B10 Leadership - On Vacation for Two Years

DodgerHawki

HR Heisman
Nov 19, 2002
9,449
11,052
113
Certainly we can't compete with the top 10 schools maybe...but I think you may be underestimating the deep pockets of some of our alumni. This is a giving group...and I believe the average fan will contribute something.

My personal belief is that if the Collectives are sound, have good management, and it's not going to be abused by high admin costs...I think this could generate some serious cash for players.

The one outlier problem is when you have schools, like OSU or Texas A&M, that can outright buy the guys they want for whatever price. I know Iowa isn't getting those guys now anyway...but a guy like Proctor comes to mind. We did have a shot at him...but if someone puts $1 million bucks out there...well...Iowa isn't going to compete...or that's my guess.

What's interesting is that no one is talking about the other problems with throwing all this money at 18 year old kids and their families. With money comes expectations...there is a mental health side of this that I'm sure is going to crop it's ugly head into the equation. There is enough pressure already on players...wait till their collective doles out big dollars. It will be interesting...because at Alabama, my guess is that they cut players pretty quick if they aren't panning out.
I get the concern. Yes, many 18-year olds aren't equipped to handle hundreds of thousands of dollars in a responsible way. But that in and of itself is not a reason to stop them from being able to receive the money if the market gives it to them. Pro tennis players or pro soccer players who are really good get huge sums of money, to say nothing of lottery picks in the NBA who can go pro at 19 or 1 year of college. Yes, some of them squander their money. So what? People of all ages squander money for all sorts of reasons.

To your question, yes of course players will be "cut" or have their funding cut off if they turn out to not be as good as thought in the recruiting process. Welcome to the real world. If a business or entity pays you a lot of money, they expect a lot in return. The players want to benefit from the market. Well, the flip side of the market is it rewards those who produce. If you don't produce, they will find someone who will.

I do think whatever restrictions get put in place on NIL will only come if the P5 conferences create their own division for football, with NCAA not involved at all. The NCAA has shown it is incapable of policing college FB, and honestly they have zero interest in doing so. Since the 1980s, when the major conferences negotiated their own TV deals, the NCAA has not made any money at all from college FB. The NCAA does not run FBS championships, the Playoff Committee does. The NCAA isn't going to step in and "do something" about NIL as a) they get zero money from that level of football and b) the power conferences will ignore them if they don't like it.

It's just my opinion, but my guess is in the long run there will be fewer opportunities for college athletes, including football players, as more of the money in college sports will go to the top 1% of athletes across football and men's basketball. There are ramifications for burning a business model to the ground. I'm not saying that it shouldn't happen. It has made no sense to me why Kirk Ferentz and Fran McCaffery can be millionaires many times over, and their long-time assistants can get very wealthy as well, and numerous administrators in the athletic department can have years of six-figure salaries, but the players on the teams only get a free education and a hearty thank you and well wishes for their futures. Multiply this times all the other power conference schools out there. But the flip side of all of this revenue coming in to athletic departments is that they can fund scholarships for athletes in non-revenue sports, pay non-revenue coaches hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, build multi-million dollar facilities and pay for non-revenue sports to travel across the country to events. I'm not advocating for status quo, nor am I saying that there aren't problems with NIL. Just that there are going to be changes. And no one can predict with 100% certainty how it will play out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlez

littlez

HR Heisman
Jan 29, 2003
7,287
5,882
113
I get the concern. Yes, many 18-year olds aren't equipped to handle hundreds of thousands of dollars in a responsible way. But that in and of itself is not a reason to stop them from being able to receive the money if the market gives it to them. Pro tennis players or pro soccer players who are really good get huge sums of money, to say nothing of lottery picks in the NBA who can go pro at 19 or 1 year of college. Yes, some of them squander their money. So what? People of all ages squander money for all sorts of reasons.

To your question, yes of course players will be "cut" or have their funding cut off if they turn out to not be as good as thought in the recruiting process. Welcome to the real world. If a business or entity pays you a lot of money, they expect a lot in return. The players want to benefit from the market. Well, the flip side of the market is it rewards those who produce. If you don't produce, they will find someone who will.

I do think whatever restrictions get put in place on NIL will only come if the P5 conferences create their own division for football, with NCAA not involved at all. The NCAA has shown it is incapable of policing college FB, and honestly they have zero interest in doing so. Since the 1980s, when the major conferences negotiated their own TV deals, the NCAA has not made any money at all from college FB. The NCAA does not run FBS championships, the Playoff Committee does. The NCAA isn't going to step in and "do something" about NIL as a) they get zero money from that level of football and b) the power conferences will ignore them if they don't like it.

