The Supreme Court followed the law. It was a unanimous decision. You are placing the blame in the wrong place.
Rocco's NIL value
- Thread starter JP4CY
- Start date
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
This current system is unsustainable.
The reason the NCAA had such draconian rules about outside employment and restrictions on what recruits/athletes could receive was because prior to that schools were basically paying big-time recruits to come, whether through cash-laden handshakes from alumni or no-show “jobs” from big donors. It was decided this kind of arms race was bad for competition and bad for the sport.
Until now - between NIL, collectives, and the transfer portal, things are even worse than they were in the days when schools could just line up donors to promise cash to players. The flow of money is practically unlimited, at least for blue blood schools, and players are able to shop themselves to the highest bidder with the free transfer rules.
Mid-level and smaller schools will never again have a core of outstanding players to build any kind of success on. Once a player at an Eastern Michigan or a Purdue or an Iowa State shows a spark of performance, the Ohio States and Alabamas and USCs and Oklahomas will be on them like wolves. Those schools will end up as minor-league feeder systems for the top of the B1G and SEC.
Things have got to change or college football will die.
The reason the NCAA had such draconian rules about outside employment and restrictions on what recruits/athletes could receive was because prior to that schools were basically paying big-time recruits to come, whether through cash-laden handshakes from alumni or no-show “jobs” from big donors. It was decided this kind of arms race was bad for competition and bad for the sport.
Until now - between NIL, collectives, and the transfer portal, things are even worse than they were in the days when schools could just line up donors to promise cash to players. The flow of money is practically unlimited, at least for blue blood schools, and players are able to shop themselves to the highest bidder with the free transfer rules.
Mid-level and smaller schools will never again have a core of outstanding players to build any kind of success on. Once a player at an Eastern Michigan or a Purdue or an Iowa State shows a spark of performance, the Ohio States and Alabamas and USCs and Oklahomas will be on them like wolves. Those schools will end up as minor-league feeder systems for the top of the B1G and SEC.
Things have got to change or college football will die.
I’m talking about those that never play at Alabama, but could start at ISU.
I respect your opinion but in my opinion the product on the field is unchanged, arguably even better as stars are staying in college longer, spreading talent out to more teams, ect. Why is it making it unwatchable? Genuinely curious.
I'd say many bowl games were hard to watch or less appealing but I'm not sure how you fix that.
Even if you move the transfer portal or something I'm not sure how you force players to play in something that's no more than a chance for players to get practice/game experience.
Under the new ownership, Deadspin has become practically unusable (and unreadable), but this archived piece is worth a read: https://deadspin.com/how-the-myth-of-the-ncaa-student-athlete-was-born-1524282374
This is the fault of the schools, and 70 years of bad karma is coming home to roost all at once.
Agree. Bowl games might be too far gone to fix at this point. The regular season is still incredible.
I realize the $ amount and the player movement makes people uncomfortable but once the ball is kicked college football tradition and it’s pageantry still remains.
I will add it is the hypocrisy of universities that want to tell us how to live and treat people, provide safe spaces when things don't go your way, and that everything should be as equal as possible. However, when it comes to athletics, they want unbridalied capitalism to squash the less fortunate and needy. Hypocrisy at its best.
Totally agree. We knew it was gonna be a problem. It is.
It's kind of like allowing a known destructive virus to escape into the general population, knowing that eventually there may be a vaccine. Too close to Covid, sorry.
I do like that the players are being compensated. The present system isn't the way to do it however.
Let’s talk about opportunity cost. And risk management.
Take that $1 million offer, go to X school. Take the risk of not earning the starting position. Take the risk of having that $1 mill pulled after a year. Take the risk of not fitting perfectly with the surrounding talent/OC/school/etc.
Is that 700K margin for a year or two worth the risk of potentially damaging the chances of a possible NFL paycheck?
More aptly, if Brock Purdy had taken the “big offer” when he came out of high school and gone to Alabama instead…would he be starting in the NFL now? Would he have have gotten a chance to start or develop?
The overall picture is worth more than what is ultimately a “modest” sum (on the NFL scale) in the long run.
I haven’t counted, but it seems to me that there has been a veritable flood of quarterbacks—especially highly rated ones—into the Portal. Some of them won’t find a decent home. If we needed to, there’s always a solid option.
Without doing the math, these posts are both good points.
The problem is that “managed well” is an incredible long shot. We’ve seen for decades how many former NFL players end up broke, the risk has to be even higher for an 18-22 year old kid.
Even if they’re smart enough to take their very first $ and invest in a mortgage-free house.
