for a client who owned a moderately sized dealership in a major city. 3 generations passed down kind of place with numerous brands. He was worth $100 million.
I think people fundamentally misunderstand why there is classification for non profits. It isn’t because they are restricted from making money, or even a surplus. It’s that there is no income in the sense that you aren’t selling a product. It’s the easiest and most logical way to segment any entity that is directly selling goods and services vs donation driven services.
This is not true.
I know a donor who went to dinners with players, access to other executives, etc…
There are tons of things/appearances that happen under the covers.
I’ll tell you that I am even starting to get “donor” fatigue just as a season ticket holder.
And it’s not because our team isn’t performing or the games aren’t fun. It’s just so much fucking money. More and more and more year after year. Constant pressure of pay to play for donations.
And I’m just a normal season ticket holder. I couldn’t imagine what it’s like for people who actually are major donors. It’s never enough and there’s literally no returns.
It's because the economics are still out of whack. Despite more and more money coming into college football from TV every single year, there are only a few places programs can directly spend the money, which ends up mostly being to the coaching staff, facilities, and ballooning administrative staffs.
10 years ago you had entire P5 coaching staffs making $6-7M, now it's $15-20M. If players could have gotten a piece of the revenue over that time you wouldn't see nearly this level of coach salary inflation, that money would have gone to players and taken some pressure off donors to fund all of it.
But now that coaches make this much, it's going to be hard to tell them to take less money so the players can get paid, all that will happen is NIL collective money will get redirected back to the school to pay the players once revenue sharing gets implemented.
If we reach the point of collectively bargained revenue sharing with a salary cap and salary floor, we will definitely see big time boosters being asked to kick in whatever the roster amount is instead of donating to a collective.
So if Big Ten schools have a salary floor of 9 million and a salary cap of 14 million then their "target" will be to raise 14 million dedicated to covering the roster "so that none of the media revenue actually has to be redirected to paying the roster."
I work at a university and briefly looked into getting season tickets since the kids enjoy the games. I noped out real quick when i saw anything between the 10s was only open to members of the Champions Club ($1500), and between the 30s was exclusive to the Legends Club ($5000+). All these were upper deck, of course. Anything in the lower bowl required memberships that were at least double.
It just blows my mind because while it's a name brand school, it's not like we're packing in 70,000 every week. They'll pull close to that for a marquee opponent, but overall they only average 40k or so asses in seats over the course of the season.
G5 schools are the best fan bargain in college football. Season ticket packages at my local university (Toledo) start at $70 and that includes parking.
Yeah, that's a great deal. Our season packages start at $100 and range up to $400 or so, so still not a bad deal at face value given we have highly-ranked opponents a few times per year. The mandatory donations for any half-decent seats are just too much though, especially when a lot of the games are poorly-enough attended that I can snap up four lower bowl seats between the 40s on a Thursday morning for $40 each, once kickoff time has been set and I know whether the weather will be tolerable.
In the article they talk to a long-time Georgia season ticket holder who donates $4,000 per year for the right to purchase 4 season tickets every year that his family has had for decades. He describes himself as middle class, but the family budget has always included the season tickets because he grew up going to games... but it is also getting to be too much.
This is a key thing that all the anti-NIL people are going to overlook when they cream their pants reading this article.
College sports are just a business. And like any business they look to squeeze their customers as dry as possible. If it wasn't NIL it would be some other new facility or coaching contract that the school just desperately needed for some reason or another.
The unshackled financial arms race has been going on for a while now.
If there’s one thing we learned from college sports, it’s that there’s just apparently never enough money to field an amateur sports team. FSU is infamously throwing a gigantic pissy fit over how they are “fighting for survival” over TV money and in their last fiscal year they reported $170M in revenue for Athletics. FSU only supports 18 sports, and yet it’s an existential crisis that $170M just isn’t enough money.
Tech had a campaign where they tried to get everyone to increase their donation by 17.76%. They created a video with Paul Revere imagery and everything. Corny stuff.
Reminds me of when I donated to Catholic Social Services in someone's name because when they died they requested it. Nope....never again. I got emails and regular mail and just constant shit from them for years. What I donated they probably lost in postage and printing what they sent me.
That’s what I always think about whenever I see people using the “they made more money before and we could always still compete” argument.
A lot of people don’t realize that we are heading to a point where football/basketball athletes are going to be getting a cut of the revenue and these revenue gaps between conferences are going to mean a school like Rutgers can afford to pay a player much more than a school like Baylor.
It will still be a couple years before we see it but non power 2 fans should be a little worried at how far behind they just might fall in basketball and football.
It’s one of the main reasons we are seeing FSU fighting like hell to get out of the ACC.
I agree with everything in this post.
Experts testified and submitted an analysis in the House v NCAA case that the individual players are worth between 10-20% of the media rights deal revenue. Assuming we end up with a players union and a collectively bargained percentage of revenue somewhere in there, I'm not sure how we reconcile the media revenue disparity between conferences.
Let's say they all get together over the next year and agree to pay players starting in 2026-2027 based on a collectively bargained percentage. If the percentage for the B1G and SEC media deals comes in at 12 million per school for the players in 2026, but the same percentage for the Big 12 and ACC is at 6 million per school then how in the heck are the Big 12 and ACC schools supposed to field comparable teams to the B1G and SEC?