It's just my opinion, but my guess is in the long run there will be fewer opportunities for college athletes, including football players, as more of the money in college sports will go to the top 1% of athletes across football and men's basketball. There are ramifications for burning a business model to the ground. I'm not saying that it shouldn't happen. It has made no sense to me why Kirk Ferentz and Fran McCaffery can be millionaires many times over, and their long-time assistants can get very wealthy as well, and numerous administrators in the athletic department can have years of six-figure salaries, but the players on the teams only get a free education and a hearty thank you and well wishes for their futures. Multiply this times all the other power conference schools out there. But the flip side of all of this revenue coming in to athletic departments is that they can fund scholarships for athletes in non-revenue sports, pay non-revenue coaches hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, build multi-million dollar facilities and pay for non-revenue sports to travel across the country to events. I'm not advocating for status quo, nor am I saying that there aren't problems with NIL. Just that there are going to be changes. And no one can predict with 100% certainty how it will play out.
Well said !
 

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,813
7,775
113
It has made no sense to me why Kirk Ferentz and Fran McCaffery can be millionaires many times over, and their long-time assistants can get very wealthy as well, and numerous administrators in the athletic department can have years of six-figure salaries, but the players on the teams only get a free education and a hearty thank you and well wishes for their futures.

That is how labor markets operate. A player may ultimately have no value to the program but still receive a free degree. Last I looked, and these are round numbers, but a HS diploma gets you about $800K lifetime earnings. A BA earns about $1.2M. So, they get a free education, which brings with it many functional abilities and education. Most of the football and basketball players also make contacts of immense financial value if they choose to use them.

At least for now it also provides the training and skill development that allows a small percentage of college players to become wealthy as Pharoh and enjoy a life of luxury and privilege few on Earth ever experience. So strictly speaking, the players were already very well compensated.

The other part of problem is the players, and certainly the layers of bureaucracy that make up the Uni and its Athletic Dept are economically largely fungible. Marci, the 3rd accountant in a room of accountants, can be replaced almost immediately. Other than a handful of stars most of the schollies could be filled with players as good or almost as good as the guy they replace. There are thousands of average college football players, both actual and future.

On the other hand, the high-level coaches are doing something that few people can do. There might be 50 people, on Earth, that could have the level of success that KF has brought to a little school like Iowa. Similarly, although perhaps not as limited, are the outstanding assistants. Are there even 200 people that could replace rather than merely succeed Phil Parker?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kceasthawk

Mountain Man Hawk

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Mar 30, 2010
5,676
3,507
113
That is how labor markets operate. A player may ultimately have no value to the program but still receive a free degree. Last I looked, and these are round numbers, but a HS diploma gets you about $800K lifetime earnings. A BA earns about $1.2M. So, they get a free education, which brings with it many functional abilities and education. Most of the football and basketball players also max contacts of immense financial value if they choose to use them.

At least for now it also provides the training and skill development that allows a small percentage of college players to become wealthy as Pharoh and enjoy a life of luxury and privilege few on Earth ever experience. So strictly speaking, the players were already very well compensated.

The other part of problem is the players, and certainly the layers of bureaucracy that fill make up the Uni and its Athletic Dept are economically largely fungible. Marci, the 3rd accountant in a room of accountants, can be replaced almost immediately. Other than a handful of stars most of the schollies could be filled with players as good or almost as good as the guy they replace. There are thousands of average college football players, both actual and future.

On the other hand, the high-level coaches are doing something that few people can do. There might be 50 people, on Earth, that could have the level of success that KF has brought to a little school like Iowa. Similarly, although perhaps not as limited, are the outstanding assistants. Are there even 200 people that could replace rather than merely succeed Phil Parker?
I understand the arguments you are making, and many of them I agree with, but I think we are seeing that market value for lots of these players is much higher than they had been getting under the table. I mean, the market value is whatever someone is willing to spend, and we are seeing that people at many schools are willing to spend a lot (reportedly $13m at OSU and God knows how much at Texas A&M, etc.). And I know many people expect these numbers to prove unsustainable but personally I would be willing to bet the numbers will grow significantly larger in a few years time once everyone figures out what the real market values are.

And I know part of your point is that only the stars really deserve the millions while the “average” player is largely replaceable with any other replacement-level player. We haven’t yet figured out what the market value is for that type of player but I think it’s going to be pretty significant eventually. I’m pretty sure Texas already said that even their worst O-linemen will get a minimum of $70k (so $280k over 4 years) plus whatever amount goes to any roster player would presumably be on top of that.

I guess we will see what the future holds but I think that will be fairly common in a few years once every school has their collectives up and running. I personally think losing a few transfers like Charlie Jones, etc will eventually be a pretty big motivator to get donor bases to step up to the plate.
 

DodgerHawki

HR Heisman
Nov 19, 2002
9,449
11,052
113
I understand the arguments you are making, and many of them I agree with, but I think we are seeing that market value for lots of these players is much higher than they had been getting under the table. I mean, the market value is whatever someone is willing to spend, and we are seeing that people at many schools are willing to spend a lot (reportedly $13m at OSU and God knows how much at Texas A&M, etc.). And I know many people expect these numbers to prove unsustainable but personally I would be willing to bet the numbers will grow significantly larger in a few years time once everyone figures out what the real market values are.

