NIL

For discussion regarding the Vanderbilt Commodores' football program.

Moderators: kerrigjl, BrentVU, jfgogold, NateSY, KarenYates, Vandyman74, roanoke, VandyWhit

LawoftheWest
Vice Admiral
Posts: 2620
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:37 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

NIL

Post by LawoftheWest »

Under NCAA rules (with limitations) and differing state laws, college athletes now have the right to sell their names, images and likenesses. Well, what has happened? The arrival of brokers/agents to facilitate those sales, for a profit to the brokers/agents, of course.

The Austin newspaper had an interesting article covering this new environment. It starts with: "Now comes a new problem. Whom should the athletes trust? The NCAA is of no help." "University officials across the country are still scrambling to build out compliance and financial education programs." "We can't be involved in any way in arranging or brokering those types of deals" says a Texas official.

"A small ... cottage industry of companies has sprung up to 'help' athletes with..." NIL issues. "But do these companies provide any real help? Do the athletes even need their services?"

One year ago there was 10-15 companies in it. Now there are more than 100. Some will provide genuine services; some will have good intentions, but not be competent; and some will be sleazes.

There will be some athletes who do it wrong, or maybe get in trouble. "The NCAA can't punish Subway or Verizon or the local pizza joint for doing something wrong."

Elsewhere I read that UCLA is trying to use its location near Hollywood to use NIL benefits as a recruiting advantage.

So, in conclusion, the NIL is uncharted territory that could have unintended negative consequences.


User avatar
egbertsouse
Captain
Posts: 587
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:48 am
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: NIL

Post by egbertsouse »

I have a hard time envisioning how college athletics survives NIL.
accent grave over the e
Doresince89
Commander
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: NIL

Post by Doresince89 »

Some people will make a lot of money off the NIL change and it won't be a vast majority of student athletes. The way this may go, I would not be opposed to colleges dropping athletics and I am a huge fan of college sports.
MikenNashville
Captain
Posts: 861
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:36 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: NIL

Post by MikenNashville »

One thing I haven’t heard mentioned is what happens when a star QB gets a gig sponsoring Draftkings or some other gambling entity? Looks like the NCAA has no jurisdiction in states that legalized NIL by statute.
Doresince89
Commander
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: NIL

Post by Doresince89 »

I can't remember the player because I don't follow MLB too closely but didn't one of the better players lose a big chunk of his first big contract because he signed some type of "loan" in the minors for any future earnings? I remember reading something about how unfair that was to the player even though it was a big risk by the company. I see this happening all over college now.
commadore
Admiral
Posts: 9918
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:29 pm
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: NIL

Post by commadore »

No Commodores yet? I see plenty from Alabama, Auburn, and Tennessee.
User avatar
VUinFL
Commander
Posts: 455
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 8:06 am

Re: NIL

Post by VUinFL »

I think we can add this to the list of things that we will have trouble competing at an SEC level. No offense to anyone on here, but I can't think of a more disinterested fanbase within the Power 5 schools. That translates into a lack of self-marketing opportunities for athletes.
MrMemorial
Rear Admiral
Posts: 2016
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:37 pm
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: NIL

Post by MrMemorial »

VUinFL wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:32 pm I think we can add this to the list of things that we will have trouble competing at an SEC level. No offense to anyone on here, but I can't think of a more disinterested fanbase within the Power 5 schools. That translates into a lack of self-marketing opportunities for athletes.
TSU has an incoming athlete with a 2 million dollar NIL deal.

This is their "fan support" for football and basketball...

Image
Image
alathIN
Rear Admiral
Posts: 1911
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:35 pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: NIL

Post by alathIN »

MrMemorial wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:02 pm
VUinFL wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:32 pm I think we can add this to the list of things that we will have trouble competing at an SEC level. No offense to anyone on here, but I can't think of a more disinterested fanbase within the Power 5 schools. That translates into a lack of self-marketing opportunities for athletes.
TSU has an incoming athlete with a 2 million dollar NIL deal.