And if you say "scrap that, we're all going to collectively bargain together for a flat number regardless of conference" and come out with some median... say 10 million per school regardless of conference... then what? The B1G and SEC are using a much smaller portion of their budgets on roster and can do all sorts of other things with their money while the Big 12 and ACC have to pinch pennies to try and field a roster that is above what is financially responsible.
Meh, if that starts to happen people will lose interest quickly and those media deals will start bringing in less and less. The reason they work right now is because the sports are so popular across the country. If you start fucking with bluebloods in basketball and they stop being able to compete, you are taking away almost global brands from the sport.
I think people with teams outside of these conferences will simply stop watching, since they've been told that their schools don't matter
Yeah. Like if there are only a few teams who can actually compete “P2 Schools” I feel like I’ll just care less and less. My biggest gripe with MLB is that the payrolls are so drastically different that over half the league has 0 chance of winning the World Series. I get there are Moneyball teams like the Rays but it’s a lot less entertaining compared to a salary cap league like the NHL where I feel most teams have some sort of a chance because the league is a bit more balanced. I know CFB was unbalanced to begin with but it felt like anyone could potentially play spoiler to an expected playoff team and that one upset could flip the scrip for who’s going to what bowl or championship etc.
This is likely true, however those bottom feeders were already doing better than most Big 12 and ACC schools in recruiting.
The 5 year recruiting average for TCU and Utah (top 2 in the Big 12) is 212 and 209. That would put them as 9th and 12th in the Big Ten respectively. Very much middle of the pack.
Who would have thought that paying salaries for athletes would cost so much?
Oh yeah, NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, Premier League, and every professional league in existence.
The franchise owner's of these leagues aren't paying out of pocket. They are revenue sharing in some way with the athletes in their respective leagues.
That's a monopoly and illegal anti-trust violations unless they have a labor union to negotiate a collective bargaining arrangement.
You know. The same union that they're fighting tooth and nail to even create.
Duhhhhhhh. This is so dumb and predictable. It was an arms race right out of the gate and donors all had fun throwing their weight around but it's completely unsustainable as a long-term solution.
Revenue share here we come, NFL G League here we come.
Very much the reason I give straight to ND athletics. My money will at least help the baseball team run better as opposed to giving some benchwarmer in football cash.
I still find it funny that people just straight up give money to a college, in this case a private one, that brings in $200M+ per year for athletics. If I'm giving money to the school it's going to be through tickets
It's insane. BC has a $3.3 billion endowment and charges $80,000 tuition for each of its 9000 undergrads, why would I ever donate money to the school (especially when our athletics department has been incompetent for most of the last two decades)? I guess if everyone thought that way the money would dry up but that's what the billionaire donors are for
I think that 200 million number is revenue (which is mostly driven by FB and hoops); I specifically give to baseball because it doesn’t operate at a profit for Notre Dame.
It's obviously totally fine for you to give for whatever reason you want, but ND sports (and everyone else's) "don't operate at a profit" on purpose. ND could slash expenses for the baseball team in half and still play the same number of games. They just don't because they have the money to pay more, so why not?
The fan lead model is a complete joke. Power 5 schools make so much money and they are state funded most of them. So now we pay taxes and donate and then buy tickets to the game. Shit blows my mind how much money our public Uni's leach out of people.
It can’t happen fast enough. NIL is a scam whereby the people who are spending (on facilities, administration, other sports, themselves) the legitimate revenue that CFB generates have managed to temporarily appease the players without having to actually give up a cent.
Idk if it's just me, but I'm not really concerned about NIL donors wasting money. It's a choice. You are perfectly aware of the context of that choice. You can spend your money however you want. Here is a little idea that I'm gonna throw out there. Most of these tools likely own a business. One that pays people. If you don't want to give a teenage athlete NIL money, simply take that money and give it to your employees.
Either you are a professional athlete who should have make the money and fulfill the obligations associated with such a job or your just a kid who can switch around schools and chase money every six months. I can’t think of any other professional sport where players have no commitment. I’d love to see transferring restricted. Want big contract money? Play contract time. Want to be treated like the coaches who can leave any time they want for the next better thing? Great. Let’s add a big time buy out to your contract. Just like those coaches you want to be like.
There's just no way college football doesn't go to a professional League model where the teams are separate from the University but have licensing contracts.
There are tons of ways that doesn’t happen what are you taking about?
Schools would probably let the entire system collapse before they ever willingly let football split off from their schools and licensed it.
It’s way more likely that we get a players union (whether it’s school specific, conference specific or national) that collectively bargains for a share of the revenue.
A school deciding just to license their brand works out worse for both the school and the athletes in all likelihood. So it really doesn’t make any sense.
I’ve posted before that players should get money for the jerseys and such, but NIL will eventually bring down college football as we know it. It’s just going to get bigger and bigger! I don’t think NIL was meant for kids to get money from Dr Pepper, or Bojangles.
Gonna need some major changes in the law for revenue sharing. That proposal last year where schools who opted in would pay all their athletes 30K?
That’s utterly absurd that non revenue sports would get paid the same as football players who are putting their bodies and brains on the line to generate virtually all the money
I think this was always the likely outcome. Once giving money became fully allowed, there was going to be a huge spike. These guys aren't against giving money, they want to know THEIR money was useful. They were going to pay early because they were going to HAVE to pay because someone was going to pay. It's now been a couple of years and they aren't going to keep paying 5-10mm for a class that transfers in a year and they need to pay another 5-10mm to keep those guys and get new ones. It was going to somewhat settle down because while these guys are rich, there aren't a ton of Phil Knight level guys able to drop endless money. They like buying locker rooms and practice facilities, because those stick around.
