Page 8 of 19 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 183
  1. #71
    Supporting Member xu82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    10,445
    Quote Originally Posted by MADXSTER View Post
    Also

    A booster who gives say 100k to the athletic department now is asked to sponsor(NIL) a player. That 100k isn't spread around anymore.

    Also, Also

    The kid now transfers and the 100k is gone. So you'll have signing bonuses plus incentives to keep the kid around. Rosters are going to get crazy. I'm just glad I don't have to deal with it.

    AMEN! This is going to get messy and ugly, I’m afraid.

    I’m with you and GO on fearing the unintended consequences.

  2. #72
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    2,301
    Quote Originally Posted by GoMuskies View Post
    If this ends up killing some non-revenue sports programs, that will suck.
    I think it more likely to kill some fb and bb programs. What killed X fb ? Money.

  3. #73
    Supporting Member MADXSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Finneytown
    Posts
    6,842
    So can the players now get agents? Coming out of high school?
    Balls of Steele!!

  4. #74
    Sophomore XUGRAD80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,305
    Quote Originally Posted by JTG View Post
    I think it more likely to kill some fb and bb programs. What killed X fb ? Money.
    Schools are going to have to decide if they want to play with the big boys, or settle for playing at lower levels, or just give up entirely. But I suspect that eventually it will sort itself out and sanity will return. Possibly going to be a wild ride until that happens though.

  5. #75
    All-Conference xudash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    8,356
    Quote Originally Posted by MHettel View Post
    Can we make some assumptions here? These are not exact numbers by any means, but more of my best estimates about the current state.

    - I'd estimate that there about 115 D1 Football programs. I dont think it called "D1", maybe it's FBS or FCS or whatever. I think you know what I mean.
    - There are probably another 150 smaller programs, across lower divisions.
    - I'm guessing 35% of the D1 Programs operate "in the black", with probably 15% of all teams accounting for 80% of the "profit."
    - I'd assume 100% of the lower division teams operate at a loss.
    - There are about 345 D1 Mens Basketball teams. I'd estimate that about 35% of those operate "in the black" as well. And again, about 15% of all D1 teams responsible for about 80% of all the "profit."
    - I think there are maybe 2-3 Women's BBall teams out of 345 that operate in the back.
    - I think there are maybe 2 dozen additional sports offered, and all schools have a mix of these programs but almost never do they have them all. Maybe each school has 8 other sports (on the low end), up to 18 (on the high end). So thousands of other teams out there with rosters of maybe 12 players on average. All these teams operate with a financial loss.

    So lets boil it all down and estimate that maybe 125 sports programs operate in the black, out of maybe 3500 total programs. Lets round that up to 4%.

    When a school has programs operating at a loss, there is one of 2 options: 1) the programs are being "funded" out of the profits of a football or Mens basketball team, thus leading to an "athletic department" that might be running at a profit. or 2) these programs simply run at a loss and are subsidized by a broader university fund.

    Now, lets jump to the scenario where Schools can pay the players. Would any program currently operating at a loss have the ability to pay a player? I would think not. Would a program "in the black" be able to pay players? Yes, I think of course they could, which leads me to the next question. would paying players from profitable programs reduce the ability to those programs to provide funding to programs that operate at a loss? Yes, obviously which leads directly to the decision of the school to retain the programs at the expense of the general fund, or to cut programs due to funding.

    And even ON the teams where a player can be paid, it's gonna be a select few people that earn anything meaningful. Just because players are ELIGIBLE to be paid, it won't trickle down to 90% (or more) of the players.

    This will not require a "tweak" to fix. This is a "do over" in terms of how College Sports will be administered.

    More downside than upside in my opinion
    I like your breakdown. I believe you've covered the "well healed" side of it well.

    It's your bolded statement that deserves a little amplification, IMHO. Supply of and demand for the top athletes. Are things truly going to change that much?

