Skip to main content

Try to think through the effects of the new world in college baseball from the perspective of the players/recruits replaced by the transfers. Also admit that this is playing by the present rules and definitely is a sound approach to winning a national championship. Then add in the NIL money.

https://twitter.com/LSUbasebal...TGXivS57H8A&s=19

A whole new world.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

@Goosegg posted:

Try to think through the effects of the new world in college baseball from the perspective of the players/recruits replaced by the transfers. Also admit that this is playing by the present rules and definitely is a sound approach to winning a national championship. Then add in the NIL money.

https://twitter.com/LSUbasebal...TGXivS57H8A&s=19

A whole new world.

I am sure that LSU used NIL to get many of the players to transfer, but I don't believe that it was the only reason why most wanted to transfer.

JMO

This is what everybody wanted - athletes being able to make money off their image. They heard all the stories of eating ramen and illegally accepting gifts because they had no money. Now that the kids can do whatever they want and go wherever they want everybody wants it gone.

While I was anti NIL, for this reason, I have always thought students should be free to transfer. It's their education, they should be able to get it wherever they want. Wouldn't be surprised if we start moving towards NIL deals that are contract based. Meaning you can't transfer to take another NIL deal.

I don't see how they could do that.  An NIL is theoretically between an individual athlete and the entity that wants to pay him for the use of his NIL.  I mean, of course I know that most of these are "companies" supported by alumni who are paying for "charitable appearances".  So I guess they could try contracts where they tie the money to remaining at the school - as long as the athlete was performing well.  And break the contract for injury or bad performance or bad behavior.  But would athletes sign those contracts?  The more I type, the more I think that the whole rotten system is going to collapse, sooner rather than later.

Not every D1 baseball program in the country is throwing money at athletes to come to play at their school, can't speak for other sports.

Some states have laws to protect both player and institution, others don't. Some are using NLI wisely to help athletes pay for tuition (not every school is funded), others are using NIL to get players to come to their program because that will mean more money for that program. I saw that at one school there will be an NIL payout when an athletes jersey or shirt is sold. I don't know how that will work. But that's fair. I like what Bar Stool is doing and I like how athletes get payouts from companies for being internet influencers. Football will be in full swing this weekend, which will bring in millions and millions of dollars. Share it.

I have no problem with it all, if done the right way for the right reasons.

JMO

I wasn't focusing on the NIL aspect; that is just a piece of the puzzle.

I was trying to make potential college recruits (and their parents) see how out of their control all their well-laid plans are in light of the landscape of the present day.

LSU (and its peers) recruits kids early - real early (9th grade, earlier if possible). How many of those 20+ "commits" (yes, 20 a class) will actually play a role at LSU? Well, that 18 year old in that class of 20 will need to compete not just against the remnant of the 20+ in the two/three classes above him - but compete against the absolute best transfer players in the country.

Fine, we say; the cream will rise to the top, competition is good. But each of those 20+ were the cream of their time. So, most will find homes in other programs. Which programs, you ask? Well, LSU peer programs, mid-majors, JUCO powerhouses. What happens to the players in those programs displaced by the LSU former commits/players transfering/matriculating to the new  college? It trickles down from there, eventually impacting virtually EVERY D1 program in the game of musical chairs, but with players.

If we were discussing professional baseball, that's fine and understood as the rules of the road - perform or walk; but the underpinning of college ball is SUPPOSED to be getting a reasonable education.

I don't know how a family navigates this new world; the LSUs are effectively the same as unaffiliated minor league teams, building a brand new roster EVERY year - while simultaneously stuffing the pipeline with HS dreamers who live on hopium and wear their LSU gear through the HS halls.

The blame isn't with LSU - its playing within the rules, bringing in heavy weight coaches to teach (note: NOT DEVELOP) these rental players. But, parents and players need to realize that the kid is a simple commodity to most D1 programs - fungible, replaceable, transitory.

Anyone thinking kids get a real college education under these circumstances is seeing an illusion.

While the current rules allow for the annual reconstruction of power teams, that is totally inconsistent with any real education for most kids. (For example, just think about transferring credits.)

If a family values the educational aspect of college - and not just giving it lip service - the new world is very difficult to navigate.

What has been created - IMO - is a system which has totally lost and failed in the mission: a reasonable college education. What has been created is a business where players - who are supposed to be students - are merely disposable workers, cogs in a machine, who are used and disposed of at will.

