Do you believe Drake May was offered $5 million?

[andrew]

Idk. If a great NFL qb is worth $50M; there is no way a great college qb at some big revenue program isn’t worth $5M.

The thing is NFL player salaries aren't determined by a free market like college NIL deals currently are. The CBA dictates how much each money players get each year. So given that each NFL team must pay players $208 million a year, we know that teams feel QBs are worth 25% of that, which comes out to $50M.

But we don't know how much teams would pay star QBs if they were allowed to pay players as much or as little as they'd like. Could be a lot more than that or a lot less than that.

In baseball, which is uncapped, Aaron Judge is up to $40 million/year. Given that QB is a more important position in a more wealthy sport, I'd put my money on more, at least in the current environment.

 

[savbandjacket]

At the moment, athletes favor NIL because it’s putting money in their pockets. There will be a swing in opinion though when the rest of the college system, including how scholarships are awarded, catches up. When that happens, NIL will be used by the same unscrupulous people who are back-channeling offers to do stuff like cut underperforming players mid-year, eliminate scholarship opportunities, etc.

 

[GT7378]

Brown said yesterday that Maye had been offered unbelievable amounts of money to transfer. But, I have maintained for years UNC can keep its stars longer than anyone else because going pro is a paycut.

The ACC office has bots that check these posts and then forward to the NCAA. Expect an infraction to come down of GT now...

 

[andrew]

At the moment, athletes favor NIL because it’s putting money in their pockets. There will be a swing in opinion though when the rest of the college system, including how scholarships are awarded, catches up. When that happens, NIL will be used by the same unscrupulous people who are back-channeling offers to do stuff like cut underperforming players mid-year, eliminate scholarship opportunities, etc.

I think that the swing will come when non-revenue sports start getting severely impacted by all the funding going towards CFB "NIL". At that point we'll end up with a college athletes' union who will negotiate a CBA with the NCAA and we'll end up with a sustainable model.

It will be messy getting there though. Very messy. The NCAA really should have gotten out ahead of this when they still held all the leverage over the players. Now the situation is the opposite.

 

[savbandjacket]

I think that the swing will come when non-revenue sports start getting severely impacted by all the funding going towards CFB "NIL". At that point we'll end up with a college athletes' union who will negotiate a CBA with the NCAA and we'll end up with a sustainable model.

It will be messy getting there though. Very messy. The NCAA really should have gotten out ahead of this when they still held all the leverage over the players. Now the situation is the opposite.

That’s part of what I mean by the entire system being changed to account for NIL. Why contribute to the general athletic scholarship fund when people can buy specific players? And when they system is no longer based on scholarships, nothing is guaranteed in terms of a player remaining at any institution.

 

[THWG247]

NIL is supposed to be for paying the player for the use of their name or likeness, sponoring products, making commercials etc. Why is the NCAA just ignoring that and letting boosters and nil collectives just straight up pay kids to come play? Why are they allowing tampering with other teams players that aren’t even in the portal? Why are there no rules on this or enforcement?

 

[GTCrew4b]

I feel like if all nine Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously that the ban on NIL was illegal, and the justice who wrote the majority opinion signaled that the ban on schools paying players was also illegal, then they were unjustly kept from getting paid by definition. I mean, it's right in their name -- justice!

We're a nation of laws, and those laws apply to everyone. If the schools were systematically and publicly violating the law to keep players from getting paid, as all nine Supreme Court justices ruled, then yes, that was unjust.

The ban on NIL was illegal because it banned all revenue based on your likeness. Like you couldn’t even start a cooking show. I don’t believe the intent was for it to become a channel for paying players for play directly. So calling it “wages” isn’t exactly fair even though that’s essentially how it’s being used now. Pretty sure that’s in the opinion as well.

 

[andrew]

The ban on NIL was illegal because it banned all revenue based on your likeness. Like you couldn’t even start a cooking show. I don’t believe the intent was for it to become a channel for paying players for play directly. So calling it “wages” isn’t exactly fair even though that’s essentially how it’s being used now. Pretty sure that’s in the opinion as well.

From the opinion:

"Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate," Kavanaugh wrote. "And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different.

"The NCAA is not above the law."

"Price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor. And price-fixing labor is ordinarily a textbook antitrust problem because it extinguishes the free market in which individuals can otherwise obtain fair compensation for their work."

The current NCAA model is "suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year," Kavanaugh wrote.

"Agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate", "price fixing labor", "suppressing the pay of student atlhetes." That is pretty clear to me.

 

[GTCrew4b]

The thing is NFL player salaries aren't determined by a free market like college NIL deals currently are. The CBA dictates how much each money players get each year. So given that each NFL team must pay players $208 million a year, we know that teams feel QBs are worth 25% of that, which comes out to $50M.

