The “We Will” Collective

[FriendlySpartan]

yeah those numbers seem really inflated to me too, and im sure it is to induce panic giving.

They are insanely inflated. People just throw out a bunch of random numbers for what player x will cost and the reality is that no one ever shows anyone making anywhere near this amount of money from a schools nil fund. 50k is essentially the standard.

 

[Paddythefatty]

One thing I have not seen in the discussion and analysis of this new NIL regime is the change in total dollars spent and made in the industry. Here's what I mean:
- Universities - will still sell tickets and jerseys, will still provide scholarship funds, and will still be required to build top-notch facilities to remain competitive, which means donations will need to come in at the same rate they always have. So, this seems like no change, in the aggregate.
- Players - will still receive a scholarship for tuition/room/board and a living stipend from the University. Now, players may also receive NIL funds, which is a completely new bundle of money entering the equation. Thus, a net increase in money flowing to players, in the aggregate.
- Fans/donors - will still buy tickets and jerseys, and will still donate to facilities, athletic department, etc. In that regard, they will spend the same as always. Now, you have NIL funds that will also be paid to players, and these will be coming from fans/donors (at least, that's my understanding of where this money comes from). Thus, the entire new bundle of money that is involved in college athletics is expected to be provided exclusively by fans/donors.

Here is my point - this entire conversation pre-supposes that fans/donors of Universities have the interest and the financial wherewithal to fund an additional bundle of money (NIL payments) that was never there before, thereby donating some percentage more than before in the aggregate, for no specific additional benefit, other than the fear that if they don't do it, others will and their favorite team will suffer competitively. The early discussion of the topic and rumored actions (creating collectives, etc.) seem to suggest that this is absolutely true - that is, fans/donors are collectively willing to give more money, there apparently just needed to be a compelling case made as to why that additional giving was necessary (like competing in the NIL landscape). I just wonder if it will actually turn out to be true, or whether the assumed willingness of donors to give in these collectives will not measure up. It's an amazing economic exercise, that people can be convinced to simply increase spending, getting nothing directly tangible in return (just the hope that their giving will advance the cause of their favorite University's athletic department, which ostensibly is why donors gave money previously as well).

Sorry to ramble, this topic is just objectively interesting, in addition to sparking subjective emotions in people (including me) about the effect this will have on amateurism in athletics, competitive balance, etc.

I think what will separate schools, other than billionaires who can easily throw money at it every year, is business attached to NIL to pay players & refill the coffers for future players. Donating every year isn’t sustainable but using the players to generate a return & maybe give them an incentive to earn some % might be where it goes.

 

[mharder]

Wasn’t this whole NIL issue about the “poor” student athlete not making any money off their own NIL while their University did? So, they wanted a piece off that, thus “taking” some from the University. But, now the University is not giving up any cheddar but gen pop is? Seems pretty f’d up to me.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Wasn’t this whole NIL issue about the “poor” student athlete not making any money off their own NIL while their University did? So, they wanted a piece off that, thus “taking” some from the University. But, now the University is not giving up any cheddar but gen pop is? Seems pretty f’d up to me.

University isn’t allowed to pay the players, if it was this would be a very different conversation. What you are describing is happening. Players are making money off their NIL. They can sign sponsorships which is essentially what this money is, and use their social media and name to make other income.

 

[ISUCyclones2015]

Those numbers for 3-4 star recruits are an absolute joke that no one with any sense believes. The amount that people should be focused on is a general fund for all football and basketball players where each individual gets around 50k.

Isn’t there some MSU site you can post at? We’re past the need for Big 10 view points.

 

[Mr.G.Spot]

We have a alumni base of 250,000...I guess..

Seems like there would be 10x thst if 3-4000 kids graduate a year?

Anyway.. if just 10% or 25,000 donate $50 a year that’s over $1mil just from average alumni..

2.2% of living alums contribute to the National Cyclone Club. Good luck getting 10%.

 

[CyCrazy]

Isn’t there some MSU site you can post at? We’re past the need for Big 10 view points.

As long as you post elsewhere than I would call that a deal.

 

[AuH2O]

Whatever happens, as things are structured at the moment, college sports as an industry is getting an influx of many million dollars per university (times maybe a hundred schools in football, maybe two hundred or more in mens basketball), all in what amounts to donations, that was not being donated before! That will change the game/industry for sure...not confident it will necessarily be in ways that I like, but it will change it.

Maybe it will, but there will also be a bunch of money simply that gets diverted from general AD donations. The donations were given to the general AD, sport, or capital project in the past because that’s what they could do. Once everybody had good facilities they knew it had diminished return but those were the above board option.