This is their "fan support" for football and basketball...

Image
Image
They don't need full stands or recent wins to exploit NIL.
What they need is wealthy local supporters of the program who are single-minded about their team and ready to drop $ to support it.

There are some historically or recently mediocre programs I can see doing well with this.
I grew up in Lawrence KS, where just about every local business is owned by a KU grad, and tons more in the region and a lot of them are truly fanatical fans not just of KU hoops which is perenially good, but also KU football which is perenially bad. If those people are willing to drop $ into NIL it will draw in recruits.
Knoxville could provide that environment for you-know-who. Arkansas, the Mississippis... big schools in medium-small markets dominated by the local college sports and a bunch of rabid local fans, some of whom have disposable income to throw at their favorite team's players.

Which I am sad to say, does not sound at all like Vanderbilt.
User avatar
geeznotagain
Admiral
Posts: 8877
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:04 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Re: NIL

Post by geeznotagain »

I think alathIN's analysis is on the money (poor pun, poor outlook for VU).
LawoftheWest
Vice Admiral
Posts: 2620
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:37 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: NIL

Post by LawoftheWest »

Maybe the NIL will allow us to get onto campus some of the baseball players who otherwise would opt for the baseball draft. Just a thought.
User avatar
AuricGoldfinger
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 16329
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:29 pm
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 223 times
Contact:

Re: NIL

Post by AuricGoldfinger »

My thoughts on NIL begin with two opinions that appear to be at odds with each other:

1. I appreciate and support the concept of NIL for student athletes.
2. I believe NIL is a Pandora's box that marks the beginning of changes that will fundamentally alter the college sports landscape.

Both can be true at the same time.

I've heard quite a few ardent proponents of NIL over the last week and a half say "Oh, it's not that big a deal, you're going to see a bunch of high profile deals in the first few weeks of this and then it will die down." I'm not so sure about that. If anything, I think most of what we've seen thus far have been relatively amateurish, lemonade stand kind of deals. Most of the serious money is still on the sidelines trying to figure things out. There is still a myriad of questions that remain to be answered, and it’s more or less the wild West out there right now. I think the NCAA and its member institutions were caught totally flatfooted by this, even though they shouldn’t have been.

My greatest fear about NIL has always been that it basically legalizes cash recruiting inducements by boosters. After the first few days of NIL, my opinion hasn’t changed. Opportunities remain for athletic departments to corral NIL and provide some structure around it, but I’m not convinced that zealous, cash-laden boosters won’t find ways around whatever regulatory framework is introduced—just as they always have.

I've also heard many of those same proponents arguing that NIL still doesn't go far enough in compensation and that more of the largesse of college athletics ought to be shared with the players. That quiet drumbeat will eventually turn into a louder cry for pay-for-play. I'm not usually a slippery slope kind of guy and I’m not saying it's inevitable. But as the amount of revenue generated by bigtime college sports continues to grow, pay-for-play will become the next big question for universities to deal with. Once pay-for-play happens, college athletics at the highest level of competition becomes just another professional league.

I know I probably sound like a “Get off my lawn!” old man who laments change and the passing of time. But I believe we’re ultimately headed for a complete reorganization of college sports that will result in three different tiers of competition: non-scholarship (today’s NCAA Division III); reduced scholarship levels and fewer sports offered, but limited or no pay-for-play (more or less the current Division II); and a much smaller Division I tier where pay-for-play is allowed. It’s also possible that schools will compete in multiple tiers for different sports. My guess is that Vanderbilt winds up in the aforementioned Division II tier for most of its sports.

The implications for Title IX are also unclear, but the universities competing primarily at the Division II tier simply won’t be able to afford to retain as many sports or scholarships because the money just won’t be there.

(What I don’t envision is a continuation of the kind of revenue sharing model that encourages schools to jump to Division I in some sports just so they can take advantage of a March Madness payday. As the NCAA continues to wither away, I think the bigger schools are going to end it, despite how beloved the tournament continues to be.)

