ADVERTISEMENT

NIL - Current State of Affairs

Looks like pay to play will lower the talent level for college players,
The top talent will opt out to go play professional
Why? Follow the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ward Jr
I’m telling you. This is all going to run into trouble within a couple years. Everybody now is trying to fund the collectives under the misguided thought that if you just pay the right players that vast improvement and a spot in the playoff is just around the corner. Wrong. With everybody doing it the playing field will virtually stay the same. And since the elite have the fan bases entrenched they will raise more than anyone. When folks realize they are saddled with funding all this, while still expected to pay big money for the right to buy a ticket, a nice outlay for the the ticket and parking too boot, the fan that doesn’t just have deep pockets is going to stop funding these collectives unless they have seen massive improvement. Folks are going to start taking the attitude that with the millions the major conferences dole out to all the schools that the individual schools can do pay for something on the athletic side themselves. If they don’t make massive changes to the NIL this will surely happen. Some of the money these kids are getting are past ridiculous. And this was not at all how this was intended to work, but the
NCAA didn’t have the sense to put up some guardrails to prevent it. And it is going to cause issues in the locker rooms as you will have a skill player drawing big money, while others in roles that don’t draw attention are drawing little. Many say that the reason for UT not showing up when they came to Columbia was to a week long uprising they had amongst the team over NIL and that there was actually a fight in the locker room before the game. Am sure that wasn’t the first incident, nor will it be the last.
 
Last edited:
Looks like pay to play will lower the talent level for college players,
The top talent will opt out to go play professional
Why? Follow the money.

Agreed. It's definitely going to make the losses harder to stomach for the boosters when they're paying both the coaches and the players outrageous salaries.

Previously the TV contracts hid the cost the of the coaches. But it's just not sustainable now that the players are getting paid too.
 
The issue is that the NFLs minor league masquerades as college football. This works because bastions of academic excellence don’t have to share their profits with the athletes that turn the profit. It also works because graduates automatically feel a connection with their team, making it more reasonable to spend money being a fanatic.

My preference would be for the NFL to setup their minor league and pay the athletes their worth. Then, Universities could get back to having real student athletes. It’d be fun to know how young men from the State of SC stack up to what the Midwest had to offer. However, that wouldn’t make the NFL any money, and would in fact likely cost them a hefty sum. Meanwhile, Universities would also make less money, and instead have to focus on their actual purpose, providing an education.
 
The issue is that the NFLs minor league masquerades as college football. This works because bastions of academic excellence don’t have to share their profits with the athletes that turn the profit. It also works because graduates automatically feel a connection with their team, making it more reasonable to spend money being a fanatic.

My preference would be for the NFL to setup their minor league and pay the athletes their worth. Then, Universities could get back to having real student athletes. It’d be fun to know how young men from the State of SC stack up to what the Midwest had to offer. However, that wouldn’t make the NFL any money, and would in fact likely cost them a hefty sum. Meanwhile, Universities would also make less money, and instead have to focus on their actual purpose, providing an education.
Universities don't make money from athletics. Athletics might boost out-of-state enrollment, which only matters at state-supported schools. Schools get contributory infusions once in awhile. Athletic programs at major schools, almost all of them incorporated, make the money. Notre Dame would be rich if they didn't even play stick ball. So would Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, Southern Cal, Stanford, on and on. The money goes to athletics; athletic programs consume huge amounts of revenue.
 
This is the sum of it all.
Sources of NIL money will eventually diminish and level off.
Players with exceptionl ratings the 5 stars will sign up for a one and done year in college. They will rake in the NIL money knowing they will go pro often for big money at the end of one year in college. Leaving coaches out of the equations. The best coachs will not be played, They will recruit top rated player
in the 3 to 4 star talent. The one and done 5 stars will prove to be fools gold.
 