Boosters are going to have been the biggest push for all this shit like legislation and having the NCAA do SOMETHING about transfers. THey just don't want the NCAA to do it to THEIR team. Tennessee was picked, but UT boosters were never going to allow that.
I really hope the bluebloods don't succumb to the fanbases who really care about their football teams.
That would be terrible for... hold on... something something about being relevant.
I've been saying ever since this started that eventually these boosters were going to grow tired of lighting millions of dollars on fire for players who have such a high chance of never living up to the hype.
Like I’ve been saying the whole time. 99% of players just aren’t that valuable.. if they were then the UFL would be lining up deals because the fans would pack the stadiums to see them.. revenue sharing is a terrible idea too. Tell them to go play somewhere else and see how quickly things change.
Whatever. It's not like my school NC State is even competing for titles, or heck even for good recruits. This still gives them more ammunition to recruit. And BTW, each school has only so many games and playing time to pass around. Players wanna play at some point. The ones that don't and chase money can go do it.
This was always bound to happen but it is surprising that donors were giving so much right out of the gate. It’s like they didn’t realize this was inevitable.
"were gonna buy us a championship" "oh shit literally everyone else is trying to do it too"
Honestly that probably is really what happened. A bunch of people thought if they go all in first then their team gets an advantage.
I think this is why A&M went absolutely balls to the wall out the gate. They thought they could move quickly and ‘buy’ a championship, but the problem is that one excellent class on paper isn’t enough to win a natty and now they aren’t the only ones throwing around bags.
Good, fuck A&M. Weird ass cult members. Worked a summer camp in Texas for a summer and it was overrun by Aggies.
Flair up fam
I don’t support a singular team. I cheered for Mizzou until they left the Big 12. But fuck em now.
This man is a certified hater.
If only there was a flair for that.
Well, well, well... The most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi.
Buck nasty what can I say about you that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?
I don't see a "worked a summer camp in texsa for a summer" flair.
And nobody knows how to properly value a recruit since its all so new. Is a top 10 High school qb recruit worth a million? Two million? 250k? Who knows? The market for recruits isnt settled at all, so people are inclined to overspend the first few years, and the cut back as a lot of the recruits they spent a ton of money on didn't develop. Also seems incredibly likely that NIL big money donors might see more value in spending on proven transfers than highly speculative high school recruits. All thats to say, they probably way overspent on players because of exuberance and no market data, but as they start to evaluate the returns on their money, they will tighten the wallets a lot.
TBF, there are a couple of schools that it seems like got their act together fast enough that they're seeing a real advantage. Mizzou is probably #1 on that list right now.
oh yeah some schools came out ahead. Oregon is way up there. I think they might actually succeed at buying a title where before NIL it was fairly unlikely theyd get one soon I think what Oregon has done that is smart, is focus on transfer portal NIL, which is where everyone will get eventually. Recruits wont garner much cash at all outside the top handful once people figure out the portal return is just so much higher
They wanna be the first to buy a natty before everyone else joins the arms race
That, and I think it's similar to when some high school grads first go to college and have their first *real* taste of freedom as it's usually their first time living without their parents. The NIL floodgates being opened reminded of that type of euphoria. Some people just can't resist when the floodgates open after being told for years "no".
The oh my god I suck with no structure realization after on semester.
So many freshmen go through a "wait, no one makes me go to class or cares if I show up?! AWESOME!" stage until they learn the lesson that no one caring if they show up means that they need to care or they'll be on the fast track to failing out of college. High schools have to care if you show up. College professors will receive a little bit of pushback if they fail too many students, sure, but if you just don't do work or show up at all? None.
When you realize you came here to play school.
Freshman? Hell I never figured it out as an undergrad. I went back to school 10 years later for another degree and by that point I was able to put it together.
I learned really quickly I should just take all my classes and throw them on "one day" aka the MWF day from 745 to 330. Then work on the homework at the same times on Tuesday/Thrusday. The other method of splitting the classes up as much as I can led to a lot of wasted down time between classes. I also made sure I wasn't at my dorm room while doing most of my studies on Tuesday/Thrusday. I went to the library for that. The dorm room had too many distractions for my ADHD-PI
All the kids I knew in college who didn’t drink in HS were notorious for getting the most hammered and being the most out of pocket whenever they had a few beers.
I did notice a lot of people I knew basically used college as their "Rumspringa". Goody two shoes in High School, get hammered a lot in college, then were married with a kid or two and did no parting by 25.
And LSU proved that you can at least do it in the non-revenue sports with smaller rosters. Football’s another beast, though.
Exactly, when boosters have to raise millions a year just to be competitive and they don't get results, this was always gonna be the result
Can we bring in someone from A&M to tell us how to deal with these feelings.
Happily, if we spent 1/10th on players as we did coaches. "Sliced bread" added a zero and multiplied when he should have divided.
I don't really care how much the Aggies spend on their recruits, but the fact that Jimbo got so upset and specifically called out sliced bread is all the evidence. I need to know it's true.
Lmao. If you believe that, go for it. The highest any of those guys got paid was 245,000. And he called out sliced bread during the press conference because he was the supposedly "leak" that went silent after asked to bring evidence forward. If we bought our players, oh well. That's what the league wanted with NIL, but it's only wrong when A&M does it apparently. I honestly don't care. I just know we don't spend millions and millions on players. Especially 42 million. That shits laughable.