I could be wrong with all of this, and maybe very little changes. Maybe the landscape of collegiate athletics isn't altered and all of this talk is just gum-flapping, disingenuous handwringing. But it's hard not to think that the lid of Pandora's box hasn't been cracked open at least a little in the last 10 days.
MikenNashville
Captain
Posts: 861
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:36 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: NIL

Post by MikenNashville »

With basically unrestricted NIL and the expansion to a 12 team playoff by 2026 - which IMO is a just a Trojan horse to go to a 16 team playoff - I think college football is already on a trajectory where a lot of power 5 schools and maybe a handful of group of 5 schools like UCF or a Cincinnati set up a super tier in football only. Probably Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, etc will be left out of this top tier in football but will remain at the highest Div 1 level in all other sports assuming that pay for play is not instituted. I was actually for NIL with some limits like Freshman not being eligible.
vandy05
Vice Admiral
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NIL

Post by vandy05 »

AuricGoldfinger wrote: Sun Jul 11, 2021 10:14 am My thoughts on NIL begin with two opinions that appear to be at odds with each other:

1. I appreciate and support the concept of NIL for student athletes.
2. I believe NIL is a Pandora's box that marks the beginning of changes that will fundamentally alter the college sports landscape.

Both can be true at the same time.

I've heard quite a few ardent proponents of NIL over the last week and a half say "Oh, it's not that big a deal, you're going to see a bunch of high profile deals in the first few weeks of this and then it will die down." I'm not so sure about that. If anything, I think most of what we've seen thus far have been relatively amateurish, lemonade stand kind of deals. Most of the serious money is still on the sidelines trying to figure things out. There is still a myriad of questions that remain to be answered, and it’s more or less the wild West out there right now. I think the NCAA and its member institutions were caught totally flatfooted by this, even though they shouldn’t have been.

My greatest fear about NIL has always been that it basically legalizes cash recruiting inducements by boosters. After the first few days of NIL, my opinion hasn’t changed. Opportunities remain for athletic departments to corral NIL and provide some structure around it, but I’m not convinced that zealous, cash-laden boosters won’t find ways around whatever regulatory framework is introduced—just as they always have.

I've also heard many of those same proponents arguing that NIL still doesn't go far enough in compensation and that more of the largesse of college athletics ought to be shared with the players. That quiet drumbeat will eventually turn into a louder cry for pay-for-play. I'm not usually a slippery slope kind of guy and I’m not saying it's inevitable. But as the amount of revenue generated by bigtime college sports continues to grow, pay-for-play will become the next big question for universities to deal with. Once pay-for-play happens, college athletics at the highest level of competition becomes just another professional league.

I know I probably sound like a “Get off my lawn!” old man who laments change and the passing of time. But I believe we’re ultimately headed for a complete reorganization of college sports that will result in three different tiers of competition: non-scholarship (today’s NCAA Division III); reduced scholarship levels and fewer sports offered, but limited or no pay-for-play (more or less the current Division II); and a much smaller Division I tier where pay-for-play is allowed. It’s also possible that schools will compete in multiple tiers for different sports. My guess is that Vanderbilt winds up in the aforementioned Division II tier for most of its sports.

The implications for Title IX are also unclear, but the universities competing primarily at the Division II tier simply won’t be able to afford to retain as many sports or scholarships because the money just won’t be there.

(What I don’t envision is a continuation of the kind of revenue sharing model that encourages schools to jump to Division I in some sports just so they can take advantage of a March Madness payday. As the NCAA continues to wither away, I think the bigger schools are going to end it, despite how beloved the tournament continues to be.)

I could be wrong with all of this, and maybe very little changes. Maybe the landscape of collegiate athletics isn't altered and all of this talk is just gum-flapping, disingenuous handwringing. But it's hard not to think that the lid of Pandora's box hasn't been cracked open at least a little in the last 10 days.
I don't think you're get off my lawn at all. This is all pretty reasonable opinion and conjecture.

