Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z
It appears that you support paying players or more specifically paying players through the NIL model. Let me ask you a question. Would you be upset if Sean Miller announced next year that he had accepted a head coaching job with another school and the reason why he was leaving Xavier was because he didn’t feel he could be successful due to insufficient NIL funding (sorry for the run-on sentence)?
I guess the ones that have a problem with nil are the ones who have stuck their heads in the sand and believe that players weren’t getting paid for decades under the table. Must be nice to live in the world of fantasy and make believe.
That would suck for Xavier, but because that sucks for Xavier do I think every college player who can make money off their image and likeness should be denied the right to do so? Heck no. However, Miller knows exactly the situation he's walking into at X, what the advantages are, and what the limitations are, so I'd be pretty surprised if that happened. Plus this is already, essentially, why Miller left in 2009 the first time. For a program that was bigger, with more resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final4
Anyway this is all a moot point to discuss in terms of it we like it or not. It isn't going anywhere. It isn't even a rule the NCAA decided on that they can now take away. The courts told them they can't stop it. Not legally allowed.
Now do I think some more common sense things can be applied to some of this stuff? Sure, probably more portal related than NIL though. I think there probably should be more of a defined portal period, no just something that is open all the time. I think that should be the case for coaches leaving their teams for another too though (seems to be more of an issue in football) where they are leaving, in some instances, before huge meaningful bowl games.
Here is a question for you. It appears you support coaches being allowed to make as much money as they want, and as much as someone will pay them. Would you be upset if UNC fired Hubert Davis tomorrow and offered Sean Miller 9 million per year to coach at UNC, and Miller took it stating it was life changing money he could not pass up for his family?Quote:
Originally Posted by Final4
I'll you what........I asked my question first so how 'bout you answer mine and then I'll answer yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z
X has had 6 of its last 7 coaches leave because they didn't think they could win at the highest level for one reason or another. NIL would just be another "excuse" for a coach to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final4
A slight refocusing on the topic, given that NIL is most likely here to stay in some form.
What are outcomes/realities that could bring sanity to the NIL environment (if I am allowed to presume that NIL is here to stay, but is operating at a more feverish level out of the gate at this point)?
I see two potential governing possibilities:
1. Supply and demand of available talent; and
2. Funding fatigue on the part of NIL sponsors who don't always realize their perceived/stated objectives with the NIL-funded player.
Re #1: As has been pointed out, there has always been a stratification of talent in the sport with the most talented going to the bigger programs, and with most of those players, if not all of them receiving "support" for choosing those schools. Are we at a place in the pecking order that will still allow us to operate effectively with a sufficient talent pool for Sean? Does the supply of available talent at the level we require it outpace the demand for NIL-targeted players we may want? I guess we could draw conclusions from rating services lists, etc., but part of this is complicated by the amount of oxygen that football playing schools are going to suck away from each other as they chase football players on the NIL side. Yes, bigger schools, so more NIL co-op space, but still, they have to make room for at least 22 starters on both sides of the ball for football. I don't have an answer for this, obviously. I'm just wondering if the issue is abated somewhat by having enough of a talent pool to begin with, and then having a little competitive relief from the fact that the "P5" crowd has other funding issues to address.
Re #2: Here is where I may be naive, but how does a SPONSOR achieve true marketing value from a kid who may only be around for one, two or a few years? As I've noted before, an 18-year old or a 22-year old basketball player isn't going to sell me a car. Beyond that, what if my INVESTMENT breaks an ankle or something and is left sitting on the bench watching the game? Corporate NIL deals. Publicly traded companies spending this way in their marketing departments? NCAAT sponsors maybe - look at AT&T. But that is a very few people benefitting from that one. Privately-held company that makes a lot of money? So you make a lot of money - 7-digits a year - but are you going to be willing to go out of pocket for this stuff over multiple years to the tune of six-digit installments over those years? Perhaps, if you're one of the avid boosters. Perhaps not, or perhaps it gets old after a while as you assess the value of the NIL "investment" and other ways of supporting your school. Here is where I get back to worrying mostly about the collectives as I understand them. Big schools with huge alumni bases that PayPal there way online through $5 and $10 here and there over 40,000 people. Wait. That tops out at $400k. Good for ony player for the "U."
Now I'm babbling. The question remains: what could bring sanity to this area. Who is paying for C. J. Stroud's scheduled maintenance calls at the Bentley dealership? Well, bad example.
This is flat earth level shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
I'm sure that in the most exceptional circumstances players were getting paid modest amounts. Like VERY rarely were players getting paid at all, and usually probably more like the "hundred dollar handshake."
To say that "its no different than it's always been, i'ts just not being hidden anymore" is just ridiculous.
And KyKy has entered the Portal
Maybe I just think the Value of the Scholarhip (and assorted other benefits) is sufficient. Actually, I dont think that. I think a stipend for players would be appropriate. But only to the extent that the stipend amount is uniform for all players at all schools for a certain sport. I'd be in favor of 1000 a month per player during the school year. this gets them off the "Ramen Plan", and allows them to upgrade to the "frozen chicken strips plan".Quote:
Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z
I didnt think you needed a free education AND a sports car.
By the way, at this juncture, I would like to see the scholarships revoked and just have kids pay their own way using the NIL money. Why not?