The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(07-15-2021 06:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 05:16 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 04:45 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 03:40 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-14-2021 09:10 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  I guess I don't understand how it's that hard to do that...but I'm also not one of the people who says they'll stop watching sports because a guy gets on a knee even if I personally stand up and put my hand on my heart for the anthem. Just enjoy the game, because that is all it is...just because 4-5 kids on a team get a $1,000 check doesn't change how the game itself makes you feel, or how watching your alma mater win should.

I won’t unplug until the UK’s and Memphis’ of the world start openly starting shell companies to funnel money directly to recruits with cash transfers the day they show up to campus and matriculate.

And yes, those types of shenanigans are going to start pronto.

If they do that, and money is coming directly from the Universities, they're going to be fined to frigging Alpha Centauri by the DOE for being out of compliance with Title IV, because I can guarantee there will be federal funds in there somewhere...especially if general student fees still go into Athletic Department budgets.

It wil be boosters funding it. The schools will only be involved in the distribution and decision marking by the staffs when targeting recruits.

Won’t need World Wide Wes types anymore. Bag man will be all legit.

All I'm saying is if the school distributes the money (which isn't legal based on the current framework by the way) and they take ANY federal funding to pay the bills in Athletics, they will need to have the cleanest books in the history of planet Earth to not be taken to the woodshed by the T4 compliance people. For the record, any school that takes student fees for athletics uses Federal monies...so that would be every public institution in America with the exception of, like, 4 if USAToday's database is up to date on the Fee distributions.

Why would the school need to get involved in distributing the money? I don't get why you keep returning to it. Rich folks don't need to get the school involved when they can take all the glory of patronage for their chosen school's team for themselves. All the school has to do is sit back and reap the benefits to recruiting that will come from the appeal of huge legal checks players can get at a particular school from its financial booster(s).

I feel this will be the beginning of the end of college sports. Once UC's players are no different than NFL/NBA, I will stop contributing.

If people are upset because collegiate sports may be more like professional sports, your outrage is about 75 years too late. Under the new system we will at least have a chance to find out who is paying whom and how much.

If this is, in the words of Jim Morrison, “the end”, then why do we not see similar problems amongst the parts of universities that bring in the Big Money (i.e., research schools with Darpa connections)?

(07-15-2021 08:35 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 06:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 05:16 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 04:45 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 03:40 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  I won’t unplug until the UK’s and Memphis’ of the world start openly starting shell companies to funnel money directly to recruits with cash transfers the day they show up to campus and matriculate.

And yes, those types of shenanigans are going to start pronto.

If they do that, and money is coming directly from the Universities, they're going to be fined to frigging Alpha Centauri by the DOE for being out of compliance with Title IV, because I can guarantee there will be federal funds in there somewhere...especially if general student fees still go into Athletic Department budgets.

It wil be boosters funding it. The schools will only be involved in the distribution and decision marking by the staffs when targeting recruits.

Won’t need World Wide Wes types anymore. Bag man will be all legit.

All I'm saying is if the school distributes the money (which isn't legal based on the current framework by the way) and they take ANY federal funding to pay the bills in Athletics, they will need to have the cleanest books in the history of planet Earth to not be taken to the woodshed by the T4 compliance people. For the record, any school that takes student fees for athletics uses Federal monies...so that would be every public institution in America with the exception of, like, 4 if USAToday's database is up to date on the Fee distributions.

Why would the school need to get involved in distributing the money? I don't get why you keep returning to it. Rich folks don't need to get the school involved when they can take all the glory of patronage for their chosen school's team for themselves. All the school has to do is sit back and reap the benefits to recruiting that will come from the appeal of huge legal checks players can get at a particular school from its financial booster(s).

I was responding directly to a poster who stated, explicitly, that the schools would distribute funds. I also don't think schools want ANYTHING to do with this for the reasons I stated...which is why I do not understand all of the posters mentioning that schools will be paying players, since I wholeheartedly agree with you that they will not.

The school (ie: coaching staff) would never touch the $$ but they would be coordinating the process. Who they want and how much they will need from the boosters. No way to stop it unless they get stupid and sloppy.