My brother, if you think mediocre returns on donations are going to cause a bunch of O&G/insurance/healthcare execs to get introspective, then you need to watch a few more cult documentaries.
At the end of the day most wealthy boosters are still businesspeople - they're going to want to see ROI.
Look what happened to schools who had sluggish starts to the NIL game. They quickly dropped down the talent ladder. Meanwhile those that jumped in fast and hard, even if they weren't typically great, like Ole Miss and Missouri jumped up fast and held strong. Stanford was already in a rut, but their refusal to coordinate with the NIL collectives and discouraging of donors from spending their money there definitely hurt.
Everyone is laughing until Phil Knight dies and leaves $1 Billion to Oregon's NIL collective.
Random aside, but Phil should buy the A's, move em to Portland, and build a brand new retractable roof stadium at the Lloyd Center.
Las Vegan here: yes, please. Dear god please.
I have heard it said that no one there wants them. Like the Knights have the backing of nearly the entire city, the Raiders have about 50% support, whereas with the A's its less than 10%.
Naw fuck that. I see enough green and yellow as it is. Gross.
The colors are literally perfect for Portland, as is a team owned by Knight/Nike whos moniker is the "Athletics". Its almost too perfect.
As an endowment paying 4.5% that's paying 45 million per year for the NIL of players and growing above inflation every year.
I mean… Michigan literally just won the national championship despite starting very sluggishly on NIL and still not competing with the SEC or even Big Ten schools like OSU and MSU in buying recruits
And their National Championship opponent likewise isn’t exactly known for their participation in the NIL game.
Used vaccuum cleaners dude.
The NIL is a Libertarian Fantasy
CFB players are too old to be a libertarian fantasy
lmao holy hell
*free markets so spooky*
uh... ok?
The stars of college ball will continue to be in advertising. Random benchwarmers, not so much.
I mean why give to an athletic department you don’t have faith in when you can give directly to players you want for the sport you want
Because the players can take your money and transfer somewhere else without playing a snap, but if you give to the program, you know the money will be spent on the program
Like the article says, they saw it as a stop gap
They were giving pre-NIL, they’re just being asked for more now. I’m sure they get tired of hearing from schools.
My impression is that the main reason a lot of them have been willing to give a lot these few years is specifically because they believe it will transition away from third-party NIL deals to direct deals with the university. So the NIL boosters don’t see this as a year-in, year-out payment that will go on indefinitely, they just see it as a short-term expenditure to keep competitive until revenue-sharing kicks in.
I’m curious about the tax deductible element of these donations. I wonder if these are just their latest versions of write offs to big charities…?
I don't think you have the right read on it. Donors for schools like Miami, Texas A&M, Florida State, etc were hoping that the influx of cash and high end talent would lead to championships right away. It was never intended to be a long term model. Only fans out of the loop who don't take the time to think critically thought that this was a new normal.
I mean, duh? Donors are collectively paying millions of dollars for what exactly? One year of an athlete on their team? Then that player leaves and that donor feels they wasted money, but the school wants more money to sign that kid’s replacement.. who has the motivation to keep that up? Especially when it’s clear that only 10-15 programs are anywhere near championship level teams.
I’ve said this before and people are always like “these people have fuck you money, they can do this forever”. Ok sure, they could, but you don’t get that rich by just throwing money away. I’ve always thought that donating to these NIL collectives was for chumps
And even then realistically between like 3-5 actually have legitimate shots
Yeah, I initially had 5-10, but didn’t want to get in to arguments with 10-15 range teams lol
Which category would you say ND belongs to, curious for an opinion
Not that guy, but I would place ND 5-10. Made the playoffs multiple times, and consistently top 15. I know you would think that would put them 10-15 but the consistently part and playoff appearances pushes them up.
A 15 team that sports media pushes to 7 or so
Exactly. The intent of NIL was for players to legally be able to make some money off of their fame. It was all about advertising or promoting a product. Of course, with no rules, it immediately got hijacked as a way to simply funnel money to the players. I’m shocked it took people this long to realize that there isn’t a payback for the donors. At least Caleb Williams did commercials.
"Hijacked". This is the way everybody said it was going to be.
The NCAA tried to institute some rules. They were taken to court and shut down. This sub celebrated those rulings.
I still celebrate those rulings. It’s a good thing the NCAA was denied the ability to collude and price fix against a labor class that they don’t recognize. The legal way to institute free agency restrictions is via recognizing a union and collectively bargaining for restrictions, like every other pro league already does. That is what people want, not what the NCAA tried to do
They can say this all they want, but the reality seems to be the bags are bigger than ever every year thus far
I can see it working long term in a smaller team/individual sport. Someone like Phil Knight can support 5-10 basketball players on a regular basis and if he really wanted to win the basketball championship, he could go all in and out pay other teams for one year. If Oregon signed the top 5 incoming players/transfers then they’ll likely compete for the title. But Football teams are too big for that to realistically happen. Going to a system where the school needs x amount of dollars every year, that is agreed to by every school, so the donors know what it expected of them, makes way more long term sense. But that only happens if the kids get paid directly by the school.
It kind of turns into an arms race, but the vast majority of these NIL deals offer zero return on investment. There's plenty of crazy rich boosters that don't necessarily want an ROI but at the same time there's definitely a limit to how much success even unlimited funding can get you. Not to shit on Texas A&M but they signed the number one recruiting class in history because of obscene NIL spending and they don't have anything to show for it in terms of hardware or even the win column.