In its desire to dismantle the NCAA oversight and overbearing ways, college coaches got their dream: disposable gladiators to whom nothing is owed and from whom everything is expected.

End of rant.

What percentage of college athletes can expect to make any significant income on NIL?

If would guess many could make a few hundred bucks a year but I doubt very many of them could make a lot of money except for future first round draft pick level of talent players.

I think NIL is a good thing but most won't make significant if any money from that.

@Dominik85 posted:

What percentage of college athletes can expect to make any significant income on NIL?

If would guess many could make a few hundred bucks a year but I doubt very many of them could make a lot of money except for future first round draft pick level of talent players.

I think NIL is a good thing but most won't make significant if any money from that.

This granular reality is lost on many players; but dreams live forever.

@Goosegg posted:

I wasn't focusing on the NIL aspect; that is just a piece of the puzzle.

I was trying to make potential college recruits (and their parents) see how out of their control all their well-laid plans are in light of the landscape of the present day.

LSU (and its peers) recruits kids early - real early (9th grade, earlier if possible). How many of those 20+ "commits" (yes, 20 a class) will actually play a role at LSU? Well, that 18 year old in that class of 20 will need to compete not just against the remnant of the 20+ in the two/three classes above him - but compete against the absolute best transfer players in the country.

Fine, we say; the cream will rise to the top, competition is good. But each of those 20+ were the cream of their time. So, most will find homes in other programs. Which programs, you ask? Well, LSU peer programs, mid-majors, JUCO powerhouses. What happens to the players in those programs displaced by the LSU former commits/players transfering/matriculating to the new  college? It trickles down from there, eventually impacting virtually EVERY D1 program in the game of musical chairs, but with players.

If we were discussing professional baseball, that's fine and understood as the rules of the road - perform or walk; but the underpinning of college ball is SUPPOSED to be getting a reasonable education.

I don't know how a family navigates this new world; the LSUs are effectively the same as unaffiliated minor league teams, building a brand new roster EVERY year - while simultaneously stuffing the pipeline with HS dreamers who live on hopium and wear their LSU gear through the HS halls.

The blame isn't with LSU - its playing within the rules, bringing in heavy weight coaches to teach (note: NOT DEVELOP) these rental players. But, parents and players need to realize that the kid is a simple commodity to most D1 programs - fungible, replaceable, transitory.

Anyone thinking kids get a real college education under these circumstances is seeing an illusion.

While the current rules allow for the annual reconstruction of power teams, that is totally inconsistent with any real education for most kids. (For example, just think about transferring credits.)

If a family values the educational aspect of college - and not just giving it lip service - the new world is very difficult to navigate.

What has been created - IMO - is a system which has totally lost and failed in the mission: a reasonable college education. What has been created is a business where players - who are supposed to be students - are merely disposable workers, cogs in a machine, who are used and disposed of at will.

In its desire to dismantle the NCAA oversight and overbearing ways, college coaches got their dream: disposable gladiators to whom nothing is owed and from whom everything is expected.

End of rant.

Have you been reading my mail, sir? Many of us have been saying this for the past 2 years. And I for one have been amazed at how many HS players (and parents) refuse to recognize what is going on despite the facts being right there in front of them. They continue to waste money on showcase events that play to the wrong audience, chase numbers instead of skills, pay for scouting service ratings, and essentially plod along as tho nothing has changed. It’s very frustrating to watch for those of us that try to help kids get placed. IMO never have player expectations been more unrealistic.  It’s almost as if they have been brainwashed by the PG, PBR, and VTool media and can’t see the truth. Hmmmmm?  Brainwashed by media ….….. I have seen a lot of that somewhere else too. Just can’t quite remember where. Oh well, it will come to me.

@Dominik85 posted:

What percentage of college athletes can expect to make any significant income on NIL?

If would guess many could make a few hundred bucks a year but I doubt very many of them could make a lot of money except for future first round draft pick level of talent players.

I think NIL is a good thing but most won't make significant if any money from that.

I imagine some super "hot" guy will figure out how to make some serious coin off their looks like that LSU gymnast.  Both my teen boys are well aware of her

Completely agree that the baseball (probably most college sports) recruiting world has completely changed.  Even the athlete’s campus(es) experience is probably going to be drastically altered.