Last edited:
I’m telling you. This is all going to run into trouble within a couple years. Everybody now is trying to fund the collectives under the misguided thought that if you just pay the right players that vast improvement and a spot in the playoff is just around the corner. Wrong. With everybody doing it the playing field will virtually stay the same. And since the elite have the fan bases entrenched they will raise more than anyone. When folks realize they are saddled with funding all this, while still expected to pay big money for the right to buy a ticket, a nice outlay for the the ticket and parking too boot, the fan that doesn’t just have deep pockets is going to stop funding these collectives unless they have seen massive improvement. Folks are going to start taking the attitude that with the millions the major conferences dole out to all the schools that the individual schools can do pay for something on the athletic side themselves. If they don’t make massive changes to the NIL this will surely happen. Some of the money these kids are getting are past ridiculous. And this was not at all how this was intended to work, but the
NCAA didn’t have the sense to put up some guardrails to prevent it. And it is going to cause issues in the locker rooms as you will have a skill player drawing big money, while others in roles that don’t draw attention are drawing little. Many say that the reason for UT not showing up when they came to Columbia was to a week long uprising they had amongst the team over NIL and that there was actually a fight in the locker room before the game. Am sure that wasn’t the first incident, nor will it be the last.
All that is absolutely true, but the Supreme Court doesn't really care. They put a stake in the heart of amateur college athletics and danced on its grave.
 
This is the sum of it all.
Sources of NIL money will eventually diminish and level off.
Players with exceptionl ratings the 5 stars will sign up for a one and done year in college. They will rake in the NIL money knowing they will go pro often for big money at the end of one year in college. Leaving coaches out of the equations. The best coachs will not be played, They will recruit top rated player
in the 3 to 4 star talent. The one and done 5 stars will prove to be fools gold.
The NFL collective bargaining agreement does not allow players to be drafted until after their redshirt sophomore year (3yrs). So nobody is doing one year and done in football unless they are going to Canada or the Arena league. Basketball, yes, that has been true for a while.
 
Meanwhile, Universities would also make less money, and instead have to focus on their actual purpose, providing an education.
I was with you until this last sentence. That doesn't make sense. What would happen is that smaller sports like tennis, swimming, wrestling, softball, volleyball would be hurt or phased out as money dries up. It would have little effect pro or con on academics.
 
Universities don't make money from athletics. Athletics might boost out-of-state enrollment, which only matters at state-supported schools. Schools get contributory infusions once in awhile. Athletic programs at major schools, almost all of them incorporated, make the money. Notre Dame would be rich if they didn't even play stick ball. So would Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, Southern Cal, Stanford, on and on. The money goes to athletics; athletic programs consume huge amounts of revenue.
The South Carolina Fighting Gamecocks football program turned a profit of approximately $35 million last fiscal year. Enough to pay each of the 117 slave hands on the team almost $300,000 each. However, no money was paid and instead the supplier of higher education distributed the money to float other University sports teams that lose money every year (men’s basketball does turn a small profit). The fact that the Athletic Department ultimately breaks even every year is irrelevant.
 
I was with you until this last sentence. That doesn't make sense. What would happen is that smaller sports like tennis, swimming, wrestling, softball, volleyball would be hurt or phased out as money dries up. It would have little effect pro or con on academics.
I agree it would have minimal impact on academics. My point is the original purpose of the University was solely academics (research included). Sports is not its purpose. The University should be focused on providing an education or conducting research that benefits society.

At some point, many universities also turned into multi million dollar football teams. Which is odd until you realize it became about making money. And not paying the athletes makes it possible.
 
I agree it would have minimal impact on academics. My point is the original purpose of the University was solely academics (research included). Sports is not its purpose. The University should be focused on providing an education or conducting research that benefits society.

At some point, many universities also turned into multi million dollar football teams. Which is odd until you realize it became about making money. And not paying the athletes makes it possible.
All that money football makes goes to fund the minor sports and women's sports. I don't see how the university loses focus on academics with or without athletics. It is totally different people and totally different funding sources. It is like saying you shouldn't have a car because you should be focused on your children. You can focus on more than one thing, especially when you use different people to do each thing. An airline has ticket takers and airline mechanics, doing both doesn't make them lose focus.
 