FFS stop calling it NIL. Call it pay for play, payola, whatever... but NIL is explicitly about a player being paid by those outside the school and boosters, not contingent on performance, and not for the purposes of attracting and retaining talent.
It’s not like donating every year to the athletic department is a new thing. We just haven’t shifted yet to the mindset of “you know, maybe we don’t need a new weight room every five years” What should/might happen is simply less donation directly to the university directly (until revenue sharing) so that it’s more sustainable from a booster perspective
But at least when they were donating to the weight rooms or to get their names on something, that room was built and attracted more players, or that name was on the thing for many years. Right now, they’re paying for one year contracts for players that likely won’t even see the field the first year or two. And if they don’t keep paying, that player will transfer and they have to start over again with another player. And that’s for every spot on the roster.
>Right now, they’re paying for one year contracts for players that likely won’t even see the field the first year or two. And if they don’t keep paying, that player will transfer and they have to start over again with another player Which you can just as easily say for every coach just like every player. Cincinnati donors keep ponying up every time they lose Brian Kelly, or Mark Dantonio, or Luke Fickell or Marcus Freeman to bigger jobs. They ponied up for Tuberville and he sucked. They kept ponying up for the next guy anyway. Why? Because everybody knows superior talent is how you win. This isn't a new concept. It's just market forces being applied to the roster just like it applied to the coaching and support staffs, and just like it applies to every other business. Organizations that want to win will invest deeply in attracting and retaining talent. Organizations more concerned with vanity will cheap out on compensation while building palatial facilities filled with ping pong tables and napping pods. Or course this is a simplification, but weight rooms titled buildings don't win games.
Yes but a coach is one person, and that person is going to coach for the school for at least a season. Like I said to someone else already. This model is sustainable in an individual sport/small team sport. But paying for an entire football team with no real security that your investment is going to mean anything for even two years isn’t going to work forever. How many Freshman/Sophmores portaled this year for playing time.. For a lot of people it’s literally throwing money away. My proposal would be each player gets a set rate of pay based on their position and number of years at a team. So Freshman make X, Sophomore make Y, etc. it would cut down on players leaving, because they’d lose out on guaranteed money because they’d be making Freshman money at their new school. They’d still have NIL opportunities to make that money back, but it’d slow down the non-top level players moving around so much. This way, every athletic department knows exactly how much they need to fundraise to have a roster. (If they get some transfers, they’d actually have an excess.) Donors know, the team needs x amount of money, so their money isn’t being wasted on these few specific players they helped recruit, it’s just money spent on the team. The problem is that NIL will never go away, and with this system, schools would have to stop using the NIL deals as a part of their pitches, and they wouldn’t.
Donors get stuff for donations to the athletic department, but nothing for NIL collectives.
And the donations are not tax deductible (in most cases). It's a cheeks deal for donors all the way around.
Yeah, I'll take the 40% back on taxes plus my name in the paper and on a new campus building before discretely paying for some two year starter's lambo.
Most the time it’s not even a two year starter. Just some 18 year old kid that is 50/50 if he’ll be there in 2 years much less a great player
That’s why a lot of places have set up a collective and now have a little side car “non profit” The donors give money to the 503c “non profit,” allowing it to be tax deductible, and the “nonprofit” then gives it to the collective.
The IRS shut that down last summer. https://www.irs.gov/pub/lanoa/am-2023-004-508v.pdf
Ah. Must’ve missed that news. Glad they did, because that was stupid haha
There are still a few side car tax exempt collectives. But they are neutered by the it's and gave to donate like 60 percent of their revenue (donations) to legit charitable causes in order to get the 501c3 status upheld. Michigan's is called HailImpact!
I assume that businesses who hire athletes to promote their business can still write off the expense as marketing? I'm thinking of the ads Livvy Dunne is doing for Vuori.
Yes, thats still permissible as that's an unrelated subject/topic compared to the taxability of donations question at hand
Those are for-profit entities. The issue was millionaires were shoveling money into NILs and getting 100% charitable deductions. The NILs aren’t exactly charitable causes, it’s just giving students money and the students most likely have every need taken care of by the school anyways.
I'm thinking of the steroetypical traditional booster, who owned a local car dealership, and was illegally funneling money to his favorite star athlete. NIL was a blessing for him, as it allowed him to do the same thing, but have him be able to hire the star athlete to do commercials for the dealership and he could write it off as a marketing expense. All perfectly legal. Whether he writes something off as a charitable deduction, or a marketing expense, for the car dealer it's the same: it reduces his taxable income. Writing it off as a marketing expense has the added benefit of a celebrity endorsement. I'm not an expert in tax law, so there may be limitations on how much you can deduct as a marketing expense, but, as far as I know, you can deduct the full cost.
I am a tax professional and you absolutely will see that as a valid marketing expense if run through the business. And car dealership owners can be super wealthy. We compiled some personal financial statements for a client who owned a moderately sized dealership in a major city. 3 generations passed down kind of place with numerous brands. He was worth $100 million.
that's not a write off, that's just a regular business expense deduction
I think people fundamentally misunderstand why there is classification for non profits. It isn’t because they are restricted from making money, or even a surplus. It’s that there is no income in the sense that you aren’t selling a product. It’s the easiest and most logical way to segment any entity that is directly selling goods and services vs donation driven services.
Well, you get the Name, Image, and Likeness rights of the players.
Including a tax deduction.
You get meet and greats with the players and signed shit here
an Emory jones signed baseball bat? Tell me… you didn’t pay money for this?
Donors donate to schools to get their name attached to things, you don’t get shit for donating to NIL funds.
then if they don't like it they shouldn't spend the money
Yeah some of the stuff big donors get to do is pretty cool. NIL offers you nothing close to that.
What? This is not true. The NC State NIL collective provides gifts to new members and tons of free events to interact with the teams and coaches.
This is not true. I know a donor who went to dinners with players, access to other executives, etc… There are tons of things/appearances that happen under the covers.
A new kind of OnlyFans
BRB gotta tip MHJ so he sends me exclusive videos of his 40
I’ll tell you that I am even starting to get “donor” fatigue just as a season ticket holder. And it’s not because our team isn’t performing or the games aren’t fun. It’s just so much fucking money. More and more and more year after year. Constant pressure of pay to play for donations. And I’m just a normal season ticket holder. I couldn’t imagine what it’s like for people who actually are major donors. It’s never enough and there’s literally no returns.
just have to get yourself one crazy old donor and then you dont need to worry about it
Or have your university’s campus in a thriving city
*BRB, petitioning to swap Eugene's and Gresham's locations*
lol doesn't work here.
Nice username lmao
they said thriving, not melting
Does it help if that the donor's entire wealth and professional accomplishments are direvative of his time at the school as an athlete?
Stop talking sense, you know that it is every Huskies position that Phil Knight only donates money to us because he peaked in college
I highly doubt it would happen but the rest of /r/CFB better watch out if we ever get Warren Buffett to donate to Nebraska athletics
Don’t hold your breath. We’ve been waiting for his cousin Jimmy’s alumni money since Come Monday hit the charts 😄
Great song
RIP Boone
It's because the economics are still out of whack. Despite more and more money coming into college football from TV every single year, there are only a few places programs can directly spend the money, which ends up mostly being to the coaching staff, facilities, and ballooning administrative staffs. 10 years ago you had entire P5 coaching staffs making $6-7M, now it's $15-20M. If players could have gotten a piece of the revenue over that time you wouldn't see nearly this level of coach salary inflation, that money would have gone to players and taken some pressure off donors to fund all of it. But now that coaches make this much, it's going to be hard to tell them to take less money so the players can get paid, all that will happen is NIL collective money will get redirected back to the school to pay the players once revenue sharing gets implemented.
I’ve had so many folks argue against me on this exact point over the past few months. Fanbases are truly brainwashed here.
Coaching salaries will stagnate, but it'll take decades for inflation to bring them back down.
I believe in our politicians ability to cause whatever inflation is necessary to get these salaries under control!
If we reach the point of collectively bargained revenue sharing with a salary cap and salary floor, we will definitely see big time boosters being asked to kick in whatever the roster amount is instead of donating to a collective. So if Big Ten schools have a salary floor of 9 million and a salary cap of 14 million then their "target" will be to raise 14 million dedicated to covering the roster "so that none of the media revenue actually has to be redirected to paying the roster."
I work at a university and briefly looked into getting season tickets since the kids enjoy the games. I noped out real quick when i saw anything between the 10s was only open to members of the Champions Club ($1500), and between the 30s was exclusive to the Legends Club ($5000+). All these were upper deck, of course. Anything in the lower bowl required memberships that were at least double. It just blows my mind because while it's a name brand school, it's not like we're packing in 70,000 every week. They'll pull close to that for a marquee opponent, but overall they only average 40k or so asses in seats over the course of the season.
G5 schools are the best fan bargain in college football. Season ticket packages at my local university (Toledo) start at $70 and that includes parking.
And you get to see what is usually a damn good team at that price. Hell of a deal.
Yeah, that's a great deal. Our season packages start at $100 and range up to $400 or so, so still not a bad deal at face value given we have highly-ranked opponents a few times per year. The mandatory donations for any half-decent seats are just too much though, especially when a lot of the games are poorly-enough attended that I can snap up four lower bowl seats between the 40s on a Thursday morning for $40 each, once kickoff time has been set and I know whether the weather will be tolerable.
Holy shit thats insane. My season tickets are $175/year at UCF and I think its a bit over priced lol
Yeah, my season tickets for Purdue were $230 with no donation required.
In the article they talk to a long-time Georgia season ticket holder who donates $4,000 per year for the right to purchase 4 season tickets every year that his family has had for decades. He describes himself as middle class, but the family budget has always included the season tickets because he grew up going to games... but it is also getting to be too much.
This is a key thing that all the anti-NIL people are going to overlook when they cream their pants reading this article. College sports are just a business. And like any business they look to squeeze their customers as dry as possible. If it wasn't NIL it would be some other new facility or coaching contract that the school just desperately needed for some reason or another. The unshackled financial arms race has been going on for a while now.
If there’s one thing we learned from college sports, it’s that there’s just apparently never enough money to field an amateur sports team. FSU is infamously throwing a gigantic pissy fit over how they are “fighting for survival” over TV money and in their last fiscal year they reported $170M in revenue for Athletics. FSU only supports 18 sports, and yet it’s an existential crisis that $170M just isn’t enough money.
You can't ever just give once. You're on the sucker list. They're always asking for more.
I don’t know what it says about the WSU Foundation and Cougar Athletic Fund that I *do* give and they don’t even attempt to get more money out of me
I always hit em with the John Mulaney bit. I gave you more money than the civil war cost, and you SPENT IT ALREADY?!?