But we don't know how much teams would pay star QBs if they were allowed to pay players as much or as little as they'd like. Could be a lot more than that or a lot less than that.

In baseball, which is uncapped, Aaron Judge is up to $40 million/year. Given that QB is a more important position in a more wealthy sport, I'd put my money on more, at least in the current environment.

If you morons will continue comparing SUPERSTAR PROFESSIONAL athletes to high school and college QB’s as your basis for value then we will definitely have a problem. Because you are supposed to be smart people.

Aaron Judge signed with the Yankees after his Junior year of college for essentially a $2M signing bonus. Coming out of high school he was a 31st round pick and destined to a life of minor league ball.

 

[GTCrew4b]

From the opinion:



"Agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate", "price fixing labor", "suppressing the pay of student atlhetes." That is pretty clear to me.

Banning NIL opportunities has that effect. I’m willing to agree with that, but it is not paying for play. The opinion is explicitly clear on that.

 

[andrew]

If you morons will continue comparing SUPERSTAR PROFESSIONAL athletes to high school and college QB’s as your basis for value then we will definitely have a problem. Because you are supposed to be smart people.

Aaron Judge signed with the Yankees after his Junior year of college for essentially a $2M signing bonus. Coming out of high school he was a 31st round pick and destined to a life of minor league ball.

This post was comparing the salary of a professional NFL QB to that of a professional MLB baseball player, and specifically said in the first sentence that NFL is different than college because the the salaries are determined differently. So I agree, they can't be compared.

 

[Techbert]

A superstar college QB is not worth $5M period. Maybe they are in this new bubble we have made but that will not be “the going rate” for a stud QB in college football. It is asinine. They can only play 4 years. 3 if they’re really really good. And it ensures nothing in terms of team success. The only thing it does or attempts to do is buy access for the booster which is all these people want.

Show your work.

What is the benefit to the program of potentially going to one to four national championships, factoring the probability of each outcome, with benefit coming in direct payments to the program, influx of fundraising both athletic and academic, and generation of fungible goodwill to the school?

 

[LegendaryGT]

I think that the swing will come when non-revenue sports start getting severely impacted by all the funding going towards CFB "NIL". At that point we'll end up with a college athletes' union who will negotiate a CBA with the NCAA and we'll end up with a sustainable model.

It will be messy getting there though. Very messy. The NCAA really should have gotten out ahead of this when they still held all the leverage over the players. Now the situation is the opposite.

I don't think the NFL regulates how much money an athlete can make in NIL, and neither can any collegiate CBA. (Dak Prescott and Mahomes for example make 20+ million a year in endorsements.) Important to understand that NIL is not salary.

This situation is never going to be "fixed" because it isn't broken. This is the fix. Let the guys pursue the opportunities they want to pursue. If you wanted to move jobs and colleges for a better opportunity, nobody would bat an eye. Frankly you're "ruining the industry" just as much as these guys are "ruining the sport". Which is to say, not at all. The sport as it was before was a moral travesty, as tribally satisfying as it was to have each school field its own indigenous army. The price for that was too high.

 

[GTCrew4b]

Show your work.

What is the benefit to the program of potentially going to one to four national championships, factoring the probability of each outcome, with benefit coming in direct payments to the program, influx of fundraising both athletic and academic, and generation of fungible goodwill to the school?

Cam Newton has essentially cost Auburn 10s of millions of dollars because he gave their fanbase an idiotic expectation level that they’ve been chasing ever since. So in that sense I suppose he should’ve paid Auburn $2M a year or so.

I don’t believe QB’s are worth that given the extremely large supply of talented QB’s and good college coaches essentially all being system coaches.

 

[GTLiebs]

I think that the swing will come when non-revenue sports start getting severely impacted by all the funding going towards CFB "NIL". At that point we'll end up with a college athletes' union who will negotiate a CBA with the NCAA and we'll end up with a sustainable model.

Why would the first part lead to the second part? The people throwing all this money at football likely don't care about swimming or volleyball, so they wouldn't force change if those sports suffer. The non-revenue players could try to gather but it won't do anything unless the football players join in and what reason do they have to do that?

 

[andrew]

I don't think the NFL regulates how much money an athlete can make in NIL, and neither can any collegiate CBA. (Dak Prescott and Mahomes for example make 20+ million a year in endorsements.) Important to understand that NIL is not salary.

Disagree. The NFL may not regulate how much an athlete can make in NIL, but they definitely regulate how an athlete can make money in NIL. If the Dallas Cowboys were to set up the "Dallas Cowboys NIL fund" to try to entice players to sign with Dallas, they would get punished for trying to work around the salary cap.