All that money football makes goes to fund the minor sports and women's sports. I don't see how the university loses focus on academics with or without athletics. It is totally different people and totally different funding sources. It is like saying you shouldn't have a car because you should be focused on your children. You can focus on more than one thing, especially when you use different people to do each thing. An airline has ticket takers and airline mechanics, doing both doesn't make them lose focus.
Your simile is inaccurate. It’d be like an airline deciding it also wanted to field an NFL minor league team. It’s purpose is air travel, not playing football. A university’s purpose is educating, not fielding a minor league football team.

It only works because the athletes go unpaid. NFL benefits, colleges benefit, college football players do not benefit as much as they would if we called it what it was.
 
Your simile is inaccurate. It’d be like an airline deciding it also wanted to field an NFL minor league team. It’s purpose is air travel, not playing football. A university’s purpose is educating, not fielding a minor league football team.

It only works because the athletes go unpaid. NFL benefits, colleges benefit, college football players do not benefit as much as they would if we called it what it was.
On the one hand you make it sound as if "floating" non revenue sports is a bad thing. On the other hand, you make it sound like in a perfect world, the athletes would be here to get an education first... which would be great btw. But the athletes looking to get an education here are for the most part playing non-revenue sports. So it seems to me you are actually making the case for more funding to the other sports from the AD. Am I wrong? Just trying to follow you.
 
The issue is that the NFLs minor league masquerades as college football. This works because bastions of academic excellence don’t have to share their profits with the athletes that turn the profit. It also works because graduates automatically feel a connection with their team, making it more reasonable to spend money being a fanatic.

My preference would be for the NFL to setup their minor league and pay the athletes their worth. Then, Universities could get back to having real student athletes. It’d be fun to know how young men from the State of SC stack up to what the Midwest had to offer. However, that wouldn’t make the NFL any money, and would in fact likely cost them a hefty sum. Meanwhile, Universities would also make less money, and instead have to focus on their actual purpose, providing an education.
Speedycock, my friend ... whether that be my Best Friend or Worst Friend, I don't know ....YET!!!. Maybe, we just have different ways of agreeing to the same thing. OR, maybe disagreeing to similar actions but, for different reasons.

Somehow, we turned a thing we love (College Football) into a Whore House.

If anyone else has another word for it .... go away!!! You're just part of the problem. And I have no interest in your inane justifications.
 
On the one hand you make it sound as if "floating" non revenue sports is a bad thing. On the other hand, you make it sound like in a perfect world, the athletes would be here to get an education first... which would be great btw. But the athletes looking to get an education here are for the most part playing non-revenue sports. So it seems to me you are actually making the case for more funding to the other sports from the AD. Am I wrong? Just trying to follow you.
Floating non revenue generating sports (where the actual student athletes are) is only a bad thing in that it’s dependent upon everyone pretending the football players are also student athletes who don’t deserve their/any cut of the profit pie. And it’s not as though the non revenue generating sports are costing too much money, almost all lose less than $1 million per season (women’s basketball loses the most at around $4 million a year yikes).

In a perfect world, either the Universities would pay football players their worth while tightening the budgets of the other sports, or the NFL would set up minor leagues where these young men could earn a living while pursuing what they actually want. I guess either way the other sports have to tighten their budgets. Maybe the other sports could do whatever they did prior to college football becoming a billion dollar industry.
 
Speedycock, my friend ... whether that be my Best Friend or Worst Friend, I don't know ....YET!!!. Maybe, we just have different ways of agreeing to the same thing. OR, maybe disagreeing to similar actions but, for different reasons.

Somehow, we turned a thing we love (College Football) into a Whore House.

If anyone else has another word for it .... go away!!! You're just part of the problem. And I have no interest in your inane justifications.
Friend, it’s been a whore house for quite some time, the curtain has just recently been pulled back. The genie ain’t going back in the bottle.
 