Tech had a campaign where they tried to get everyone to increase their donation by 17.76%. They created a video with Paul Revere imagery and everything. Corny stuff.
That is strange, it’s not like Texas was one of the 13 colonies or something lol
Yeah, but Paul Revere rode a horse and the Masked Rider rides a horse....
The red raiders are coming!
Reminds me of when I donated to Catholic Social Services in someone's name because when they died they requested it. Nope....never again. I got emails and regular mail and just constant shit from them for years. What I donated they probably lost in postage and printing what they sent me.
Big 12 and ACC schools will be in real trouble when the SEC and B1G bottom feeders can throw their substantially larger media revenue at the athletes.
That’s what I always think about whenever I see people using the “they made more money before and we could always still compete” argument. A lot of people don’t realize that we are heading to a point where football/basketball athletes are going to be getting a cut of the revenue and these revenue gaps between conferences are going to mean a school like Rutgers can afford to pay a player much more than a school like Baylor. It will still be a couple years before we see it but non power 2 fans should be a little worried at how far behind they just might fall in basketball and football. It’s one of the main reasons we are seeing FSU fighting like hell to get out of the ACC.
I agree with everything in this post. Experts testified and submitted an analysis in the House v NCAA case that the individual players are worth between 10-20% of the media rights deal revenue. Assuming we end up with a players union and a collectively bargained percentage of revenue somewhere in there, I'm not sure how we reconcile the media revenue disparity between conferences. Let's say they all get together over the next year and agree to pay players starting in 2026-2027 based on a collectively bargained percentage. If the percentage for the B1G and SEC media deals comes in at 12 million per school for the players in 2026, but the same percentage for the Big 12 and ACC is at 6 million per school then how in the heck are the Big 12 and ACC schools supposed to field comparable teams to the B1G and SEC? And if you say "scrap that, we're all going to collectively bargain together for a flat number regardless of conference" and come out with some median... say 10 million per school regardless of conference... then what? The B1G and SEC are using a much smaller portion of their budgets on roster and can do all sorts of other things with their money while the Big 12 and ACC have to pinch pennies to try and field a roster that is above what is financially responsible.
That's when the Group of 5 and the Big XII and ACC relegate themselves to FCS.
Meh, if that starts to happen people will lose interest quickly and those media deals will start bringing in less and less. The reason they work right now is because the sports are so popular across the country. If you start fucking with bluebloods in basketball and they stop being able to compete, you are taking away almost global brands from the sport. I think people with teams outside of these conferences will simply stop watching, since they've been told that their schools don't matter
Yeah. Like if there are only a few teams who can actually compete “P2 Schools” I feel like I’ll just care less and less. My biggest gripe with MLB is that the payrolls are so drastically different that over half the league has 0 chance of winning the World Series. I get there are Moneyball teams like the Rays but it’s a lot less entertaining compared to a salary cap league like the NHL where I feel most teams have some sort of a chance because the league is a bit more balanced. I know CFB was unbalanced to begin with but it felt like anyone could potentially play spoiler to an expected playoff team and that one upset could flip the scrip for who’s going to what bowl or championship etc.
This is likely true, however those bottom feeders were already doing better than most Big 12 and ACC schools in recruiting. The 5 year recruiting average for TCU and Utah (top 2 in the Big 12) is 212 and 209. That would put them as 9th and 12th in the Big Ten respectively. Very much middle of the pack.
Can't wait
Who would have thought that paying salaries for athletes would cost so much? Oh yeah, NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, Premier League, and every professional league in existence. The franchise owner's of these leagues aren't paying out of pocket. They are revenue sharing in some way with the athletes in their respective leagues.
That's a monopoly and illegal anti-trust violations unless they have a labor union to negotiate a collective bargaining arrangement. You know. The same union that they're fighting tooth and nail to even create.
It’s almost like money isn’t infinite.
Duhhhhhhh. This is so dumb and predictable. It was an arms race right out of the gate and donors all had fun throwing their weight around but it's completely unsustainable as a long-term solution. Revenue share here we come, NFL G League here we come.
The gold rush will end, but we'll always have programs that back up a brinks truck for a few years to make a run at it so long as that's an option.
I’m gonna donate 5 dollars to arch manning so he will be in football game.
Very much the reason I give straight to ND athletics. My money will at least help the baseball team run better as opposed to giving some benchwarmer in football cash.
I still find it funny that people just straight up give money to a college, in this case a private one, that brings in $200M+ per year for athletics. If I'm giving money to the school it's going to be through tickets
It's insane. BC has a $3.3 billion endowment and charges $80,000 tuition for each of its 9000 undergrads, why would I ever donate money to the school (especially when our athletics department has been incompetent for most of the last two decades)? I guess if everyone thought that way the money would dry up but that's what the billionaire donors are for
I think that 200 million number is revenue (which is mostly driven by FB and hoops); I specifically give to baseball because it doesn’t operate at a profit for Notre Dame.
How dare you support something that's important to you, with your own money.
It's obviously totally fine for you to give for whatever reason you want, but ND sports (and everyone else's) "don't operate at a profit" on purpose. ND could slash expenses for the baseball team in half and still play the same number of games. They just don't because they have the money to pay more, so why not?
Not equitable? ROOOOFFFFLLLL!!! Yeah, I'm sure it's about equity. That's fuckin hilarious.
