forums

Business owner announces $540K/year NIL commitment to Miami

Advertisement
DoctorKrazey said:
The only thing that concerns me about this is the whole, “Pandora’s box being opened” concept. We all KNOW where this is heading: This week it’s $500 a month at Miami, then it’s $5,000 a month at Ohio State, and then Bama raises it to $10,000 a month, etc. It’s not that I’m against these kids making money, but I’m concerned that eventually it will create an even bigger disparity in college football. All I’m saying is that if a line isn’t drawn somewhere it will continue to grow.
Click to expand...
That would be pretty impressive if numbers get that high PER PLAYER….

But hey if the market truly lets that happen so be it… I trust that Miami in its own market can keep pace.
 
Couldn’t keep up with all the comments so it may have already been mentioned…

With the potential to have individual and team sponsorships such a focal point for major college sports now, I’m curious of the impact it could have on athletes’ revenue streams post-college, whether it’s pro sports or just living as a legend (Johnny Manziel, etc.)

Really I’m just waiting for someone in Miami to create a crypto-coin branded for the canes or the player jerseys to have their cash app instead of last name.
 
Just-W2 said:
Other programs are watching UM. If they can do this, Texas A&M has more billionaires than any other university and they will respond to get recruits.
Click to expand...
Where do you guys get your stats? This is absolutely false as TAMU probably isn't even in the top 25 on this front and even just among "football schools" isn't even anywhere near Stanford, Michigan, USC, etc.
 
Advertisement
All these questions about how much a player may be worth, amount and type of contracts, type of businesses, etc. all underscore the macro point of why we need a marketplace and why one is justified.

The biggest issue in my opinion, won't be how boosters respond and react, how they may or may not create NIL opportunities - though its a real factor. And one I fully welcome and am excited to see within the context of a robust market.

Rather, I think the game changing dynamic is player agency. Dabo, Saban, Kelly, Fisher, etc. - now players aren't as beholden to them for either money (illicit bags/scholarships to now NIL) or necessarily playing time (transfer portal). At the margins - or more accurately at least at the margins - players will have some greater autonomy, some ability to create leverage and protection for themselves beyond Signing Day - the moment they can contract for themselves.

I dont have the answers. I dont see the world in absolutes. I view it terms of options and risks. Its a Bayesian world. And I think its time we revisit and update our a priori beliefs on college football.
 
Did anyone hear Dan Lambert on with Joe Rose this morning? I think he was supposed to interview him around 9am.
 
Salary cap for cfb?

a hard cap that would be enforced by someone more serious than the ncaa?

thoughts? if this ever comes i think it'll happen only after things get far more nuts
 
Advertisement
How are endorsements ops not going to be weighed when choosing what school to go to?

Seems like a disaster. Not that kids are getting paid but in that parity will suffer because the money schools will do whatever is necessary to keep their school at the top of that list. What's to stop a booster from saying I need you to promote my tailgate and hand the kids 100K?
 
clg003 said:
How are endorsements ops not going to be weighed when choosing what school to go to?

Seems like a disaster. Not that kids are getting paid but in that parity will suffer because the money schools will do whatever is necessary to keep their school at the top of that list. What's to stop a booster from saying I need you to promote my tailgate and hand the kids 100K?
Click to expand...

Boosters are already giving kids $100k+ and there is little to no parity anymore (see the teams in the playoffs every year). This eliminates the fear of getting hit with heavy sanctions while some schools are protected regardless of the evidence against them.

NIL at least gives SOME schools a chance to be competitive with Bama, Clemson, etc. in today's recruiting landscape. A school like Duke or UVA, for example, doesn't stand a chance to become a big boy regardless of NIL or not. But, we do now. Just need to combine a good NIL program with better results on the field.
 
stormsurge said:
Salary cap for cfb?

a hard cap that would be enforced by someone more serious than the ncaa?

thoughts? if this ever comes i think it'll happen only after things get far more nuts
Click to expand...
You're more likely to see a salary cap in corporate America before you see one now in college sports as this toothpaste can't be put back in the tube.

As far as an entity "more serious" than the NCAA, if college presidents actually wanted that then they certainly have had the power to reform or abandon the NCAA but they were/are content to sit back and just collect the cash that flows their way.

I absolutely get why a lot of people think this is going to ruin college sports. I think you just have to look at it from the perspective that college sports were already "ruined" by the likes of the SEC (and the general greed of the NCAA) and now at least we're getting some measure of sunlight.
 
Advertisement
Tad Footeball said:
I absolutely get why a lot of people think this is going to ruin college sports. I think you just have to look at it from the perspective that college sports were already "ruined" by the likes of the SEC (and the general greed of the NCAA) and now at least we're getting some measure of sunlight.
Click to expand...
I dont. If people had any clue about college football, in this case, they would know about bags. This has happened for a hot minute now, it just got legalized. Thats really it.
 
Hogan said:
I dont. If people had any clue about college football, in this case, they would know about bags. This has happened for a hot minute now, it just got legalized. Thats really it.
Click to expand...
For sure but ignorance is bliss for a lot of people. Allows them to grasp to a sense of nostalgia (often false nostalgia) or some concept of how they wish things were vs how they actually are.

I'll just never understand the people that acknowledge that widespread "cheating" is obviously happening and that it's punished in a beyond biased manner (in the rare instances that it actually is) but then are still for the status quo. And these people are often fans of programs like ours that certainly aren't advantaged in the old system.
 
ajkreider said:
And so begins the death of CFB. Rich donors will create "companies" for students to "sponsor" and get paid. Good for the kids, bad for the sport
Click to expand...
This is exactly what will happen. It won't be the death of college football, but it's gonna turn into just funneling money to players through a shell company.
 
Advertisement
This definitely feels like the death of college football as we known it. Recruiting will be based on how many endorsements these kids have when they walk on campus. The rich will get all the talent. Still unsure if this helps or us?
 
Cane[]_[]DigIt said:
This definitely feels like the death of college football as we known it.
Click to expand...
Its not the death, jesus, its the same procedure as every year. Its only legal now. If you want to say that college football will die: College Football has been dead for over a decade if thats the standard.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top