 

[cyatheart]

I'm not sure how I feel about all this yet. It is without question making me lose interest for right now. I change my mind on these things as the new season rolls around. Still thinking about it, but if we are already saying we will be last in the Big 12 and at the same level as Wichita State regardless how much I give. It doesn't fill me with hope.

 

[Cycl1]

I'm not sure how I feel about all this yet. It is without question making me lose interest for right now. I change my mind on these things as the new season rolls around. Still thinking about it, but if we are already saying we will be last in the Big 12 and at the same level as Wichita State regardless how much I give. It doesn't fill me with hope.

Yeah, if giving my entire salary will get us a 2 star player.... Meh.

 

[Nycclone]

2.2% of living alums contribute to the National Cyclone Club. Good luck getting 10%.

Yeah, they don’t really try to get people to donate. I can think of zero examples of anyone asking me to contribute to athletics. If they did, I probably would have. Hope this opinion helps provide perspective.

 

[Cycl1]

Yeah, they don’t really try to get people to donate. I can think of zero examples of anyone asking me to contribute to athletics. If they did, I probably would have. Hope this opinion helps provide perspective.

Haven't even heard of the national cyclone club.

 

[CycloneErik]

Like Netflix for Cyclone football.

Call it Nutkicks and see where things go?

 

[isufbcurt]

Its almost like there is the potential for corruption in this whole system.

Maybe they could put the AAU in charge to keep it clean. I don't think the IOC or UN would be available to help.

I was thinking FIFA

 

[Mr.G.Spot]

Yeah, they don’t really try to get people to donate. I can think of zero examples of anyone asking me to contribute to athletics. If they did, I probably would have. Hope this opinion helps provide perspective.

It doesn't. I've never been asked. I do it because I think it's the right thing to do.

 

[aeroclone]

Yeah, if giving my entire salary will get us a 2 star player.... Meh.

Yeah, I have always known we were at a financial disadvantage, but if these numbers are even close to accurate it seems clear that we don't have a place at the big kids table. I'm not interested mid major sports, so that would be the end of the line for me.

 

[Jer]

They are insanely inflated. People just throw out a bunch of random numbers for what player x will cost and the reality is that no one ever shows anyone making anywhere near this amount of money from a schools nil fund. 50k is essentially the standard.

You are severely mistaken. You have no idea what you’re talking about. It’s no secret if you had any connections.

 

[t-noah]

What will the administration costs be?

I too am interested in knowing this and what percentage of NIL will actually get to a particular player.

One thing I have not seen in the discussion and analysis of this new NIL regime is the change in total dollars spent and made in the industry. Here's what I mean:
- Universities - will still sell tickets and jerseys, will still provide scholarship funds, and will still be required to build top-notch facilities to remain competitive, which means donations will need to come in at the same rate they always have. So, this seems like no change, in the aggregate.
- Players - will still receive a scholarship for tuition/room/board and a living stipend from the University. Now, players may also receive NIL funds, which is a completely new bundle of money entering the equation. Thus, a net increase in money flowing to players, in the aggregate.
- Fans/donors - will still buy tickets and jerseys, and will still donate to facilities, athletic department, etc. In that regard, they will spend the same as always. Now, you have NIL funds that will also be paid to players, and these will be coming from fans/donors (at least, that's my understanding of where this money comes from). Thus, the entire new bundle of money that is involved in college athletics is expected to be provided exclusively by fans/donors.

Here is my point - this entire conversation pre-supposes that fans/donors of Universities have the interest and the financial wherewithal to fund an additional bundle of money (NIL payments) that was never there before, thereby donating some percentage more than before in the aggregate, for no specific additional benefit, other than the fear that if they don't do it, others will and their favorite team will suffer competitively. The early discussion of the topic and rumored actions (creating collectives, etc.) seem to suggest that this is absolutely true - that is, fans/donors are collectively willing to give more money, there apparently just needed to be a compelling case made as to why that additional giving was necessary (like competing in the NIL landscape). I just wonder if it will actually turn out to be true, or whether the assumed willingness of donors to give in these collectives will not measure up. It's an amazing economic exercise, that people can be convinced to simply increase spending, getting nothing directly tangible in return (just the hope that their giving will advance the cause of their favorite University's athletic department, which ostensibly is why donors gave money previously as well).

Sorry to ramble, this topic is just objectively interesting, in addition to sparking subjective emotions in people (including me) about the effect this will have on amateurism in athletics, competitive balance, etc.

You should post more. Spread it out. Being serious, not derisive at all.

 

[cmjh10]

Oscar T at Kentucky got 2 mil to come back. Granted, he was NPOY, but that’s a **** ton of money.

 

[Rabbuk]

Oscar T at Kentucky got 2 mil to come back. Granted, he was NPOY, but that’s a **** ton of money.

I wonder how that works since he's from Nigeria(?) I think(?). Unless he is on a work visa or something?