Does NIL and Transfer Portal equal Parity in CFB

[VolBallGuy]

I’ve been thinking for a while, Since Saban’s retirement, that Bama’s dynasty is officially over; had it not already been. If Smart at Georgia doesn’t win it all this year, I think they tread down; may tread down regardless due to potential player playing time elsewhere plus potential money. CFB is becoming more like the NFL, will there be any long term dynasties, such as what Bama had? I know Brady and the Pats had their long standing run but, can that be in college with players only playing for four years?

I see Bama going back to the Perkins/Curry eras and another revolving door. With NIL and easy transfer rules, to me, it seems that many CFB teams could have one offs and win the NC. However, do you guys think the expanded playoffs will work more for the traditional blue bloods of CFB. Do you guys think the traditional power houses will always get the premier players, regardless?

Anyone else dreading hearing Saban yabber on ceaselessly on ESPN and hearing him get slobbered all over by everyone?

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Amazing to see so many fans still don't understand NIL.

Agreed. Even after it's explained to them.

 

[JRich]

Manning getting payed by the TX collective means he's not playing for anyone else. Manning may have some NIL market value because of his name but I haven't seen him in any TV commercials so, is it really worth what they're paying him?

Can you explain why players are getting payed based upon position and athletic ability or star rating rather than their NIL market value?

Also, please enlighten us with your definition of pay for play.

At this point, Manning's lucrative NIL deal is based on his namesake as he has done nothing to separate himself from that. You would have to look at the details of his contract, but I'm sure that he does promote products and businesses on his social media accounts, does in person promotions and autograph signings, has his face on Austin billboards, and promotes the school and the football program. He is not a prominent national figure, so we will not see him in TV commercials outside of the Austin viewing area.

If the collectives are smart, the contracts are likely short, maybe for a one year term. If his marketability wains-maybe he gets hurt or doesn't meet expectations on the field-the next deal won't be as lucrative. I will add if he is still riding the bench as a Junior or Senior, his contract will not be worth much. Right now, his current deal is based on the potential success he will have on the field. Like much of investing, there is a level of risk by the investor (NIL collective).

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Okay? That’s legal though, pay for play under the guise of NIL is not an illegal thing lol it’s just a term to label recruiting as “dirty” but it’s been going on for decades, now it’s taxed. The only ppl who have problem with it is the NCAA and they deserve no sympathy

The guy I replied to keeps insisting NIL isn't pay for play. He's just trolling, of course, and I was pointing out the obvious: no big NIL, no Nico at UT.

He's saying I'm "speculating" that the two are connected, as you'd expect from a troll.

And yes, the extreme valuation of athletic talent by schools and getting boosters to pay athletes illegally for decades RUINED college athletics well before the transfer portal and NIL but most fans could pretend it wasn't happening.

Now that they can't pretend, you end up with fans being very upset the "purity of the sport" is being compromised. It's comical.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

At this point, Manning's lucrative NIL deal is based on his namesake as he has done nothing to separate himself from that. You would have to look at the details of his contract, but I'm sure that he does promote products and businesses on his social media accounts, does in person promotions and autograph signings, has his face on Austin billboards, and promotes the school and the football program. He is not a prominent national figure, so we will not see him in TV commercials outside of the Austin viewing area.

If the collectives are smart, the contracts are likely short, maybe for a one year terms. If his marketability wains-maybe he gets hurt or doesn't meet expectations on the field-the next deal won't be as lucrative. I will add if he is still riding the bench as a Junior or Senior, his contract will not be worth much. Right now, his current deal is based on the potential success he will have on the field. Like much of investing, there is a level of risk by the investor (NIL collective).

Arch is in the rare position that he COULD be a national figure because of his family but it's clear the family has chosen otherwise.

Even Cooper was in commercials with his family but not Arch.

Though I think those were gambling or beer commercials and might be "immoral" via the NCAA NIL rules. I'm certain the Manning family could pitch "3 generations of Manning love" Subway, McDonald's, Nike, whatever....... but they've obviously chosen to keep Arch relatively low profile.

 

[GoodTimeVol]

The guy I replied to keeps insisting NIL isn't pay for play. He's just trolling, of course, and I was pointing out the obvious: no big NIL, no Nico at UT.

He's saying I'm "speculating" that the two are connected, as you'd expect from a troll.

And yes, the extreme valuation of athletic talent by schools and getting boosters to pay athletes illegally for decades RUINED college athletics well before the transfer portal and NIL but most fans could pretend it wasn't happening.

Now that they can't pretend, you end up with fans being very upset the "purity of the sport" is being compromised. It's comical.

Well said sorry I should have read through the exchange better

 

[JRich]

Arch is in the rare position that he COULD be a national figure because of his family but it's clear the family has chosen otherwise.

Even Cooper was in commercials with his family but not Arch.

Though I think those were gambling or beer commercials and might be "immoral" via the NCAA NIL rules. I'm certain the Manning family could pitch "3 generations of Manning love" Subway, McDonald's, Nike, whatever....... but they've obviously chosen to keep Arch relatively low profile.

For sure, and I'm sure they want him to focus on his on field success as he has a lot to live up to. He has a lot to prove before he gets to their level.

That family, especially Eli and Peyton has great comedic appeal, not to mention the popularity that football has provided for them.

"I got a hose."

 

[VolPack22]

I think Kirby will get tired of recruiting and re-recruiting 24/7 and try the NFL out within the next 5 years.

 

[ntxVOL]

You're pretty good at throwing out zero evidence claims that defy the facts and the legal definitions.

Legal definitions are irrelevant.

As stated before, pay for play has been around forever. The only difference now is it's being done under the guise of NIL and the NCAA is powerless to stop it.

To argue otherwise is either ignorance or trolling.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

The guy I replied to keeps insisting NIL isn't pay for play. He's just trolling, of course, and I was pointing out the obvious: no big NIL, no Nico at UT.

He's saying I'm "speculating" that the two are connected, as you'd expect from a troll.

And yes, the extreme valuation of athletic talent by schools and getting boosters to pay athletes illegally for decades RUINED college athletics well before the transfer portal and NIL but most fans could pretend it wasn't happening.

Now that they can't pretend, you end up with fans being very upset the "purity of the sport" is being compromised. It's comical.

There never was "paying athletes illegally"..

NCAA rules aren't laws. Ergo, breaking them isn't illegal. In fact, the NCAA rules themselves were the "illegal" acts. They violated all kinds of federal and state laws and regulations.

So say the court cases and injunctions that the NCAA has lost in any related issue.

 

[LWSVOL]

One asks how the schools had these programs, and many did, before basketball and football became the big revenue cows?

Or how schools without big revenue programs manage to have diverse athletic programs?

Not sure how far back in history you would need to go to answer that question. Its been that way for many, many years now...

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

For sure, and I'm sure they want him to focus on his on field success as he has a lot to live up to. He has a lot to prove before he gets to their level.

That family, especially Eli and Peyton has great comedic appeal, not to mention the popularity that football has provided for them.

"I got a hose."

I think the Manning family has handled Arch extremely well. I'm unsure if it's Cooper, who i think Peyton may have said was "the best natural athlete of the Manning boys" and realizes A LOT can go wrong between high school and the NFL, or Archie, who has always had looked out for the family, recalling his protection of Eli when he has drafted.

I've huge personal, private respect for Peyton because of his closeness to UT has let me become aware of large and small things he's done privately for individuals.

I'd like to see Arch in a commercial with his grandad at some point. Something like both of them playing QB in the backyard and Archie beating him and Arch complaining "You got throw to my Dad. He can catch. I was stuck with Peyton....." then toasting Gatorade or something over laughs.

 

[LWSVOL]

You're pretty good at throwing out zero evidence claims that defy the facts and the legal definitions.

I've challenged you to prove your claims. You can't. Your opinion isn't proof. Your conflating NIL with salaries is ludicrous.
Unsourced statements about what unnamed third or fourth paries supposedly said or did isn't proof. It's not even legit evidence.

Then you made two claims that are mutually exclusive. Something that isn't pay for play can't simultaneously be pay for play.

I can recognize that media saying something happened does not make it proof. I have not had an opportunity to sit and record conversations with coaches discussing NIL opportunities with players since NIL has been implemented so I can't provide you any proof.

I assume you have proof that its not happening so I will accept your proof as facts.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

There never was "paying athletes illegally"..

NCAA rules aren't laws. Ergo, breaking them isn't illegal. In fact, the NCAA rules themselves were the "illegal" acts. They violated all kinds of federal and state laws and regulations.

So say the court cases and injunctions that the NCAA has lost in any related issue.

Again, obtuse and trolling. By "illegal" you knew damn well I meant against NCAA rules.

And, sure, the NCAA is in complete violation of Antitrust Laws and will be dismantled.

None of that changes that players have been paid...... wink, wink, nudge, nudge..... to play at schools for decades. I've posted the Joe Nameth video of him saying he was offered "more than my Dad made plus a new car every year" by a school and "they weren't the only ones."

Of course it was pay to play. Was it a written contract for "pay to play?" No.

You're a troll.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Again, obtuse and trolling. By "illegal" you knew damn well I meant against NCAA rules.

And, sure, the NCAA is in complete violation of Antitrust Laws and will be dismantled.

None of that changes that players have been paid...... wink, wink, nudge, nudge..... to play at schools for decades. I've posted the Joe Nameth video of him saying he was offered "more than my Dad made plus a new car every year" by a school and "they weren't the only ones."

Of course it was pay to play. Was it a written contract for "pay to play?" No.

You're a troll.

Your childish name calling is ludicrous.
Grow the hell uo.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Again, obtuse and trolling. By "illegal" you knew damn well I meant against NCAA rules.

And, sure, the NCAA is in complete violation of Antitrust Laws and will be dismantled.

None of that changes that players have been paid...... wink, wink, nudge, nudge..... to play at schools for decades. I've posted the Joe Nameth video of him saying he was offered "more than my Dad made plus a new car every year" by a school and "they weren't the only ones."

Of course it was pay to play. Was it a written contract for "pay to play?" No.

You're a troll.

You can't even use well defined English terms correctly. Then you get butthurt when your mistakes are pointed out. You sound like a Vanderbilt fan.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Again, obtuse and trolling. By "illegal" you knew damn well I meant against NCAA rules.

And, sure, the NCAA is in complete violation of Antitrust Laws and will be dismantled.

None of that changes that players have been paid...... wink, wink, nudge, nudge..... to play at schools for decades. I've posted the Joe Nameth video of him saying he was offered "more than my Dad made plus a new car every year" by a school and "they weren't the only ones."

Of course it was pay to play. Was it a written contract for "pay to play?" No.

You're a troll.

It's laughable that you can't factually back up your claims, then resort to as hominems when you get called out about it. Take a Logic 101 class then get back to me.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

It's laughable that you can't factually back up your claims, then resort to as hominems when you get called out s out it. Take a Logic 101 class then get back to me.

You're a troll. It's fun to watch to you squirm when called out.

Carry on.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

You're a troll. It's fun to watch to you squirm when called out.

Carry on.

You are ludicrously out if touch. LMAO at how you keep embarrassing yourself.

Give back the GED.

 

[LWSVOL]

I think Kirby will get tired of recruiting and re-recruiting 24/7 and try the NFL out within the next 5 years.

That could be the case with any coach including Josh .

 

[Delmar]

Again, obtuse and trolling. By "illegal" you knew damn well I meant against NCAA rules.

And, sure, the NCAA is in complete violation of Antitrust Laws and will be dismantled.

None of that changes that players have been paid...... wink, wink, nudge, nudge..... to play at schools for decades. I've posted the Joe Nameth video of him saying he was offered "more than my Dad made plus a new car every year" by a school and "they weren't the only ones."

Of course it was pay to play. Was it a written contract for "pay to play?" No.

You're a troll.

You are correct. By any reasonable explanation, whether it’s NIL, money coming from boosters or money paid by the schools (when that comes to pass), it’s pay for play. Players are playing and are getting paid. More now than ever before. Not sure why that’s so complicated. Pretty simple to me.

 

[OrangeBeachVol]

That could be the case with any coach including Josh .

Agree LWS. If it gets to the point that its a free for all to the highest bidders for all players it could get ugly, especially if your current roster player stars are getting poached every yr. CFB will come down to the few richest schools. Love CFB. just hoping this doesn't ruin it for us all.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

You are ludicrously out if touch. LMAO at how you keep embarrassing yourself.

Give back the GED.

Trollio! Disses ad hominem attacks while making them! You're humorous. Please continue.

BTW, I cited a YouTube interview with Joe Namath where he alluded to being offered money to play. Of course that was 1960 before he signed with Bear at AL. You may view it at your leisure, though it refers to them as "illegal" so it probably doesn't meet your demanding standards for semantics.

But sure, it was never common. Despite many athletes stating that it happened, you can insist it was never common. They wouldn't possibly know.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Legal definitions are irrelevant.

As stated before, pay for play has been around forever. The only difference now is it's being done under the guise of NIL and the NCAA is powerless to stop it.

To argue otherwise is either ignorance or trolling.

Claiming that legal definitions are irrelevant is delusional. Any argument based on those delusions is completely bogus. The legal definitions are the only ones that matter.

Check the tidal wave of federal court cases and injunctions that support my position.

 

[Voltopia]

You are correct. By any reasonable explanation, whether it’s NIL, money coming from boosters or money paid by the schools (when that comes to pass), it’s pay for play. Players are playing and are getting paid. More now than ever before. Not sure why that’s so complicated. Pretty simple to me.

Totally right. The little semantic game about "the schools are not paying the players" is silly. Proving a business relationship between NIL entities and their respective schools would be a simple matter in a legal setting. A business relationship involves any two parties where the actions of one benefits the business of the other. Even if the school is not literally giving money to the players, the NIL collectives ARE, and those payment benefit the school's business operations. The specific points may not be on paper, but that's not the only way you could prove the relationship - and once you establish the business relationship, a whole new world of legal possibilities emerge.

I mean, some of these NIL collectives are bathed in branded signage, apparel, school promotions, etc. Establishing that relationship would be trivial. This tongue-in-cheek "oh they're not paying them" stuff is nonsense.