Agree with much of the detail that adbono shared.  Much of what I see on the ground is inline with what adbono has shared in the past.

Most of these changes really are driven in large part to the change of the transfer portal.  Studs and developing studs are getting more then one bite at the apple.  This will negatively effect former or non-developing studs.

Where I differ is on NIL.  Most of the comments have had a underlying assumption which I think we will find to be false.  The underlying assumption is that the NIL will be used for athletes to monetize themselves by selling widgets like professional athletes have always done.  I propose that is wrong, what we will find is that boosters will find ways to use NIL to get kids on campus to better their teams, who cares if they sell widgets.  All these multimillion dollar facilities that used to attract kids where paid for by boosters.  Now boosters can skip the middle man and just pay the kid.  This is actually a good thing.  We have all complained about 11.7 for 35 slots.  Now the market can take care of the issue.  Yes it will be more capitalistic, and college sports will look different, but that might just be a good thing.  

After just going through the recruiting process again with my son, the big NIL difference maker, especially in the SEC, is the collective for the school. It was mentioned earlier about "how much will these kids actually make, a few hundred". I will tell you this, most of the big schools are not (and are not supposed to be) giving a set in stone number of how much you will get if you come to that school. But they are giving you a range of what the NIL income was for their team. The basement for a lot of these schools was $6k-$8k and that was in part because of the school's collective.

https://www.on3.com/nil/news/w...how-do-they-operate/

We have all complained about 11.7 for 35 slots.  Now the market can take care of the issue. 

You are going to hear a lot more about "full rides" to schools because schools are selling the NIL money to bridge the gap between athletic money, academic money, and the cost of going to school. Also, when athletic money is not available, combining academic money and NIL becomes a selling point during the recruiting process. NIL has definitely become a game changer, but it is like the wild west now.

Go in with your eyes open.  That's my only advice.  Ask for things in writing. I know at our school, 3 athletes that had summer surgeries were asked to give up scholarships.  One did, because he was getting a couple thousand a month in NIL.  Guess what, when they handed out the NIL contracts this year, he didn't get one.  No warning.  I wasn't sure if it was just happening in a few schools, but when my son visited his PT, the PT brought up 2 guys from another part of the country (P5) who were told that they were injured and the program didn't want to waste a scholarship on them during a year they couldn't compete, so to move on.  There aren't a ton of schools going to the portal for a guy who just had surgery.  

Well, this is exactly the kind of thing I mean.  In the business world, no-one would bat an eye at taking money away from injured players.  Colleges are supposed to be different.  If they are not, then the sports teams should not be part of the college.

Personally I am leaning towards any school with an NIL collective (i.e. not just individuals monetizing their personality) disengaging the teams completely from the school.  Allow them to keep the "brand name" for a fee, but then just run them like businesses, and pay the athletes with booster money.  Don't make the athletes be students.  Call them what they are.  Would fans care if the "Ohio State" football team players were students? or the "LSU" baseball players?

Now boosters can skip the middle man and just pay the kid.  This is actually a good thing.  We have all complained about 11.7 for 35 slots.  Now the market can take care of the issue.  Yes it will be more capitalistic, and college sports will look different, but that might just be a good thing.  

Just don't call it "college sports" because that's not what it is.

@ARCEKU21 posted:

You are going to hear a lot more about "full rides" to schools because schools are selling the NIL money to bridge the gap between athletic money, academic money, and the cost of going to school. Also, when athletic money is not available, combining academic money and NIL becomes a selling point during the recruiting process. NIL has definitely become a game changer, but it is like the wild west now.

I am not sure that schools can outright hand anyone $$. It's all done through collectives. All teams should have their own collectives.

Here is a scenerio. The coach calls the collective and says I have a player that needs $ to help pay for tuition or housing. The collective has been approved as will be the company employing the player. The player has to report income and pays taxes. This is a great way to help out students. It especially helps the ones who didn't play in 2020.

I am not 100% on who pays the player. But this is how it should be. Get students that need the $$s to help pay school costs, not get a new car to drive for the season. JMO

I am not 100% on the above. But I did read that it is against NCAA NIL rules for a coach to offer money to recruits or transfers to come play at their program.

And yes it is like the wild west but I think in time it will work out.