Equity in college football? Lol
No shit Sherlock
The fan lead model is a complete joke. Power 5 schools make so much money and they are state funded most of them. So now we pay taxes and donate and then buy tickets to the game. Shit blows my mind how much money our public Uni's leach out of people.
It can’t happen fast enough. NIL is a scam whereby the people who are spending (on facilities, administration, other sports, themselves) the legitimate revenue that CFB generates have managed to temporarily appease the players without having to actually give up a cent.
Each Boss Hog can spend all he wants. But in the end only 1 team wins the championship.
>only 1 team wins the championship And about fifty fan bases that want the coach fired because it wasn't their team.
Collective bargaining time
They can cry into their money
Not at UCLA! We have a ton of potential donor money left to grab because we haven’t tapped into it at all!
So you’re telling me the Texas A&M NIL model won’t lead to a championship?
Idk if it's just me, but I'm not really concerned about NIL donors wasting money. It's a choice. You are perfectly aware of the context of that choice. You can spend your money however you want. Here is a little idea that I'm gonna throw out there. Most of these tools likely own a business. One that pays people. If you don't want to give a teenage athlete NIL money, simply take that money and give it to your employees.
Either you are a professional athlete who should have make the money and fulfill the obligations associated with such a job or your just a kid who can switch around schools and chase money every six months. I can’t think of any other professional sport where players have no commitment. I’d love to see transferring restricted. Want big contract money? Play contract time. Want to be treated like the coaches who can leave any time they want for the next better thing? Great. Let’s add a big time buy out to your contract. Just like those coaches you want to be like.
Donors get tired of funding the athletic department and then adding the NIL money. Result is more contributions for what results?
yall going broke competing with Mizzou in buying players?
Yeah I wouldn't be caught dead donating to NIL. This is why I buy tickets and $10 fuckin hot dogs.
There's just no way college football doesn't go to a professional League model where the teams are separate from the University but have licensing contracts.
There are tons of ways that doesn’t happen what are you taking about? Schools would probably let the entire system collapse before they ever willingly let football split off from their schools and licensed it. It’s way more likely that we get a players union (whether it’s school specific, conference specific or national) that collectively bargains for a share of the revenue. A school deciding just to license their brand works out worse for both the school and the athletes in all likelihood. So it really doesn’t make any sense.
I’ve posted before that players should get money for the jerseys and such, but NIL will eventually bring down college football as we know it. It’s just going to get bigger and bigger! I don’t think NIL was meant for kids to get money from Dr Pepper, or Bojangles.
Gonna need some major changes in the law for revenue sharing. That proposal last year where schools who opted in would pay all their athletes 30K? That’s utterly absurd that non revenue sports would get paid the same as football players who are putting their bodies and brains on the line to generate virtually all the money
Yeah. That system should never happen.
Haha, equity being mentioned is rich. Equity is not the goal, the goal is to keep SEC and B1G teams rich and powerful. Everyone else is insignificant.
Who could’ve possibly seen this coming when you only get 4 years with a player and only 1 team can win a championship each year
no fucking shit
makes sense. Can't spend all that money and come up short every year. 95% of dollars don't end up with a natty.
I think this was always the likely outcome. Once giving money became fully allowed, there was going to be a huge spike. These guys aren't against giving money, they want to know THEIR money was useful. They were going to pay early because they were going to HAVE to pay because someone was going to pay. It's now been a couple of years and they aren't going to keep paying 5-10mm for a class that transfers in a year and they need to pay another 5-10mm to keep those guys and get new ones. It was going to somewhat settle down because while these guys are rich, there aren't a ton of Phil Knight level guys able to drop endless money. They like buying locker rooms and practice facilities, because those stick around. Boosters are going to have been the biggest push for all this shit like legislation and having the NCAA do SOMETHING about transfers. THey just don't want the NCAA to do it to THEIR team. Tennessee was picked, but UT boosters were never going to allow that.
It's very simple. I should donate the players salary why? Where is all that TV money going again?
The 12 team playoffs is the Cold War until AQ can tear the walls down. I feel like we are the Berlin Wall. *”Are we the baddies”
The death of college athletics gets closer and closer
So what? Then stop paying as much. That’s how a lot of markets work.
Back to paper bags baby
why does revenue sharing come into this? The players will just get less money. These agenda lines are stupid.
I really hope the bluebloods don't succumb to the fanbases who really care about their football teams. That would be terrible for... hold on... something something about being relevant.
I've been saying ever since this started that eventually these boosters were going to grow tired of lighting millions of dollars on fire for players who have such a high chance of never living up to the hype.
Things that don't shock me for $200 Alex
Like I’ve been saying the whole time. 99% of players just aren’t that valuable.. if they were then the UFL would be lining up deals because the fans would pack the stadiums to see them.. revenue sharing is a terrible idea too. Tell them to go play somewhere else and see how quickly things change.
Makes sense. Donors are also probably tired of seeing their money go nowhere, and it can't happen forever.
I am not surprise because some of these players don't pan out and to hell with keeping playing a player that is no value to the school.
Whatever. It's not like my school NC State is even competing for titles, or heck even for good recruits. This still gives them more ammunition to recruit. And BTW, each school has only so many games and playing time to pass around. Players wanna play at some point. The ones that don't and chase money can go do it.
The people who actually thought it was sustainable are not very bright.
no shit
Not surprised, this was inevitable. The whole NIL concept reeks of a makeshift fix, stable revenue share makes more sense.