And I know part of your point is that only the stars really deserve the millions while the “average” player is largely replaceable with any other replacement-level player. We haven’t yet figured out what the market value is for that type of player but I think it’s going to be pretty significant eventually. I’m pretty sure Texas already said that even their worst O-linemen will get a minimum of $70k (so $280k over 4 years) plus whatever amount goes to any roster player would presumably be on top of that.

I guess we will see what the future holds but I think that will be fairly common in a few years once every school has their collectives up and running. I personally think losing a few transfers like Charlie Jones, etc will eventually be a pretty big motivator to get donor bases to step up to the plate.
You both (you and Deplorable Sleeping Dog) make good points. I largely agree with Deplorable that many of the players are fungible and replaceable assets, the issue has been that even the fungible assets haven't been able to have the market set for them in this setup. Yes, a college degree historically means higher lifetime earnings when compared to a high school degree. But they were literally prohibited from earning money for a skill they had which sets them apart from the vast majority of their peers. A very small amount of college players end up going to the NFL, but the football player at a power conference school is already a very elite person in the market when compared to all of the high school football players in their class, 95%+ of whom were never good enough to play in college.

As you point out, the market for even an "average" player at a P5 school (which makes them elite when compared against other high school players in their class), might be higher than we think. Texas NIL money is likely to be way on the high end. So what is the market for an "average" player at Illinois or Minnesota or name your typical P5 school? We have yet to see that. But my guess is it's more than people think. Media companies are willing to play hundreds of millions per year to broadcast games because they can still turn a profit by selling advertising or subscriptions because there is a lot of interest in the games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mountain Man Hawk

The Deplorable Sleeping Dog

HR Heisman
Gold Member
May 9, 2018
5,813
7,775
113
but I think we are seeing that market value for lots of these players is much higher than they had been getting under the table

So what is the market for an "average" player at Illinois or Minnesota or name your typical P5 school? We have yet to see that. But my guess is it's more than people think.

I am inclined to agree with both of these statements. Now the players have become actual professional athletes they can easily pay for college themselves. This sounds fair. A player can take NIL or a scholarship but not both. Then, in the interest of fairness, as mentioned far above, those excess schollies could be given to non schollie programs.

Kind of a hard swallow when an 18 y/o wants $250K in NIL money and a scholarship. He could pay his own room and tuition/books (or programs I suspect), sponsor two more schollies and still net six figures, with a clever CPA.

Even better perhaps an actual federal law that classifies athletes as professional or amateur. Each individual player has to choose at latest by say the last day HS senior year or before they sign any contracts for their services as a pro or amateur. Amateur status means a player waives any compensation beyond the traditional schollie benefits and maybe a thousand a month for expenses, at least for football to compensate for the inability to realistically hold a job, go to school and play P5 football. Electing professional status prohibits competition with or against amateurs or accepting any consideration for services from a school that participates in amateur athletics. Be good for the CFL and the USFL (is that still a thing?) and good for colleges, less incentive to cheat and probably better overall academic rosters.

If that law existed I bet the golfers and tennis players would see the highest percentage of HSers elect professional status.

The current situation is literally the worst of all possible worlds for the fans and most of the NCAA member institutions. Its designed to create a kind of super group that is effectively a form of oligopoly.​
 
Last edited:

Iron Doc

Team MVP
Nov 5, 2005
200
372
63
Might have to start watching Waldorf Warrior NAIA FB until the NIL crap gets sorted out.
 

jonesy5960

HR All-American
Gold Member
Sep 6, 2012
4,269
7,340
113
You mean any transfers? Bell was talking about how he was in on a few guys...and bam, suddenly no communication...and he said NIL was the difference.

I'm honestly not delusional that NIL is going to bring Iowa high profile players...what I'm worried about is that it's going to do a few things:

1) Make some teams more competitive (Nebraska for example) who will do things others won't. Nebraska fans would sell their kids if they thought they could make their beloved Huskers more competitive...and I guarantee you their collective will be huge...because it's like a Field of Dreams fantasy for them...something that will return them to the late 90s or early 70s. And they will cheat with Frost there.

2) NIL will entice the players Iowa has developed to transfer during their last two years of play. Would you turn down $250K-500K to play your final year or two at OSU? It's really messed up.
Nebraska can generate all the NIL dollars they want. As long as Frost is in charge they're a crappy to middling program.
 
Dec 16, 2011
7
1
3
When we get to the stage, in this college professional football era, that the players are not students, how long are they going to be allowed to play for a university affiliated team, 5 years? 10 years? This NIL money is going to make its way into the high school level eventually, maybe sooner than we think. I know this, the talk of forming a 32 team, college football super conference is not just locker room banter or ESPN talking heads. Its not serious at this time, but the way this is going, it will be tabled sometime in the coming few years unless the university presidents and chancellors come together or there is some other unforeseen path this takes. The NCAA is shot in the ass (Mark Emmert - he gone), and congress has so far shown no interest in getting involved.