Collectives are the problem.  Under the wording of NIL they are illegal.  They are not used for Name, Image or Likeness.  They are just giving players money with no use of their Name Image or Likeness.  Here's your money.  LSU brought in 6 guys and had 2 others signed but they went draft.  Those 6 will guarantee take someone's position.  And they were paid for with a collective.  They are doing nothing to earn their money and no one is using their Name Image or Likeness to give them money.  This is the problem i have.  Yes, UT is also doing it in football and basketball and I have a problem with it.  If you are paying a kid for an advertisement, a meet and greet, an appearance, selling their jersey or tshirt or cap I'm fine with it.  They are getting paid for their NIL.  But not just giving it.  But once the paste is out of the tube there is no putting it back.  The richest programs can buy a Natty and the poor ones won't be able to compete.  It will take a few years to develop but it will come to pass.

The Transfer portal has changed recruiting because who wants to bring someone in and teach them when you can get someone who has already proven it on a high level.  Only a few MLB teams develop through their minor league systems.  The powerhouses bring in the others.

Well, the particularly rotten thing about this is the collective is entirely unsupervised by anyone.  The possibility of fraud, corruption, bribery, you name it, is off the charts.

This is not true. Some states made legit laws to protect the player and collectives as to  what you can and cannot do.

Others did not, can you guess which ones?

Last edited by TPM

I don't see how they could do that.  An NIL is theoretically between an individual athlete and the entity that wants to pay him for the use of his NIL.  I mean, of course I know that most of these are "companies" supported by alumni who are paying for "charitable appearances".  So I guess they could try contracts where they tie the money to remaining at the school - as long as the athlete was performing well.  And break the contract for injury or bad performance or bad behavior.  But would athletes sign those contracts?  The more I type, the more I think that the whole rotten system is going to collapse, sooner rather than later.

Non compete.

I agree TPM.  When the wrong school does it or the NCAA gets an itch they want to scratch they will shut it down but I think it will take a while.  I'm sure somehow these guys are doing something they can try to call NIL but it is not a clear one like most.  Again the collectives are only paying less than 1%.  The others are having to work real hard for any NIL money they are getting.   I told son the other day he could probably get a part-time job that would pay better than the NIL deals he is getting but it is networking and preparing him for the future so it is part of his education.  He is learning to talk to business men and sell himself and all the meet and greets have to be good for him in the long run.  Plus he is smart enough to work it to get free golf, free cookies, free mattress and pillow, free lawyer representation (hope he never needs it), free sunflower seeds, and free clothing.  His podcast is great for teaching him how to talk on the air from the other side if he ever wants to do broadcasting.

@PitchingFan posted:

I agree TPM.  When the wrong school does it or the NCAA gets an itch they want to scratch they will shut it down but I think it will take a while.  I'm sure somehow these guys are doing something they can try to call NIL but it is not a clear one like most.  Again the collectives are only paying less than 1%.  The others are having to work real hard for any NIL money they are getting.   I told son the other day he could probably get a part-time job that would pay better than the NIL deals he is getting but it is networking and preparing him for the future so it is part of his education.  He is learning to talk to business men and sell himself and all the meet and greets have to be good for him in the long run.  Plus he is smart enough to work it to get free golf, free cookies, free mattress and pillow, free lawyer representation (hope he never needs it), free sunflower seeds, and free clothing.  His podcast is great for teaching him how to talk on the air from the other side if he ever wants to do broadcasting.

That’s a good take on the situation. Btw, speaking well on air isn’t a requisite for broadcasting baseball games. Eduardo Perez and Ben McDonald have proven that. It’s all about connections and who you know. Eduardo Perez and Ben McDonald have proven that too.

Well, this is exactly the kind of thing I mean.  In the business world, no-one would bat an eye at taking money away from injured players.  Colleges are supposed to be different.  If they are not, then the sports teams should not be part of the college.

Personally I am leaning towards any school with an NIL collective (i.e. not just individuals monetizing their personality) disengaging the teams completely from the school.  Allow them to keep the "brand name" for a fee, but then just run them like businesses, and pay the athletes with booster money.  Don't make the athletes be students.  Call them what they are.  Would fans care if the "Ohio State" football team players were students? or the "LSU" baseball players?

Just don't call it "college sports" because that's not what it is.

Strongly agree.  Its long past the point of many of the top players being actual students or anyone caring.  The value of the school is in the brand and the equity that is built into the brand.  So why can't other brands sponsor teams?  How long before the Duke Blue Devils are playing the Nike Stars?

Athletes could become employees of the university. Then they have the option of taking classes free of charge or not. Obviously, this would only be for higher profile programs.

Using the old football classifications across the board in all sports there would be a big divide in D1. A majority of D1 programs and most sports aren’t major revenue generators. They would become D1-AA programs.

Some might are this makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. It’s already occurring. Look at the new Big 10 tv contract.

@K9 posted:

The value of the school is in the brand and the equity that is built into the brand.  So why can't other brands sponsor teams?  How long before the Duke Blue Devils are playing the Nike Stars?

@K9

I apologize for not understanding your point.

Nike and Adidas are the largest suppliers of athletic gear to D1 athletic programs. Everything from their shirts, shorts, shoes, uniforms has their logo on it. Not only do they supply athletic gear, coaches have contracts and get lots of $$ money to spend for themselves on gear besides what is provided at work.

Yet athletes never received a dime for wearing the sponsors gear.  Now some of that has changed and I have no issue with athletes receiving money, but more so for what reasons.

JMO

It will be interesting to see how the collectives affect sports at certain colleges.   I am an Arkansas fan and have made a lot of connections through baseball.  Arkansas NIL in baseball hasn't been very good so far and I think the weak portal haul is a sign of that.  The money is going to basketball and football.  I doubt there are many schools that have enough booster money to fund three sports for NIL deals.  The "word" at Arkansas is that every athlete will get 25k a year through the Hunt collective but that has been the "word" for about 6 months now.  Football is king in the SEC and basketball is on the rise with good coaches at most schools.  I just wonder if there is enough serious money to go around for all of the sports.  A&M with it's massive booster base is probably in line to compete the most.     

Yes I think it is 11 million but it is from a collective.  I'm not a fan of it.  But remember I'm only a UT baseball fan not a fan of UT football or basketball.  My son might be.  I'm actually a UGA and FSU football fan.  I think it should be illegal but I'm sure they have a way that makes it not pay to play like Alabama saying their QB had to send a certain number of tweets or social media posts after each game which made it not pay to play.  I hope they stop it.  But I don't see it coming anytime soon.

@TPM posted:

@K9

I apologize for not understanding your point.

Nike and Adidas are the largest suppliers of athletic gear to D1 athletic programs. Everything from their shirts, shorts, shoes, uniforms has their logo on it. Not only do they supply athletic gear, coaches have contracts and get lots of $$ money to spend for themselves on gear besides what is provided at work.

Yet athletes never received a dime for wearing the sponsors gear.  Now some of that has changed and I have no issue with athletes receiving money, but more so for what reasons.

JMO

@TPM

Just trying to build off of the excellent post by @anotherparent .  As college athletics become less and less about college, wondering if some other sponsors get involved.  Nike probably a bad example because as you aptly point out they are already getting enriched by the current model.

@TPM posted:

Is it true that a 2023 football player has an 8 mil deal to bring him to UT? Now that's crazy

Isn't that pay to play? I just don't get that one.

Well yes, it's just circumvented pay to play. I believe it was posted here a few months ago but there  was an article about a group of donors  (a mini collective) giving players at a P5 school money from a small business or a foundation of some sort and in exchange they had to go to one event per semester but could go to as many as they wanted. Only one was required.

I don't like getting too into this too much but there were a lot of people who thought emotionally and didn't consider the path it might delve down ($ influencing players to go to and leave schools). People were naive enough to believe the star RB could make a few bucks signing autographs at the mall for a few hours on a Saturday in the offseason and not have to eat ramen anymore. It is going to render whatever was left of the "education" portion of the student athlete experience to be completely useless.

There has always been a significant percentage of college athletes that are not concerned about getting their degree. When I graduated from Texas A&M in 1979 I was one of 10 seniors that year. 5 got degrees and 5 didn’t. That made no sense to me at the time. But my how times have changed. A college degree isn’t worth the same today as it was 40 years ago. Theoretically players today can make more money off NIL and other side deals than many of their non-athletic peers trying to enter a terrible job market. I see a lot of critical comments about NIL and it’s impact on college athletics. And I will be the first to admit that it’s out of control at the moment. But college athletes have been screwed for decades so let them make hay while they can w/o a bunch of hate. It will come to an end as soon as the NCAA can figure out a way to have all the NIL money funneled to them. And you can bet your ass they are working on that right now.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×