Like I said, World Wide Wes will not be needed anymore. This is easier with less risk.

(07-15-2021 09:03 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  If people are upset because collegiate sports may be more like professional sports, your outrage is about 75 years too late. Under the new system we will at least have a chance to find out who is paying whom and how much.

If this is, in the words of Jim Morrison, “the end”, then why do we not see similar problems amongst the parts of universities that bring in the Big Money (i.e., research schools with Darpa connections)?

There's a big difference between a few kids making a few bucks on the side, and a semipro team.

If college sports is semipro right now, you wouldn't see highly recruited freshmen like Yancy Gates and Lance Stephenson living with roommates in crappy dorm rooms. You wouldn't see a Heisman Trophy winner like Johnny Football risking his eligibility for a $30,000 payment.

(07-16-2021 07:42 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 09:03 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  If people are upset because collegiate sports may be more like professional sports, your outrage is about 75 years too late. Under the new system we will at least have a chance to find out who is paying whom and how much.

If this is, in the words of Jim Morrison, “the end”, then why do we not see similar problems amongst the parts of universities that bring in the Big Money (i.e., research schools with Darpa connections)?

There's a big difference between a few kids making a few bucks on the side, and a semipro team.

If college sports is semipro right now, you wouldn't see highly recruited freshmen like Yancy Gates and Lance Stephenson living with roommates in crappy dorm rooms. You wouldn't see a Heisman Trophy winner like Johnny Football risking his eligibility for a $30,000 payment.

Yes things can always get worse. Just because we see people regularly exceeding the speed limit on our highways doesn't mean it would be best just make them all limit free autobahns.

(07-15-2021 09:20 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 08:35 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 06:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 05:16 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 04:45 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  If they do that, and money is coming directly from the Universities, they're going to be fined to frigging Alpha Centauri by the DOE for being out of compliance with Title IV, because I can guarantee there will be federal funds in there somewhere...especially if general student fees still go into Athletic Department budgets.

It wil be boosters funding it. The schools will only be involved in the distribution and decision marking by the staffs when targeting recruits.

Won’t need World Wide Wes types anymore. Bag man will be all legit.

All I'm saying is if the school distributes the money (which isn't legal based on the current framework by the way) and they take ANY federal funding to pay the bills in Athletics, they will need to have the cleanest books in the history of planet Earth to not be taken to the woodshed by the T4 compliance people. For the record, any school that takes student fees for athletics uses Federal monies...so that would be every public institution in America with the exception of, like, 4 if USAToday's database is up to date on the Fee distributions.

Why would the school need to get involved in distributing the money? I don't get why you keep returning to it. Rich folks don't need to get the school involved when they can take all the glory of patronage for their chosen school's team for themselves. All the school has to do is sit back and reap the benefits to recruiting that will come from the appeal of huge legal checks players can get at a particular school from its financial booster(s).

I was responding directly to a poster who stated, explicitly, that the schools would distribute funds. I also don't think schools want ANYTHING to do with this for the reasons I stated...which is why I do not understand all of the posters mentioning that schools will be paying players, since I wholeheartedly agree with you that they will not.

I see now. I interpreted the poster as speaking more broadly (as in the entire community) when he mentioned Memphis. Now it sounds like we are all on the same page that the school wouldn't be directly distributing money. I think it remains to be seen how involved they might be in (in)directly coordinating things depending upon the actual new rules.

(07-16-2021 07:42 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 09:03 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  If people are upset because collegiate sports may be more like professional sports, your outrage is about 75 years too late. Under the new system we will at least have a chance to find out who is paying whom and how much.

If this is, in the words of Jim Morrison, “the end”, then why do we not see similar problems amongst the parts of universities that bring in the Big Money (i.e., research schools with Darpa connections)?

There's a big difference between a few kids making a few bucks on the side, and a semipro team.

If college sports is semipro right now, you wouldn't see highly recruited freshmen like Yancy Gates and Lance Stephenson living with roommates in crappy dorm rooms. You wouldn't see a Heisman Trophy winner like Johnny Football risking his eligibility for a $30,000 payment.

Underlying your points is the false assumption that payments go directly to athletes without a series of intermediaries involved.

Re: Lance - the last three schools recruiting him were Kansas, Duke, and UC. His father was allegedly shopping him around like a seasoned pimp would. At that last minute, UC signed him. Hmmmm…..

I wouldn't be surprised to see a new rule, along the lines of "recruits/schools/companies are not allowed to discuss sponsorships until the athlete has signed their LOI."

Such a rule would ban companies from bribing athletes to sign with their school, but still allow athletes to profit from their name/image/likeness.

(07-16-2021 06:37 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised to see a new rule, along the lines of "recruits/schools/companies are not allowed to discuss sponsorships until the athlete has signed their LOI."

Such a rule would ban companies from bribing athletes to sign with their school, but still allow athletes to profit from their name/image/likeness.

As far as I know, the unanimous SCOTUS ruling did not limit the scope to collegiate athletes only.

(07-16-2021 06:37 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised to see a new rule, along the lines of "recruits/schools/companies are not allowed to discuss sponsorships until the athlete has signed their LOI."

Such a rule would ban companies from bribing athletes to sign with their school, but still allow athletes to profit from their name/image/likeness.

The genie is getting out of the bottle and most likely won't be going back in. Players are going to know what's likely coming their way pretty quickly and easily in many cases (e.g. the last QB got $50K or the OL all got $15K from a Co. owned by a big booster.) Or heck, if it's just about being post LOI, "We at company A can't comment about this year until after signing day but last year 5* guys signing LOI with Alabama got an immediate $30K, 4* guys got $20K, 3* guys got $10K or whatever, with more available later dependent upon performance and the situation, etc."

Expectations will get communicated one way or another. The rich will get richer, the poor will stay poor.

(07-16-2021 07:12 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 06:37 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised to see a new rule, along the lines of "recruits/schools/companies are not allowed to discuss sponsorships until the athlete has signed their LOI."

Such a rule would ban companies from bribing athletes to sign with their school, but still allow athletes to profit from their name/image/likeness.

As far as I know, the unanimous SCOTUS ruling did not limit the scope to collegiate athletes only.

I think people are often surprised that unanimous decisions are the most common Supreme Court decisions. This decision your referencing was very narrow (often decisions are narrow to get unanimity). Kavanaugh has put his name to pretty clear skepticism of the NCAA well beyond the decision, the others have not. Justices regularly will join concurrences when they are on the same page. Nobody joined with Kavanaugh.

Some may not have joined Kavanaugh because they disagree with how far he seems to want to go. Some may not have joined because much of what he is saying is dicta that goes well beyond the scope of the case, but they may ultimately agree with him. Others may not actually have formed a position yet having not considered the facts as applied to other issues. People like to jump to a lot of conclusions on court decisions, but I'm wary of that until we've seen more.

Bama QB making "ungodly" money on his NIL deals...

Quote:And now for another example of "tell me you're recruiting without tell me you're recruiting" involving Alabama coach Nick Saban and quarterback Bryce Young. 

Speaking at the Texas High School Coaches Association convention on Tuesday, Saban raised some eyebrows when he was asked about name, image and likeness laws. Within his answer, he revealed that Crimson Tide quarterback Bryce Young is doing pretty well for himself in this new era of college athletics. 

"Our QB has already approached ungodly numbers, and he hasn't even played yet," Saban said, per Chris Hummer of 247Sports. "If I told you what it is … it's almost 7-figures."

Not bad for someone who threw for one touchdown as a freshman. 

Dollar specifics have been largely hard to come by with NIL laws being so new, but it would hardly be surprising if Young is earning in the high six figures even though he's yet to start a college game. Young has already signed with CAA for marketing deals and he has a deal with Cash App. Young also has large social media following -- almost 83,000 followers on Instagram despite just three posts. 

His success as a recruit has largely set that foundation. Young was a coveted five-star recruit for the Tide's 2020 class and the No. 1 quarterback in that group. Some even projected he was going to win the starting job over Mac Jones heading into last year. Young is likely to start this year, however, and could quickly become the face of college football. William Hill Sportsbook gives him the third-best preseason Heisman odds at +900. 

Yes, being the starting quarterback at Alabama is almost always going to be a lucrative deal in the NIL era. Saban can use that to his advantage, just like any school in a state where NIL laws are effective. But it's also worth pointing out that Young had marketing value even before he stepped foot on to campus. 

Remember, the NCAA's relief waiver for NIL states that high school athletes may also engage in the same types of NIL opportunities without impacting their NCAA eligibility. For prospects like Young, market value doesn't have to coincide with being a college starter. It wouldn't be surprising if some blue-chip recruits or true freshmen end up making more earlier in their career than many established starters will make in their careers.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...nil-deals/

A coach making $12,000,000 saying his QB making almost $1,000,000 as being an ungodly sum is kind of ludicrous when you break it down.

(07-20-2021 02:31 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Bama QB making "ungodly" money on his NIL deals...

Quote:And now for another example of "tell me you're recruiting without tell me you're recruiting" involving Alabama coach Nick Saban and quarterback Bryce Young. 

Speaking at the Texas High School Coaches Association convention on Tuesday, Saban raised some eyebrows when he was asked about name, image and likeness laws. Within his answer, he revealed that Crimson Tide quarterback Bryce Young is doing pretty well for himself in this new era of college athletics. 

"Our QB has already approached ungodly numbers, and he hasn't even played yet," Saban said, per Chris Hummer of 247Sports. "If I told you what it is … it's almost 7-figures."

Not bad for someone who threw for one touchdown as a freshman. 

Dollar specifics have been largely hard to come by with NIL laws being so new, but it would hardly be surprising if Young is earning in the high six figures even though he's yet to start a college game. Young has already signed with CAA for marketing deals and he has a deal with Cash App. Young also has large social media following -- almost 83,000 followers on Instagram despite just three posts. 

His success as a recruit has largely set that foundation. Young was a coveted five-star recruit for the Tide's 2020 class and the No. 1 quarterback in that group. Some even projected he was going to win the starting job over Mac Jones heading into last year. Young is likely to start this year, however, and could quickly become the face of college football. William Hill Sportsbook gives him the third-best preseason Heisman odds at +900. 

Yes, being the starting quarterback at Alabama is almost always going to be a lucrative deal in the NIL era. Saban can use that to his advantage, just like any school in a state where NIL laws are effective. But it's also worth pointing out that Young had marketing value even before he stepped foot on to campus. 

Remember, the NCAA's relief waiver for NIL states that high school athletes may also engage in the same types of NIL opportunities without impacting their NCAA eligibility. For prospects like Young, market value doesn't have to coincide with being a college starter. It wouldn't be surprising if some blue-chip recruits or true freshmen end up making more earlier in their career than many established starters will make in their careers.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...nil-deals/

This the beginning of the end.

Saban to 2023, 2024, 2025, etc recruits:
"Our current QB is making $1M. Sign with us and you'll make the same".

How the heck is UC supposed to compete with that.

(07-20-2021 03:07 PM)nachoman91 Wrote:  

(07-20-2021 02:31 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Bama QB making "ungodly" money on his NIL deals...

Quote:And now for another example of "tell me you're recruiting without tell me you're recruiting" involving Alabama coach Nick Saban and quarterback Bryce Young. 

Speaking at the Texas High School Coaches Association convention on Tuesday, Saban raised some eyebrows when he was asked about name, image and likeness laws. Within his answer, he revealed that Crimson Tide quarterback Bryce Young is doing pretty well for himself in this new era of college athletics. 

"Our QB has already approached ungodly numbers, and he hasn't even played yet," Saban said, per Chris Hummer of 247Sports. "If I told you what it is … it's almost 7-figures."

Not bad for someone who threw for one touchdown as a freshman. 

Dollar specifics have been largely hard to come by with NIL laws being so new, but it would hardly be surprising if Young is earning in the high six figures even though he's yet to start a college game. Young has already signed with CAA for marketing deals and he has a deal with Cash App. Young also has large social media following -- almost 83,000 followers on Instagram despite just three posts. 

