Question for the college football fans on here: do you think this new NIL rule tempts the players to stay in school longer

[ScWildthing61]

With them being able to make money off their name now Yes or No (please include reason with your answer).

 

[ToddFlanders]

Yes, but only for late-round/UDFA level guys. Lots of guys leave college (making no money) for an outside shot at making some money in the league. They were making zero, with no chance of making money in college, might as well chance it in the league to make something. If you don't make it in the pros, you're no worse off - you still have no income.

But if you’re one of these late round/UDFA guys you’re still a stud in college and probably in line for some NIL money. So now they’ll have to choose leaving actual income, for an outside shot at making money in the league. A bird in the hand...

 

[GarnetBeamer]

NIL combined with eventual deregulation will lead to wide open transfer of top talent to programs where they can make more money. USC football will become obsolete.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Any player that has a legitimate shot at the NFL will bolt. That is just too much money to turn down.
As for the less fortunate, I suppose that would depend on how long a coach would be willing to eztend the yearly scholarship which in turn would reduce the amount of new recruits.

Which brings up another issue that can be introduced on a new thread. If you have a player with a 5-6 figure NIL agreement should they be offered a scholarship. My head is starting to hurt.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

Which brings up another issue that can be introduced on a new thread. If you have a player with a 5-6 figure NIL agreement should they be offered a scholarship. My head is starting to hurt.

I raised this question yesterday. Someone countered with the example of an MIT student starting a company while in college. That's not directly comparable though.

It seems the most reasonable approach would be to let the athlete choose: scholarship or NIL money. Which do they think is most valuable.

 

[ToddFlanders]

Which brings up another issue that can be introduced on a new thread. If you have a player with a 5-6 figure NIL agreement should they be offered a scholarship. My head is starting to hurt.

They should definitely still get the scholarship. It’s two different agreements with two different entities. The school gives the scholarship to get them on the field. A third party(or parties) that are unaffiliated with the school pay for marketing.

 

[Boom4life]

I raised this question yesterday. Someone countered with the example of an MIT student starting a company while in college. That's not directly comparable though.

It seems the most reasonable approach would be to let the athlete choose: scholarship or NIL money. Which do they think is most valuable.

Depending on the player the nil hands down.

 

[rogue cock]

I raised this question yesterday. Someone countered with the example of an MIT student starting a company while in college. That's not directly comparable though.

It seems the most reasonable approach would be to let the athlete choose: scholarship or NIL money. Which do they think is most valuable.

One big difference is that the MIT student does not and can't use his affiliation with the school as a platform for his company. He can not use "developed in coordination (or cooperation) with" or use his affiliation with the school as any type of endorsement by the school. And if s/he uses technology developed at the school or under the tutalege of a professor at the school, the school owns a part or in some cases all the rights to it.

Accordingly, Stanford was able to claim a partial ownership of Google and the University of Illinois claimed a portion of Netscape and the University of Florida claimed a portion of Gatorade. Harvard chose not to assert its claim to a portion of Facebook.