Also, I do believe that a collegiate CBA could prohibit NIL completely if both sides agreed. I think this is not unheard of in international sports, where the contract with the player includes stipulations that the team gets their exclusive NIL rights. No reason college couldn't do a form of that.

This situation is never going to be "fixed" because it isn't broken. This is the fix. Let the guys pursue the opportunities they want to pursue. If you wanted to move jobs and colleges for a better opportunity, nobody would bat an eye. Frankly you're "ruining the industry" just as much as these guys are "ruining the sport". Which is to say, not at all. The sport as it was before was a moral travesty, as tribally satisfying as it was to have each school field its own indigenous army. The price for that was too high.

I think the situation is broken, not because the players are getting paid, but because the structure of it is not good for the sport. And this is the case with all sports leagues. You could say the same thing about the NBA -- why should LeBron James be capped at a certain contract value by rule? Why should the Knicks not be able to have a payroll of a billion dollars a year? Why not let players pursue better opportunities and maximize the money they get?

The answer is because it's not sustainable for the sport, and ultimately it ends with everyone losing. It's been shown time and time again that in sports leagues being run as a business (and make no mistake, CFB is run as a business), you need a revenue split agreement with the players rather than a completely free market system. Even uncapped baseball has rules around luxury tax for this purpose.

 

[GTCrew4b]

Why would the first part lead to the second part? The people throwing all this money at football likely don't care about swimming or volleyball, so they wouldn't force change if those sports suffer. The non-revenue players could try to gather but it won't do anything unless the football players join in and what reason do they have to do that?

The power of pussy could help football players get involved.

 

[andrew]

Banning NIL opportunities has that effect. I’m willing to agree with that, but it is not paying for play. The opinion is explicitly clear on that.

Kavanaugh also said:

[Schools] could potentially engage in collective bargaining (or seek some other negotiated agreement) to provide student athletes a fairer share of the revenues that they generate for their colleges, akin to how professional football and basketball players have negotiated for a share of league revenues.

The direct effect of this ruling does not allow pay for play, agreed. And certainly it seems a lot of these NIL funds aren't even pretending that they are actually for NIL.

However, based on many quotes in the opinion, it's very clear that the ban on pay for play is illegal too, and the court is encouraging the schools to resolve that on their own before it happens in court. Because if they don't, the floodgates will open in an unregulated way just like what happened with NIL.

 

[FatJacket]

No NFL team is drafting an 18 year old kid.

Better, let college football implode and Ugag, Alabama, OSU and a few others can continue playing semi pro ball and the rest of Div 1 can do something resembling amateur athletics.

I’ve been saying we should play LeHigh and other engineering schools. Have a football game but only players who can solve a thermo problem can play.

 

[LegendaryGT]

Disagree. The NFL may not regulate how much an athlete can make in NIL, but they definitely regulate how an athlete can make money in NIL. If the Dallas Cowboys were to set up the "Dallas Cowboys NIL fund" to try to entice players to sign with Dallas, they would get punished for trying to work around the salary cap.

Also, I do believe that a collegiate CBA could prohibit NIL completely if both sides agreed. I think this is not unheard of in international sports, where the contract with the player includes stipulations that the team gets their exclusive NIL rights. No reason college couldn't do a form of that.




I think the situation is broken, not because the players are getting paid, but because the structure of it is not good for the sport. And this is the case with all sports leagues. You could say the same thing about the NBA -- why should LeBron James be capped at a certain contract value by rule? Why should the Knicks not be able to have a payroll of a billion dollars a year? Why not let players pursue better opportunities and maximize the money they get?

The answer is because it's not sustainable for the sport, and ultimately it ends with everyone losing. It's been shown time and time again that in sports leagues being run as a business (and make no mistake, CFB is run as a business), you need a revenue split agreement with the players rather than a completely free market system. Even uncapped baseball has rules around luxury tax for this purpose.

A collegiate player-run CBA that tried to limit NIL would die in court just the same way the previous NCAA cabal did. You can't compel everyone to join it and then also compel them to forgo NIL, it's plainly anticompetitive and unconstitutional. NIL is the law of the land.

It isn't "bad for the sport", either. If NIL causes Bama to become the Yankees and everyone stops watching, the sport will just become amateur again, which everyone agrees is actually a good thing. Nobody thinks the sport is better because of a billion dollar TV industry, except the guys making billions on it. But it isn't as if anything can kill college football from a financial perspective. The sport was born in the dirt, it's played in the dirt, and it absolutely will go on if all it has left to it is a patch of dirt and a student body that wants to field a team. That stuff ain't going anywhere because of NIL or anything else. It isn't anything like the NFL or MLB.