Combating "NIL" Related Roster Turnover

[DisgruntledVol]

Random Sunday thought. I'm all for guys getting paid, but I hate how players are jumping from school to school just to chase just a little more "NIL" money. That kind of turnover diminishes programs where athletes can truly develop & feeds into nonsensical instant gratification.

What if players have to play a certain amount of years to unlock certain amounts of "NIL" money where it incentivizes athletes to stay at their school? Similar concept to a vesting period for employees for stock options/profit sharing as a way to help retain employees (golden handcuffs). For example, in order to see a certain amount of "NIL" dollars, an athlete would have to stay for at least 4 years if they're a freshman enrollee, 3 years as a transfer (with exceptions made for declaring for the NFL draft as an underclassman, genuine family matters, mental health, etc.). If an athlete feels like they have to make a move to a different school after sophomore/junior year for a better opportunity before that vesting period is complete, then so be it. Then they would give up that "NIL" money they'd otherwise be entitled to.

Let me be clear, if it's a direct marketing opportunity for a specific athlete/group of athletes (such as showing up for an event or being used in a social media post), then they should get that money when upon completion of said marketing service according to the agreement between the athlete(s) & business. The vesting period for "NIL" is to deter roster raiding by bigger schools. Oh, and maybe hard "NIL collective" spending caps earmarked specifically towards transfers in the portal.

The joys of modern college football.

Thoughts?

 

[WillisWG]

No to vesting. You have any thoughts on Saturday's game or next Saturday?

 

[ntxVOL]

If you tried to implement any of that, it wouldn't work and other teams would just rob your roster of any talent.

The schools/conferences/NCAA are all powerless when trying to limit NIL in any way.

 

[IndianaVol]

For all the good it did for UT to take the NCAA to court earlier this year, I fear we may have done some damage too.

It puts NIL square in the hands of the courts now and not any governing body, institution, or conglomerate of institutions.

 

[VolDave53]

For all the good it did for UT to take the NCAA to court earlier this year, I fear we may have done some damage too.

It puts NIL square in the hands of the courts now and not any governing body, institution, or conglomerate of institutions.

It is difficult to justify the governance of free enterprise, which is the basis of our lawsuit vs. the NCAA.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Random Sunday thought. I'm all for guys getting paid, but I hate how players are jumping from school to school just to chase just a little more "NIL" money. That kind of turnover diminishes programs where athletes can truly develop & feeds into nonsensical instant gratification.

What if players have to play a certain amount of years to unlock certain amounts of "NIL" money where it incentivizes athletes to stay at their school? Similar concept to a vesting period for employees for stock options/profit sharing as a way to help retain employees (golden handcuffs). For example, in order to see a certain amount of "NIL" dollars, an athlete would have to stay for at least 4 years if they're a freshman enrollee, 3 years as a transfer (with exceptions made for declaring for the NFL draft as an underclassman, genuine family matters, mental health, etc.). If an athlete feels like they have to make a move to a different school after sophomore/junior year for a better opportunity before that vesting period is complete, then so be it. Then they would give up that "NIL" money they'd otherwise be entitled to.

Let me be clear, if it's a direct marketing opportunity for a specific athlete/group of athletes (such as showing up for an event or being used in a social media post), then they should get that money when upon completion of said marketing service according to the agreement between the athlete(s) & business. The vesting period for "NIL" is to deter roster raiding by bigger schools. Oh, and maybe hard "NIL collective" spending caps earmarked specifically towards transfers in the portal.

The joys of modern college football.

Thoughts?

Isn't that what's happening now?

Schools recruit and essentially, but perhaps off the record, say we'll get you NIL worth $XXX this year, then we'll talk about next year.

Somebody else comes along offering $XXX + $YYY for the next year, so you can either match it or they jump.

"Vesting" or trying to claw money back is what aTm apparently tried and got called out by a transferring player about the deals. Players aren't stupid and they hold all the cards with NIL now.

If a school plays games with the offers, they'll just move to a school that isn't playing games.

 

[Voltopia]

Random Sunday thought. I'm all for guys getting paid, but I hate how players are jumping from school to school just to chase just a little more "NIL" money. That kind of turnover diminishes programs where athletes can truly develop & feeds into nonsensical instant gratification.

What if players have to play a certain amount of years to unlock certain amounts of "NIL" money where it incentivizes athletes to stay at their school? Similar concept to a vesting period for employees for stock options/profit sharing as a way to help retain employees (golden handcuffs). For example, in order to see a certain amount of "NIL" dollars, an athlete would have to stay for at least 4 years if they're a freshman enrollee, 3 years as a transfer (with exceptions made for declaring for the NFL draft as an underclassman, genuine family matters, mental health, etc.). If an athlete feels like they have to make a move to a different school after sophomore/junior year for a better opportunity before that vesting period is complete, then so be it. Then they would give up that "NIL" money they'd otherwise be entitled to.

Let me be clear, if it's a direct marketing opportunity for a specific athlete/group of athletes (such as showing up for an event or being used in a social media post), then they should get that money when upon completion of said marketing service according to the agreement between the athlete(s) & business. The vesting period for "NIL" is to deter roster raiding by bigger schools. Oh, and maybe hard "NIL collective" spending caps earmarked specifically towards transfers in the portal.

The joys of modern college football.

Thoughts?

Sorry man, that's all history now. You're trying hard here, but the barn doors are gone - and the barn is gone too. Staying a a particular school doesn't matter. Players can come at go nearly at will. And for quite a few their investment in the program will be only as strong as the NIL money makes it. Here today, gone tomorrow.

You're making the mistake of viewing NIL-related roster turnover as a problem. The NIL-related roster turnover is a FEATURE. People wanted all the rules gone. They're gone - or they're shortly going to be.

Make of that what you will. Support it to the extent you think you want to. It isn't going to change.