In my opinion, Title IX won't matter too much. The pay will just be apportioned in a way that schools will be able to "afford it", Title IX or not.

Pay for play is probably coming. Many will lament the "brokenness" of college sports at that point, but in my opinion, the model has always been broken. When you leverage free labor (no cash payments) to make that much money, it just can't last, especially as you make more and more money.
User avatar
dorepleganger
Rear Admiral
Posts: 1220
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 1:46 pm
Location: Springfield
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: NIL

Post by dorepleganger »

AuricGoldfinger wrote: Sun Jul 11, 2021 10:14 am My thoughts on NIL begin with two opinions that appear to be at odds with each other:

1. I appreciate and support the concept of NIL for student athletes.
2. I believe NIL is a Pandora's box that marks the beginning of changes that will fundamentally alter the college sports landscape.

Both can be true at the same time.

I've heard quite a few ardent proponents of NIL over the last week and a half say "Oh, it's not that big a deal, you're going to see a bunch of high profile deals in the first few weeks of this and then it will die down." I'm not so sure about that. If anything, I think most of what we've seen thus far have been relatively amateurish, lemonade stand kind of deals. Most of the serious money is still on the sidelines trying to figure things out. There is still a myriad of questions that remain to be answered, and it’s more or less the wild West out there right now. I think the NCAA and its member institutions were caught totally flatfooted by this, even though they shouldn’t have been.

My greatest fear about NIL has always been that it basically legalizes cash recruiting inducements by boosters. After the first few days of NIL, my opinion hasn’t changed. Opportunities remain for athletic departments to corral NIL and provide some structure around it, but I’m not convinced that zealous, cash-laden boosters won’t find ways around whatever regulatory framework is introduced—just as they always have.

I've also heard many of those same proponents arguing that NIL still doesn't go far enough in compensation and that more of the largesse of college athletics ought to be shared with the players. That quiet drumbeat will eventually turn into a louder cry for pay-for-play. I'm not usually a slippery slope kind of guy and I’m not saying it's inevitable. But as the amount of revenue generated by bigtime college sports continues to grow, pay-for-play will become the next big question for universities to deal with. Once pay-for-play happens, college athletics at the highest level of competition becomes just another professional league.

I know I probably sound like a “Get off my lawn!” old man who laments change and the passing of time. But I believe we’re ultimately headed for a complete reorganization of college sports that will result in three different tiers of competition: non-scholarship (today’s NCAA Division III); reduced scholarship levels and fewer sports offered, but limited or no pay-for-play (more or less the current Division II); and a much smaller Division I tier where pay-for-play is allowed. It’s also possible that schools will compete in multiple tiers for different sports. My guess is that Vanderbilt winds up in the aforementioned Division II tier for most of its sports.

The implications for Title IX are also unclear, but the universities competing primarily at the Division II tier simply won’t be able to afford to retain as many sports or scholarships because the money just won’t be there.

(What I don’t envision is a continuation of the kind of revenue sharing model that encourages schools to jump to Division I in some sports just so they can take advantage of a March Madness payday. As the NCAA continues to wither away, I think the bigger schools are going to end it, despite how beloved the tournament continues to be.)

I could be wrong with all of this, and maybe very little changes. Maybe the landscape of collegiate athletics isn't altered and all of this talk is just gum-flapping, disingenuous handwringing. But it's hard not to think that the lid of Pandora's box hasn't been cracked open at least a little in the last 10 days.
Watch Nike, Adidas, and Under Armour.

Suppose I am a QB at Oregon and a Heisman candidate. Although Oregon is a Nike school, how valuable would I be to Adidas or UA as a sponsor? Further, can I insist on wearing "my" branded shoe at the school while playing? (I think the answer is no, currently.)

Further, the basketball shoe money at the AAU level will probably now be above the table, rather than under the table. All the Nike, Adidas, or UA sponsored teams will have kids with individual shoe deals and then the kids will be even more influenced to go to a Nike, Adidas, or UA school.

Heck, I think the baseball bat makers are certainly willing to pay a few bucks for players to use their equipment, too.

I remember watching the X-Games about 10 years ago and pretty much any athlete that did not have a sponsor deal and was at the event was suddenly a Monster or Rock Star energy drink endorser. It was kind of like "slap this sticker on your helmet and I'll pay you $500." I think we are currently in a similar phase with NIL sponsorship deals.
User avatar
AuricGoldfinger
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 16329
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:29 pm
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 223 times
Contact:

Re: NIL

Post by AuricGoldfinger »

AuricGoldfinger wrote: Sun Jul 11, 2021 10:14 am
(What I don’t envision is a continuation of the kind of revenue sharing model that encourages schools to jump to Division I in some sports just so they can take advantage of a March Madness payday. As the NCAA continues to wither away, I think the bigger schools are going to end it, despite how beloved the tournament continues to be.)
There's a story in SI this morning that represents yet another sign that this is the direction college sports is heading:

“We’re tired of being told by some small school up in the northeast that we can’t do something,” says one SEC school administrator. “Why is Alabama and Binghamton in the same division? We continue to put those two on equal footing and it’s about time that all of us admitted that.”

https://www.si.com/college/2021/07/19/n ... ark-emmert
MikenNashville
Captain
Posts: 861
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:36 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: NIL

Post by MikenNashville »

Well it didn’t take long for the big money to get in, ESPN reporting Bama QB Bryce Young already has signed nearly $1 million in NIL deals.
User avatar
FayetteDore
Vice Admiral
Posts: 4988
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:58 pm
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: NIL

Post by FayetteDore »

And the coach confirms (well, sort of) it:

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2021 ... deals.html

From al.com:
"Alabama coach Nick Saban said Tuesday that sophomore quarterback Bryce Young, the team’s presumptive starter in 2021, has already earned close to $1 million in endorsement deals.

“Certain positions, probably, enhance opportunities to create value, like quarterback, and our quarterback (Young) already has approached ungodly numbers -- I’m not going to say what they are -- and he hasn’t even played yet. Hasn’t even started,” Saban said at the Texas High School Coaches Association’s annual convention on Tuesday, according to The Athletic. “... It’s almost seven figures. And it’s like, the guy hasn’t even played yet. But that’s because of our brand.”
Can't scamper or slither...but I used to swim.
User avatar
mathguy
Rear Admiral
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 1:27 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: NIL

Post by mathguy »

LawoftheWest wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 3:46 pm Maybe the NIL will allow us to get onto campus some of the baseball players who otherwise would opt for the baseball draft. Just a thought.
Problem is - even MLB players these days struggle for image/endorsements/recognizability. HS or College players? Let's just say none of them are getting a shoe named after them.
User avatar
mathguy
Rear Admiral
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 1:27 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: NIL

Post by mathguy »

FayetteDore wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:26 am And the coach confirms (well, sort of) it:

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2021 ... deals.html

From al.com:
"Alabama coach Nick Saban said Tuesday that sophomore quarterback Bryce Young, the team’s presumptive starter in 2021, has already earned close to $1 million in endorsement deals.

“Certain positions, probably, enhance opportunities to create value, like quarterback, and our quarterback (Young) already has approached ungodly numbers -- I’m not going to say what they are -- and he hasn’t even played yet. Hasn’t even started,” Saban said at the Texas High School Coaches Association’s annual convention on Tuesday, according to The Athletic. “... It’s almost seven figures. And it’s like, the guy hasn’t even played yet. But that’s because of our brand.”
It's that last sentence that terrifies me and signals the end of college sports as we know it. BUT THAT'S BECAUSE OF OUR BRAND. Saban is entirely right. And he got it out there: Any elite QB recruit that goes to Alabama can expect a million dollar payday. Does the same guy get that contract if he goes to Vandy? Or heck, even Penn State? Probably not.

And instantly, the recruiting game has been destroyed.
Locked Previous topicNext topic