The Transfer Portal is Leveling the Field. Next Up: NIL Caps

[casual-observer]

Interesting that the portal has “leveled the field”. Isn’t it arguable that the strong teams have only gotten stronger due to the portal?

Great question/argument and I don't know the answer. Georgia rarely utilizes the portal?

(BTW, I think Georgia is also lucky - their schedule has been extremely soft the past couple of years, especially in the SEC. Auburn has been stinking it up for a couple of years, the East has been weak, and their other games have been Arkansas and Miss State. They played well against Ole Miss but...I think their time will end soon.)

 

[WillOverstreetFanClub]

I do. This NIL crap is ridiculous.

I don’t see how NIL is ridiculous at all. All this money was going somehwere before and nobody had any problem with it. Now that the athletes are being paid it’s being labeled as out of control. The biggest issue in college football isn’t NIL it’s the Wild West transfer portal and the degree to which players can leave and immediately play. If a player wants to transfer once…. Fine. After that it has to stop. Take care of that and players can get paid and it won’t seem like free agency. Just my .02.

 

[OldVol]

ESPN reporting this afternoon that 20.5% of the 2023 rosters were made up of portal transfers. This up from a mere 6.5% in 2019.

I used to think the NIL would be the end of College Football but, that coupled with the new Transfer Portal rules (along with a great hire in CJH) has brought my favorite Tennessee Vols from rocky bottom closer to Rocky Top in a very short amount of time.

Think about how difficult it is to compete with the Georgia's, Alabama's, Ohio State's, and Clemson's year-after-year as they stock their 2nd and 3rd strings with five-star recruits. Think about all the great Portal Transfers in the past three years that have augmented the Volunteer program.

Next up, is going to have to be a leveling of the NIL monies. Texas A&M has shown that, money can't buy everything. But this feels a lot like the Dallas Cowboys of the 70's and 80's. How many Super Bowls do you think Dallas would have won if the salary caps had not been implemented? Now in the NFL, it's common to see a team go from worst to first or reverse over the course of even one season.

It seems like it should be on the NCAA's to-do list: How does a team like Washington with an average NIL of $32K ever supposed to compete with a Georgia ($143K), Ohio State ($139K), or Alabama ($125K)?

The horse is out of the barn on this one. The court has ruled and you can no more cap what a kid can be paid than you can what a CEO can be paid. It’s a free market. Which basically makes it a free-for-all.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I don’t see how NIL is ridiculous at all. All this money was going somehwere before and nobody had any problem with it. Now that the athletes are being paid it’s being labeled as out of control. The biggest issue in college football isn’t NIL it’s the Wild West transfer portal and the degree to which players can leave and immediately play. If a player wants to transfer once…. Fine. After that it has to stop. Take care of that and players can get paid and it won’t seem like free agency. Just my .02.

It’s always been out of control. Also not all of the players are getting NIL deals. I think this is is going to lead to serious locker room issues. I mean when you have one guy that can ink a multimillion dollar NIL deal and the vast majority of the rest of the team can’t get any, that’s a problem. Also, these kids don’t deserve all this money along with the free education and red carpet treatment they get.

 

[TNHopeful505]

Do we even wanna go back?

No way.

 

[Undercs]

Transfer portal much more harmful to college sports than NIL. College baseball I believe is harmed the most. Coaches now are resisting taking position players out of high school in favor of transfers from other D1 programs. And why wouldn’t they? The transfer players have already had college experience and routinely face high level pitching. Even elite level position players are having to go D2 or Juco first just to get the chance to play at a high level D1 program. So much roster turnover out there and school hoping. I don’t care for it at all. I like high school kids going straight to their dream school, developing into players all 4 years at that school. As it is now, they’re just players for short term hire to help a coach win quick. In 5 years you will forget 80% of UT’s baseball roster because most of those guys outside of pitchers won’t be there more than 2 years

this times 100 close the portal and nil resolves itself.

 

[cherokeeeVOL]

Is it really leveling the field though in football? It seems like the exact same teams are at the top like they are every year. Maybe it will be true in next few years.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

The NCAA loses that lawsuit. They already lost the "educational compensation" lawsuit 9-0 in the Supreme Court because the justices felt athletes were being singled out from other students with caps on what could be provided.

It'll be a similar NIL lawsuit if you cap it. Unless athletes have the exact same rights as other students to earning via NIL, it's a not going to be legal.

Once again, how in my scenario above is an individual's ability to get his NIL money limited by putting a CAP on schools NOT the kid. Might impact which school he has to earn his money at, but not limiting his NIL earnings potential. Just like the NEW visit rules, you cannot limit the number of visits a kid can have, but you can limit the number of OV's each school can offer. How many kids aspirations to play for a school have not been fulfilled because the school of choice hit the 85 limit?

That is the reason it is important to keep NIL funding outside the control of the institutions. The schools cannot control the amount of money a kid can get, but must comply by accepting or not accepting an LOI from a kid based on their REPORTED NIL deals and it's impact on the schools CAP. Violations simply reduce a schools cap, just like schollies. Only THE school and the NCAA compliance departments KNOW the individuals and the schools NIL values.

What is the basis for the court loss when emulating schollie limits for each institution? All a kid has to do to get ANY amount of money is to submit the income waiver with his deals, initially with his LOI, and incrementally when they increase or decrease. Each waiver must be accepted by the school in order for him to participate at that school. It really only puts the NIL provider at risk for funding a kid that cannot play at THEIR school of choice if one exists. Try going to court and to withdraw the money if his court protected NAME, IMAGE, or LIKENESS do not change, just because a school or two will not accept his hit on THEIR cap. Bet other P5 schools or even MTSU will have room if UT does not, etc. Until EVERY school is out of cap space there is no basis for noncompliance by the NCAA who will welcome the kid and his NIL deals to any school.

SO, once again what is the basis for a court loss for compliance with the Court ruling as it stands today?

 

[Pappy]

it's funny how a few years ago, when CEO's were making so much money, our POTUS said that they need to share their wealth to make life fair. Now when it's 'athletes' making a stipend, people say, 'it's a free market and they should be able to earn as much as they can'. Are we going to demand that these kids share their wealth with underprivileged athletes from smaller, less fortunate schools? Capitalism...ain't it great to be an American?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Once again, how in my scenario above is an individual's ability to get his NIL money limited by putting a CAP on schools NOT the kid. Might impact which school he has to earn his money at, but not limiting his NIL earnings potential. Just like the NEW visit rules, you cannot limit the number of visits a kid can have, but you can limit the number of OV's each school can offer. How many kids aspirations to play for a school have not been fulfilled because the school of choice hit the 85 limit?

That is the reason it is important to keep NIL funding outside the control of the institutions. The schools cannot control the amount of money a kid can get, but must comply by accepting or not accepting an LOI from a kid based on their REPORTED NIL deals and it's impact on the schools CAP. Violations simply reduce a schools cap, just like schollies. Only THE school and the NCAA compliance departments KNOW the individuals and the schools NIL values.

What is the basis for the court loss when emulating schollie limits for each institution? All a kid has to do to get ANY amount of money is to submit the income waiver with his deals, initially with his LOI, and incrementally when they increase or decrease. Each waiver must be accepted by the school in order for him to participate at that school. It really only puts the NIL provider at risk for funding a kid that cannot play at THEIR school of choice if one exists. Try going to court and to withdraw the money if his court protected NAME, IMAGE, or LIKENESS do not change, just because a school or two will not accept his hit on THEIR cap. Bet other P5 schools or even MTSU will have room if UT does not, etc. Until EVERY school is out of cap space there is no basis for noncompliance by the NCAA who will welcome the kid and his NIL deals to any school.

SO, once again what is the basis for a court loss for compliance with the Court ruling as it stands today?

I'm not an attorney but the basis for the 9-0 Supreme Court loss the NCAA suffered was that the schools COLLECTIVELY denied athletes the same rights other scholarships could offer other non-athlete students.

You cannot single out the group of athletes and tell them they cannot get the same benefits as non-athletes.

The schools cannot get away with limiting the legitimate earnings of Americans by couching it as "we're not limiting them, we're limiting ourselves."

In effect, you are singling out a group, athletes, and limiting their earning at the school. You'll lose just like they did on scholarship compensation. I believe the case was NCAA v Alston. Google it and read.

Edit: also the idea that the NCAA attorneys didn't think of telling the courts: "we're not limiting the students, we're limiting ourselves when it comes to educational scholarship benefits for athletes" because that's what they were doing...... limiting the benefits the school scholarships could offer to athletes vs other students.

It's exactly the same argument: we're not limiting students, just ourselves. 9-0 loss in the Supreme Court.

 

[Vol8188]

1. No it’s not leveling the field
2. Why in the world would we want to level the field?

The unequal playing field is what makes college football exciting. I’ve never seen an NFL fanbase rush the field and throw their goalpost in the river.

 

[Raebo]

Once again, how in my scenario above is an individual's ability to get his NIL money limited by putting a CAP on schools NOT the kid. Might impact which school he has to earn his money at, but not limiting his NIL earnings potential. Just like the NEW visit rules, you cannot limit the number of visits a kid can have, but you can limit the number of OV's each school can offer. How many kids aspirations to play for a school have not been fulfilled because the school of choice hit the 85 limit?

That is the reason it is important to keep NIL funding outside the control of the institutions. The schools cannot control the amount of money a kid can get, but must comply by accepting or not accepting an LOI from a kid based on their REPORTED NIL deals and it's impact on the schools CAP. Violations simply reduce a schools cap, just like schollies. Only THE school and the NCAA compliance departments KNOW the individuals and the schools NIL values.

What is the basis for the court loss when emulating schollie limits for each institution? All a kid has to do to get ANY amount of money is to submit the income waiver with his deals, initially with his LOI, and incrementally when they increase or decrease. Each waiver must be accepted by the school in order for him to participate at that school. It really only puts the NIL provider at risk for funding a kid that cannot play at THEIR school of choice if one exists. Try going to court and to withdraw the money if his court protected NAME, IMAGE, or LIKENESS do not change, just because a school or two will not accept his hit on THEIR cap. Bet other P5 schools or even MTSU will have room if UT does not, etc. Until EVERY school is out of cap space there is no basis for noncompliance by the NCAA who will welcome the kid and his NIL deals to any school.

SO, once again what is the basis for a court loss for compliance with the Court ruling as it stands today?

I kind of got lost in all this but let me play devils advocate. Let’s say Hooker and Rikea Jackson transfer to Tennessee and do exceptionally well. Their Name, Image, and Likeness value jump ways up but Tennessee is already at their cap after signing a couple recruits with high NIL deals. If I understand your scenario, if Hooker/Jackson want to get paid their NIL value, they would have had to transfer since Tennessee was already at their cap.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Once again, how in my scenario above is an individual's ability to get his NIL money limited by putting a CAP on schools NOT the kid. Might impact which school he has to earn his money at, but not limiting his NIL earnings potential. Just like the NEW visit rules, you cannot limit the number of visits a kid can have, but you can limit the number of OV's each school can offer. How many kids aspirations to play for a school have not been fulfilled because the school of choice hit the 85 limit?

That is the reason it is important to keep NIL funding outside the control of the institutions. The schools cannot control the amount of money a kid can get, but must comply by accepting or not accepting an LOI from a kid based on their REPORTED NIL deals and it's impact on the schools CAP. Violations simply reduce a schools cap, just like schollies. Only THE school and the NCAA compliance departments KNOW the individuals and the schools NIL values.

What is the basis for the court loss when emulating schollie limits for each institution? All a kid has to do to get ANY amount of money is to submit the income waiver with his deals, initially with his LOI, and incrementally when they increase or decrease. Each waiver must be accepted by the school in order for him to participate at that school. It really only puts the NIL provider at risk for funding a kid that cannot play at THEIR school of choice if one exists. Try going to court and to withdraw the money if his court protected NAME, IMAGE, or LIKENESS do not change, just because a school or two will not accept his hit on THEIR cap. Bet other P5 schools or even MTSU will have room if UT does not, etc. Until EVERY school is out of cap space there is no basis for noncompliance by the NCAA who will welcome the kid and his NIL deals to any school.

SO, once again what is the basis for a court loss for compliance with the Court ruling as it stands today?

Here is a quote from Justice Kavanaugh in Alston concerning the schools colluding to control benefits to players:

"All of the restaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’ wages on the theory that 'customers prefer' to eat food from low-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’ salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a 'love of the law.' Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ income in order to create a 'purer' form of helping the sick. News organizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reporters to preserve a 'tradition' of public-minded journalism. Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to camera crews to kindle a 'spirit of amateurism”

It's pretty clear the schools are going to have to prove to the Court WHY they have the right to limit legitimate NIL earnings and it not be considered "wage fixing."

All of Alston is why the NCAA is completely worthless now when it comes to making rules concerning player compensation. It is ALL "wage fixing" and the NCAA and college athletics is destroyed when the Court calls athletes legally employees, not students.

The NCAA wants to avoid getting sued and losing the big revenue cow they've set up.

 

[casual-observer]

it's funny how a few years ago, when CEO's were making so much money, our POTUS said that they need to share their wealth to make life fair. Now when it's 'athletes' making a stipend, people say, 'it's a free market and they should be able to earn as much as they can'. Are we going to demand that these kids share their wealth with underprivileged athletes from smaller, less fortunate schools? Capitalism...ain't it great to be an American?

I like your comments and questions here. I'm a supporter of Capitalism even when, this past year for the first time in my career, I found myself on the wrong side suffering from corporate greed. It stung but (thanks to capitalism and a free economy) I just took my marbles elsewhere and have ended up in a much better position.

Sharing that, I'm a hard NO on both sides...rich CEOs shouldn't have to share there profits (they'll eventually get theirs when their employees revolt) and I don't think students should have to split theirs, either.

I also believe these young athlete's deserve to earn whatever and however much they can because of who they are or how they market themselves.

What I'm interested in understanding is - is there anyway to achieve parity in the realm of NIL?
I've answered this earlier in the thread: NO, I'm not interested in loosing to Vanderbilt 50% of the time. But I am against a system that allows the rich to continue to just get richer. That was the point of the op...the transfer portal has somewhat leveled the playing field:

-> Good players can get better if they can find the right system (cough, cough, Hendon Hooker...Bo Nix)
-> Decimated teams (like Tennessee and Colorado) can recover quickly by augmenting losses either from max exodus or maybe less sinister senior leadership loss

My original question: How does a team like Ole Miss (average NIL $39K) ever supposed to compete with the 3x likes of Georgia (avg NIL $143K)?

 

[CAVPUT]

ESPN reporting this afternoon that 20.5% of the 2023 rosters were made up of portal transfers. This up from a mere 6.5% in 2019.

I used to think the NIL would be the end of College Football but, that coupled with the new Transfer Portal rules (along with a great hire in CJH) has brought my favorite Tennessee Vols from rocky bottom closer to Rocky Top in a very short amount of time.

Think about how difficult it is to compete with the Georgia's, Alabama's, Ohio State's, and Clemson's year-after-year as they stock their 2nd and 3rd strings with five-star recruits. Think about all the great Portal Transfers in the past three years that have augmented the Volunteer program.

Next up, is going to have to be a leveling of the NIL monies. Texas A&M has shown that, money can't buy everything. But this feels a lot like the Dallas Cowboys of the 70's and 80's. How many Super Bowls do you think Dallas would have won if the salary caps had not been implemented? Now in the NFL, it's common to see a team go from worst to first or reverse over the course of even one season.

It seems like it should be on the NCAA's to-do list: How does a team like Washington with an average NIL of $32K ever supposed to compete with a Georgia ($143K), Ohio State ($139K), or Alabama ($125K)?

Not so sure. From the standpoint that it has an impact on depth at programs like uga and bama, I see their recruiting being at such a level that it is more an annoyance than a real hit. Besides, uga and bama...bama in particular...seem to cherry pick the very best from the portal so it's kind of a wash. At the end of the day, it's all about recruiting with the portal filling holes with experienced players. As long as uga and bama continue their recruiting dominance, they'll be very, very hard to compete with much less catch.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I like your comments and questions here. I'm a supporter of Capitalism even when, this past year for the first time in my career, I found myself on the wrong side suffering from corporate greed. It stung but (thanks to capitalism and a free economy) I just took my marbles elsewhere and have ended up in a much better position.

Sharing that, I'm a hard NO on both sides...rich CEOs shouldn't have to share there profits (they'll eventually get theirs when their employees revolt) and I don't think students should have to split theirs, either.

I also believe these young athlete's deserve to earn whatever and however much they can because of who they are or how they market themselves.

What I'm interested in understanding is - is there anyway to achieve parity in the realm of NIL?
I've answered this earlier in the thread: NO, I'm not interested in loosing to Vanderbilt 50% of the time. But I am against a system that allows the rich to continue to just get richer. That was the point of the op...the transfer portal has somewhat leveled the playing field:

-> Good players can get better if they can find the right system (cough, cough, Hendon Hooker...Bo Nix)
-> Decimated teams (like Tennessee and Colorado) can recover quickly by augmenting losses either from max exodus or maybe less sinister senior leadership loss

My original question: How does a team like Ole Miss (average NIL $39K) ever supposed to compete with the 3x likes of Georgia (avg NIL $143K)?

Your last question is why the NCAA fought NIL to the bitter end. They realized the disparity ALREADY in what some boosters were paying at some schools for football and basketball athletes via "dark money" and knew that out in the open those schools or others could do, as aTm did, "buy" a #1 recruiting class.

There's no way for them to control NIL, so no way for them to limit athlete payment currently. Before, they could......they didn't usually but they could...... regulate the "dark money" by sanctioning donors, schools, etc. With NIL it's out of their hands and into state legislatures, who are political animals and will respond to fans saying "Look what Texas did! They opened up NIL completely! Tennessee will fall behind unless you open it too!" Because politicians pander to get elected.

This is "end stage amateurism" for college athletics. Some football and basketball players are worth far more money, obviously as NIL has shown, to teams than a scholarship. They are good enough even at the high school level to get paid for their work.

Short of establishing a pro league, unionizing the players, then establishing "parity wage caps" the schools are stuck wanting it both ways:

We want good players who are worth millions
BUT
we want to call our business an amateur sport.

It can't happen. That's why the pros started collective bargaining to level the talent on the teams and keep a club from buying all the good players.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

It’s always been out of control. Also not all of the players are getting NIL deals. I think this is is going to lead to serious locker room issues. I mean when you have one guy that can ink a multimillion dollar NIL deal and the vast majority of the rest of the team can’t get any, that’s a problem. Also, these kids don’t deserve all this money along with the free education and red carpet treatment they get.

Obviously, the market disagrees with you about what the athletes are worth.

Was Peyton worth no more than a scholarship to Tennessee, then a few months later worth millions to Indianapolis? Seriously? You believe that?

 

[dalton_vol]

Salary caps on coaches and NCAA, conference, and school administrators need to be first. Only then can they begin to talk about limiting the players’ cut.

salary cap on the conferences? they'll pass the expense on to us. 10 dollar smokey dog.

 

[Elhanan]

The market they’ve unleashed for transfers is working wonderfully for us. The lack of any NIL caps will too. The teams without the same funds as the big boys will be at a disadvantage until they change that.

One of the major reason to support NIL deals was transparency. No need to pay players under the table because it’s too easy to do it legally. Putting any caps on would just move that process back to the shadows. Basically pulling out one of the biggest reasons to support it in the first place.

 

[cobbwebb0710]

who cares, 11-2 doesn’t mean squat in the sec. . What that means is you didn’t play in a championship game. I don’t get why people think this is some badge of success especially since the Vols couldn’t build on it. UGA got stuck with the 1980 tag because they went 10-3, 11-2 multiple times when Richt was their coach, it was literally a laughing point. Gone are the days when playing in a bowl matters if it isn’t in the bowls that lead to a championship. It is like the Reece Bobby quote, “2nd place is the first loser.”

I give you a like for quoting Reese Bobby!

 

[DaddyChad]

who cares, 11-2 doesn’t mean squat in the sec. . What that means is you didn’t play in a championship game. I don’t get why people think this is some badge of success especially since the Vols couldn’t build on it. UGA got stuck with the 1980 tag because they went 10-3, 11-2 multiple times when Richt was their coach, it was literally a laughing point. Gone are the days when playing in a bowl matters if it isn’t in the bowls that lead to a championship. It is like the Reece Bobby quote, “2nd place is the first loser.”

It’s idiotic to think that Tennessee can snap fingers and be where Georgia is all of the sudden. Also idiotic to not see there has been progress. Kirby inherited a loaded roster from Richt.

 

[woodpusher]

Once again, how in my scenario above is an individual's ability to get his NIL money limited by putting a CAP on schools NOT the kid. Might impact which school he has to earn his money at, but not limiting his NIL earnings potential. Just like the NEW visit rules, you cannot limit the number of visits a kid can have, but you can limit the number of OV's each school can offer. How many kids aspirations to play for a school have not been fulfilled because the school of choice hit the 85 limit?

That is the reason it is important to keep NIL funding outside the control of the institutions. The schools cannot control the amount of money a kid can get, but must comply by accepting or not accepting an LOI from a kid based on their REPORTED NIL deals and it's impact on the schools CAP. Violations simply reduce a schools cap, just like schollies. Only THE school and the NCAA compliance departments KNOW the individuals and the schools NIL values.

What is the basis for the court loss when emulating schollie limits for each institution? All a kid has to do to get ANY amount of money is to submit the income waiver with his deals, initially with his LOI, and incrementally when they increase or decrease. Each waiver must be accepted by the school in order for him to participate at that school. It really only puts the NIL provider at risk for funding a kid that cannot play at THEIR school of choice if one exists. Try going to court and to withdraw the money if his court protected NAME, IMAGE, or LIKENESS do not change, just because a school or two will not accept his hit on THEIR cap. Bet other P5 schools or even MTSU will have room if UT does not, etc. Until EVERY school is out of cap space there is no basis for noncompliance by the NCAA who will welcome the kid and his NIL deals to any school.

SO, once again what is the basis for a court loss for compliance with the Court ruling as it stands today?

What forces the kid to tell the school what his NIL is? The scholarship?

 

[Carp]

ESPN reporting this afternoon that 20.5% of the 2023 rosters were made up of portal transfers. This up from a mere 6.5% in 2019.

I used to think the NIL would be the end of College Football but, that coupled with the new Transfer Portal rules (along with a great hire in CJH) has brought my favorite Tennessee Vols from rocky bottom closer to Rocky Top in a very short amount of time.

Think about how difficult it is to compete with the Georgia's, Alabama's, Ohio State's, and Clemson's year-after-year as they stock their 2nd and 3rd strings with five-star recruits. Think about all the great Portal Transfers in the past three years that have augmented the Volunteer program.

Next up, is going to have to be a leveling of the NIL monies. Texas A&M has shown that, money can't buy everything. But this feels a lot like the Dallas Cowboys of the 70's and 80's. How many Super Bowls do you think Dallas would have won if the salary caps had not been implemented? Now in the NFL, it's common to see a team go from worst to first or reverse over the course of even one season.

It seems like it should be on the NCAA's to-do list: How does a team like Washington with an average NIL of $32K ever supposed to compete with a Georgia ($143K), Ohio State ($139K), or Alabama ($125K)?

You can't cap NIL, because it's literally money players make based on their Name, image, and likeness. It's essentially branding and endorsements for college athletes. Now they might be able to police these "partnerships" that NIL collectives have with schools. That's possible. But of course there are loop holes to that as well.