The South Carolina Fighting Gamecocks football program turned a profit of approximately $35 million last fiscal year. Enough to pay each of the 117 slave hands on the team almost $300,000 each. However, no money was paid and instead the supplier of higher education distributed the money to float other University sports teams that lose money every year (men’s basketball does turn a small profit). The fact that the Athletic Department ultimately breaks even every year is irrelevant.
The fact is that, if the program disappeared tomorrow, the university would go on pretty much as it has.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neanderthal
Your simile is inaccurate. It’d be like an airline deciding it also wanted to field an NFL minor league team. It’s purpose is air travel, not playing football. A university’s purpose is educating, not fielding a minor league football team.

It only works because the athletes go unpaid. NFL benefits, colleges benefit, college football players do not benefit as much as they would if we called it what it was.
I see no reason professors can't focus on academics just because some coaches a long ways away at a practice field are focused on players and paying them. They aren't taking money from academics.
 
I find irony in “the sky is falling” NIL crowd without acknowledging that our own football program was floundering prior to NIL and seems to have bounced back with large help from the transfer portal and NIL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bucketdad
I find irony in “the sky is falling” NIL crowd without acknowledging that our own football program was floundering prior to NIL and seems to have bounced back with large help from the transfer portal and NIL.

let’s see how this year shakes out before we truly judge our place in the NIL landscape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
I find irony in “the sky is falling” NIL crowd without acknowledging that our own football program was floundering prior to NIL and seems to have bounced back with large help from the transfer portal and NIL.
We've only bounced back to the barely acceptable, in other words, where we should have been anyway at a minimum. Let's see what the ceiling truly is.
 
Last edited:
We've only bounced back to the barely acceptable, in other words, where we should have been anyway at a minimum. Let's see what he ceiling truly is.
You have to admit following the heels of the Muschamp debacle getting to 8 wins and beating Clemsux is a pretty good start. Most people wouldn’t label me optimistic on this board, but Beamer has proven if nothing else to be a solid recruiter under the new normal of college football.

Even the coaching has been pretty solid. We laid an egg with Missouri and Florida, but just about every team has one game a year like that. We beat some pretty solid teams to end the season and I’m not letting a bowl loss dampen that optimism.
 
let’s see how this year shakes out before we truly judge our place in the NIL landscape.
Not too worried about this year. We kept Rattler and Juice, added a nice piece from Memphis. It’s not over yet, but we should be solid on offense. Our biggest issue there was offensive coordinator.
 
Not too worried about this year. We kept Rattler and Juice, added a nice piece from Memphis. It’s not over yet, but we should be solid on offense. Our biggest issue there was offensive coordinator.

I'm more worried about the defense than the offense this year. We've lost a lot of talent and not sure we really replaced it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
I'm more worried about the defense than the offense this year. We've lost a lot of talent and not sure we really replaced it.
I get that concern. We did lose a lot and I haven’t heard much on that side of the ball. We did have a couple of guys step up in the bowl game with limited experience—even if as a group they didn’t play great. But considering many were backups throughout the year I expect them to be much improved by spring.

2023 might be a year where we just have to be flawless on offense and win a bunch of shoot outs.
 
You have to admit following the heels of the Muschamp debacle getting to 8 wins and beating Clemsux is a pretty good start. Most people wouldn’t label me optimistic on this board, but Beamer has proven if nothing else to be a solid recruiter under the new normal of college football.

Even the coaching has been pretty solid. We laid an egg with Missouri and Florida, but just about every team has one game a year like that. We beat some pretty solid teams to end the season and I’m not letting a bowl loss dampen that optimism.
I agree with everything you said. And I dont feel all that bad our our bowl loss either. I mean the TE position was a big part of our game throught the year. We had very little to work with at that position in the bowl game. Tough for anyone to overcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
You have to admit following the heels of the Muschamp debacle getting to 8 wins and beating Clemsux is a pretty good start. Most people wouldn’t label me optimistic on this board, but Beamer has proven if nothing else to be a solid recruiter under the new normal of college football.

Even the coaching has been pretty solid. We laid an egg with Missouri and Florida, but just about every team has one game a year like that. We beat some pretty solid teams to end the season and I’m not letting a bowl loss dampen that optimism.
The coaching never got solid until after Florida. After Florida, some steps got taken.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT