The SEC may be engaged in one of the biggest blunders / misreadings in the history of sport.

In the NIL era, college athletes have an opportunity to get paid immediately. They get paid for their visibility and play - NOT for riding the bench.

Alabama, Oklahoma and other big schools have a well-established tradition of having 5-star Freshman sit on the bench waiting their turn-

Convince a 4 or 5 star football player who can get a 25K deal playing in a big market at Houston or TCU where they will start, to sit on the bench a year.

The more I think about it - the more I see
1) Players are not going to go to a team where they have to wait their turn
2) Players who want to get paid will gravitate to big markets (So Cal, Dallas, Atlanta) or passionate fanbases (Notre Dame, UNC, and yes even a Kansas State)
3) Oklahoma, Ohio State, Alabama, may find increased competition for their 4-star depth, and may find it harder to reload every year.

In the end, NIL shifts some recruiting power to some key big population market teams (USC, UCLA, Houston, TCU, Georgia Tech) enough that the advantage being pursued by the SEC is not what they are making it out to be.

Likewise, you know what begets players getting paid? Winning.

Convince a 5 star player to come to your Missouri squad that has finished below 10th in the SEC the past few years, who can expect to have losing records every year - to play for you (unless its a local kid). The top 5-6 of the SEC are going to destroy any recruiting advantage of the rest of the teams.

For every sexy Oklahoma vs Auburn matchup, you're going to have a very unsexy Mizzou vs. Kentucky.

It is very likely that the NIL creates new powers not in the SEC, that the SEC's ratings are going to show ESPN has way over payed and overplayed their hand.

(08-03-2021 10:38 PM)jgkojak Wrote:  The SEC may be engaged in one of the biggest blunders / misreadings in the history of sport.

In the NIL era, college athletes have an opportunity to get paid immediately. They get paid for their visibility and play - NOT for riding the bench.

Alabama, Oklahoma and other big schools have a well-established tradition of having 5-star Freshman sit on the bench waiting their turn-

Convince a 4 or 5 star football player who can get a 25K deal playing in a big market at Houston or TCU where they will start, to sit on the bench a year.

The more I think about it - the more I see
1) Players are not going to go to a team where they have to wait their turn
2) Players who want to get paid will gravitate to big markets (So Cal, Dallas, Atlanta) or passionate fanbases (Notre Dame, UNC, and yes even a Kansas State)
3) Oklahoma, Ohio State, Alabama, may find increased competition for their 4-star depth, and may find it harder to reload every year.

In the end, NIL shifts some recruiting power to some key big population market teams (USC, UCLA, Houston, TCU, Georgia Tech) enough that the advantage being pursued by the SEC is not what they are making it out to be.

Likewise, you know what begets players getting paid? Winning.

Convince a 5 star player to come to your Missouri squad that has finished below 10th in the SEC the past few years, who can expect to have losing records every year - to play for you (unless its a local kid). The top 5-6 of the SEC are going to destroy any recruiting advantage of the rest of the teams.

For every sexy Oklahoma vs Auburn matchup, you're going to have a very unsexy Mizzou vs. Kentucky.

It is very likely that the NIL creates new powers not in the SEC, that the SEC's ratings are going to show ESPN has way over payed and overplayed their hand.

Those are good points when viewed under the lense of the current model. But how long will that model last?

Any school or conference that has the money and feels the need can just offer players more direct pay. A 4 or 5 star player who can make $25k in the city of Houston might instead prefer to sit a while on the bench at Georgia for, say, $35k from UGA or the SEC plus 3rd party NIL. UH or the AAC might counter but can they keep up?

Any conference that wants to try to improve parity among its teams and that treats with a players association and that maintains an education objective can just drop the requirement that their players attend one of their schools and implement a draft.

"And the University of Missouri picked ___ who will be learning ___ at ___! and who thankfully honored his NDA!" ; )

Interesting points. Although aside from interested wealthy alumni trying to stock their team, sponsors will want a return on investment as you note. And while it’s true that playing time would be important, so is mere visibility, and players can’t market DURING a game.

So who’s more valuable - a starter for a school whose game draws 1.1 million viewers, or a player on a team whose game draws 3.25 million viewers? Now admittedly it depends on how much the NIL allows the players to use school branding (even just in clothing in the ads/tweets/etc). But also everyone is likely to be looking for that “home run” prospect, and the wealth will probably be spread generously to those who catch Nick Saban’s eye.

And if the playoffs expand as expected, that’s the most visible platform of the year - so sponsors may be keen for any SEC team that may finish in the top 6 of the league and be more likely to get a playoff spot.

(08-03-2021 10:38 PM)jgkojak Wrote:  The SEC may be engaged in one of the biggest blunders / misreadings in the history of sport.

In the NIL era, college athletes have an opportunity to get paid immediately. They get paid for their visibility and play - NOT for riding the bench.

Alabama, Oklahoma and other big schools have a well-established tradition of having 5-star Freshman sit on the bench waiting their turn-

Convince a 4 or 5 star football player who can get a 25K deal playing in a big market at Houston or TCU where they will start, to sit on the bench a year.

The more I think about it - the more I see
1) Players are not going to go to a team where they have to wait their turn

Eh .... why has the Alabama QB Bryce Young racked up $800k in NIL so far? IIRC he has taken only about 20 snaps so far his whole 'career', as a backup last year.

His "visibility" is being the QB at Nick Saban's famous Alabama team. Same with the kid leaving school early for Ohio State.

It's clear now that 5-star recruits can bank big NIL before they even take a snap, IF they are on an elite program.

In contrast, starting at Houston or UCF or wherever is far less visible.

The 5-star guys who sign with Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State, etc. ARE visible the moment they sign, and bigly so, moreso then they likely ever will be at TCU, Houston, San Diego State, etc.

Now sure, a 5-star guy isn't going to sit on Saban or Dabo's bench for long, the transfer portal makes it easy for him to move, but IMO that has nothing to do with NIL, it has to do with getting playing time so as to impress NFL scouts. But they will go their first like they always have, IMO.

This motivational factor is already present with facilities, coaching, training programs, and NFL access. NIL will just make the benefits more apparent and immediate, but don't expect the hierarchy to change. Don't confuse the physical location of a school with its market.

I'm sure this very NIL issue is a primary reason why the SEC is growing with Texas and Oklahoma. Those are two of the best CFB brands that offer huge markets that will help keep more 4 and 5 star athletes in the SEC. Recruits will make more in Dallas and Houston markets with Texas and Oklahoma than TCU and Houston...

I'm sure there will be opportunities for TCU and Houston to cherry pick a recruit here and there with the promise of immediate playing time...just like now.

(08-04-2021 09:17 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  Interesting points. Although aside from interested wealthy alumni trying to stock their team, sponsors will want a return on investment as you note. And while it’s true that playing time would be important, so is mere visibility, and players can’t market DURING a game.

So who’s more valuable - a starter for a school whose game draws 1.1 million viewers, or a player on a team whose game draws 3.25 million viewers? Now admittedly it depends on how much the NIL allows the players to use school branding (even just in clothing in the ads/tweets/etc). But also everyone is likely to be looking for that “home run” prospect, and the wealth will probably be spread generously to those who catch Nick Saban’s eye.

And if the playoffs expand as expected, that’s the most visible platform of the year - so sponsors may be keen for any SEC team that may finish in the top 6 of the league and be more likely to get a playoff spot.

You bring up another point. Sponsors (many of them boosters) will want a return on their money. Are coaching staffs going to get pressure from the sponsors and players to consider that in playing time?

Regardless of NIL, many incoming Freshman, especially QBs, are going to transfer if they aren't the starter. Plus, G5 and players on losing Power 5 teams will continually be recruited like FCS guys with experience by the winning programs as transfers. We're about to see lower numbers of scholarships offered to HS seniors from the class of 2022 and 2023.

Would you rather be a back-up @ Bama making $15K NIL, or the star at Purdue making $60K??

Boiler Up!

(08-04-2021 09:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-03-2021 10:38 PM)jgkojak Wrote:  The SEC may be engaged in one of the biggest blunders / misreadings in the history of sport.

In the NIL era, college athletes have an opportunity to get paid immediately. They get paid for their visibility and play - NOT for riding the bench.

Alabama, Oklahoma and other big schools have a well-established tradition of having 5-star Freshman sit on the bench waiting their turn-

Convince a 4 or 5 star football player who can get a 25K deal playing in a big market at Houston or TCU where they will start, to sit on the bench a year.

The more I think about it - the more I see
1) Players are not going to go to a team where they have to wait their turn

Eh .... why has the Alabama QB Bryce Young racked up $800k in NIL so far? IIRC he has taken only about 20 snaps so far his whole 'career', as a backup last year.

His "visibility" is being the QB at Nick Saban's famous Alabama team. Same with the kid leaving school early for Ohio State.

It's clear now that 5-star recruits can bank big NIL before they even take a snap, IF they are on an elite program.

In contrast, starting at Houston or UCF or wherever is far less visible.

The 5-star guys who sign with Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State, etc. ARE visible the moment they sign, and bigly so, moreso then they likely ever will be at TCU, Houston, San Diego State, etc.

Now sure, a 5-star guy isn't going to sit on Saban or Dabo's bench for long, the transfer portal makes it easy for him to move, but IMO that has nothing to do with NIL, it has to do with getting playing time so as to impress NFL scouts. But they will go their first like they always have, IMO.

And the 5 star guy that's behind a junior? While he's redshirting the junior makes it clear he's staying for another year? And Alabama has another good redshirt, and just got a commit from another 5 star?

But it's not just about QBs. So you're a solid backup freshman linebacker. Stay at Alabama for a 'team' level pay, or go back home and be a team captain? Which is better? We don't know yet.

Then there's basketball. How does this change the 1 and done model? Will I make more at Wisconsin or in Turkey if I'm not an NBA quality player? Am I welcome to stay if I want, or do I need to go to make room for the next guy?

This NIL is not an exact science.

The endorsements look like they are going to go with the recruit so playing time won't be as much of a factor as you guys think.

Conference will be a factor with bigger and better NIL opportunities for P5 guys and it will be more important than market by itself.

(08-04-2021 12:54 PM)Cleanface Wrote:  Would you rather be a back-up @ Bama making $15K NIL, or the star at Purdue making $60K??

Boiler Up!

Especially but not only for QBs, transferring is no guarantee of being the star on your next team. Just using the Pac-12 as an example, there have been many QBs who transferred in recent years after not winning the starter's job, but AFAIK only one of them became the starter on the team he transferred to. That's Jake Haener, who lost the QB competition at UW a couple of years ago and became the starter at Fresno State last year.