    My sense is the answer is "no" for FBS football. The 5-star football players will continue to go to Ohio State, Alabama, Texas, etc., and especially now with their funding and with their fan bases coupled to this brave new world - huge fan bases which represent marketing clout for a prospective NIL deal for a player.

    Basketball? This might have a little more severe of an impact, especially for mid-majors. I agree with your "more downside than upside" statement, especially for basketball.

    However, thank God we're in the BE and thank God a new media deal will be sewn together in the not too distant future with Fox that will up the per team payouts for BE members. Also, thank God we're in Cincinnati and not, say, Dayton or Massillon, etc. What I'm getting at here, and I don't know and no one else knows at this point, is that maybe, just maybe, we'll still be able to effectively play in the 4-star pool with effective team seeding rounding out from the sleeper 3-star pool. Can we hold serve on recruiting solid Top 150 talent, at the very least? Can we hold serve on the sports we offer. As far as the latter question is concerned, thank God most of our major capital projects are behind us, or are close to being behind us.


    p.s. Protecting against scenarios like MadXster's comments - A booster who gives say 100k to the athletic department now is asked to sponsor(NIL) a player. That 100k isn't spread around anymore. Kid now transfers and the 100k is gone. So you'll have signing bonuses plus incentives to keep the Kid around. Rosters are going to get crazy - is key, and these possible outcomes are truly scary.
    X A V I E R

  6. #76
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    16,858
    I wonder about 2 things:
    1 - will a kid resent it when his teammate is making more from NIL...or understand it from a talent perspective (and work harder)
    2 - it might not be playing time that sends a kid to the transfer portal, but the chance for more money.

    Colleges will become de jure minor leagues for basketball, so the NBA will probably keep loving it.
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  7. #77
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    I know I've been saying this for years, but I'll say it again. I can't help but think the NCAA could have done things over the past decade or so to mitigate this. But, they didn't. They just kept doubling down on their "principles." And now things are likely going to be a total fustercluck.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #78
    Supporting Member bjf123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Section 105
    Posts
    3,986
    Im thinking the only kids wholl make money off their NIL in football will be the star QBs, WRs, and RBs, with the occasional defensive star. More will have a chance in hoops, but it will only be the most of the starting five, maybe the first guy off the bench.

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out. There will probably be some internal strife between the haves and have nots, unless the haves take the other players out to dinner and buys them other stuff.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

  9. #79
    Sophomore XUGRAD80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,305
    Teams are payed big bucks to wear a certain companies uniforms, right? How long before the players band together and say that they want some of that money paid directly to them?


    What really pisses me off the most about this whole thing is that some athletes, and athletic programs, are going to needlessly suffer because of the greed of others. Because of the envy on the part of some because of what some coaches are getting paid. You can talk about “fairness” all you want, but in the end it’s really just being envious of what some coaches are getting paid and the feeling on the part of some that they want some of that jack for themselves. It’s not about being “fair” to ALL the athletes, it’s personal greed and envy. I don’t see any of those players sharing any of the money they get with anyone else in the program. Think they are going to spread it around to the backups, the walk-ones, or the managers? Think again. They are going to keep it all for themselves.

    Someone please tell me how this is going to make it better for college athletes as a whole. Not just individual cases, but better for everyone. It’s not. It’s going to help a very privileged few and hurt a whole lot more people in the end.
    Last edited by XUGRAD80; 06-22-2021 at 11:15 AM.

  10. #80
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by bjf123 View Post
    I’m thinking the only kids who’ll make money off their NIL in football will be the star QBs, WRs, and RBs, with the occasional defensive star. More will have a chance in hoops, but it will only be the most of the starting five, maybe the first guy off the bench.

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out. There will probably be some internal strife between the haves and have nots, unless the haves take the other players out to dinner and buys them other stuff.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I think the country club sports will benefit the most. They won't be the biggest individual earners, but they'll have the highest percentage of athletes who cash in (at least a little bit) on their NIL. If they can suddenly work for an actual country club and use their status as a D1 athlete within that club to make money, or tips, or give lessons, or whatever, then game on.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •