Academic scholarships are different. It’s not jealousy. If we played football for TN, we were both highly rated recruits and you got a big NIL deal and I didn’t. Why is that fair?
Lol fair? It's the market. Hello to the real world. If you and I graduate together and you get a job at Google and I get hired at Pets.com, who cares? You'll make infinitely more than me...that is supply and demand. Pro rookies... some will make millions and others minimums. That's the real world. More importantly, none of it nullifies the importance of them being able to receive a basic right to earn off one's own name, image, and likeness like any other student.
Like with Nico. He is reportedly getting a big NIL deal. He may have already gotten $350k. So why should the university give him an athletic scholarship worth north of $100k? Why not use that money for something else?
Who cares how much he made? SCOTUS has said that is none of your business, like every other citizen.
So if someone is good enough to earn a large NIL sum, we then need to punish him by unduly making him pay for his own way, unlike every other student-athlete? Again, seems like a jealous need to punish the successful young kids. It's his money, from a private entity. And the schools themselves WANT to land the kid. You are compleeetely out of touch if you think turning the kid into a walkon is a good idea. That is an insult to top players. So, just from a program POV, it is a very hard NO.
While yes NIL technically is just like something everyone else can do it’s not the same. Look at Texas. Every OL gets $50k a year. Do you think everyone of those guys would be able to make that much working a regular job out of HS? Highly doubtful. I got no problem taking away huge coaching salaries. That’s my only real gripe with NIL. It’s not punishment. Just seems fair to me.
Lol wth does a regular job have ANYTHING to do with their market value? Smh. And an NFL rookie, making nearly 400k/year on the bench couldn't either. What a laughable argument and escape from the market value argument.
Explain to me why market values suggest roster values of 25-30x their head coach, when the current college market of scholarships and stipends are closer to 1-2x. That is the argument. College player equities are nowhere NEAR that of the free/true market's. It's disgraceful and can't imagine supporting that nonsense.
Fwiw yes agree with your very last statement. IF universities were to pay players, the coaching salaries would be the first place everyone should cut from. Telling your players you are coaching "amateurs" (and therefore ARE an amateur head coach?) for $10mm a year like Saban and Dabo has been doing is absurd.