His success as a recruit has largely set that foundation. Young was a coveted five-star recruit for the Tide's 2020 class and the No. 1 quarterback in that group. Some even projected he was going to win the starting job over Mac Jones heading into last year. Young is likely to start this year, however, and could quickly become the face of college football. William Hill Sportsbook gives him the third-best preseason Heisman odds at +900. 

Yes, being the starting quarterback at Alabama is almost always going to be a lucrative deal in the NIL era. Saban can use that to his advantage, just like any school in a state where NIL laws are effective. But it's also worth pointing out that Young had marketing value even before he stepped foot on to campus. 

Remember, the NCAA's relief waiver for NIL states that high school athletes may also engage in the same types of NIL opportunities without impacting their NCAA eligibility. For prospects like Young, market value doesn't have to coincide with being a college starter. It wouldn't be surprising if some blue-chip recruits or true freshmen end up making more earlier in their career than many established starters will make in their careers.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...nil-deals/

This the beginning of the end.

Saban to 2023, 2024, 2025, etc recruits:
"Our current QB is making $1M. Sign with us and you'll make the same".

How the heck is UC supposed to compete with that.

Because Bama was recruiting the cream of the crop before.

I warned folks this was coming. It’s going to get crazy.

Pony Express on a much larger scale and now it's all legal.

(07-20-2021 03:16 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(07-20-2021 03:07 PM)nachoman91 Wrote:  

(07-20-2021 02:31 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Bama QB making "ungodly" money on his NIL deals...

Quote:And now for another example of "tell me you're recruiting without tell me you're recruiting" involving Alabama coach Nick Saban and quarterback Bryce Young. 

Speaking at the Texas High School Coaches Association convention on Tuesday, Saban raised some eyebrows when he was asked about name, image and likeness laws. Within his answer, he revealed that Crimson Tide quarterback Bryce Young is doing pretty well for himself in this new era of college athletics. 

"Our QB has already approached ungodly numbers, and he hasn't even played yet," Saban said, per Chris Hummer of 247Sports. "If I told you what it is … it's almost 7-figures."

Not bad for someone who threw for one touchdown as a freshman. 

Dollar specifics have been largely hard to come by with NIL laws being so new, but it would hardly be surprising if Young is earning in the high six figures even though he's yet to start a college game. Young has already signed with CAA for marketing deals and he has a deal with Cash App. Young also has large social media following -- almost 83,000 followers on Instagram despite just three posts. 

His success as a recruit has largely set that foundation. Young was a coveted five-star recruit for the Tide's 2020 class and the No. 1 quarterback in that group. Some even projected he was going to win the starting job over Mac Jones heading into last year. Young is likely to start this year, however, and could quickly become the face of college football. William Hill Sportsbook gives him the third-best preseason Heisman odds at +900. 

Yes, being the starting quarterback at Alabama is almost always going to be a lucrative deal in the NIL era. Saban can use that to his advantage, just like any school in a state where NIL laws are effective. But it's also worth pointing out that Young had marketing value even before he stepped foot on to campus. 

Remember, the NCAA's relief waiver for NIL states that high school athletes may also engage in the same types of NIL opportunities without impacting their NCAA eligibility. For prospects like Young, market value doesn't have to coincide with being a college starter. It wouldn't be surprising if some blue-chip recruits or true freshmen end up making more earlier in their career than many established starters will make in their careers.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...nil-deals/

This the beginning of the end.

Saban to 2023, 2024, 2025, etc recruits:
"Our current QB is making $1M. Sign with us and you'll make the same".

How the heck is UC supposed to compete with that.

Because Bama was recruiting the cream of the crop before.

The debate used to be about whether it's good to have dominant college teams or programs. At least that involved some movement in and out of that status based upon coaching changes, NCAA violations, etc. What we are entering now is a world of paid professionals competing against amateurs or at best semi-pros. What does that make "college" football and why would most folks not self-affiliated with a select few programs want to watch?

I highly doubt a season nearly full of complete mismatches serves the long-term competitive interests of the "college" game. If it's about seeing the best professional players and teams compete among themselves, the NFL already fits the bill.