I see now a HS player and a UNC recruit has signed an endorsement deal before even playing a second of college basketball. This new NIL ruling is going to drastically change amateur sports as we now know it.
Where Does It Go From Here?
- Thread starter Ronman
- Start date
seems like it might not change much of anything except the kids will have to file tax returns instead of all the under the table money they previously got
I think an interesting topic will be what type of influence some of these bigger endorsement businesses try to have.
For example, what if 5-star Johnny QB comes in and gets 100 G in endorsements his Freshman year.......then he gets a little too comfortable and starts playing like a dog. Saban or Debo (I mean where else would he be going) bench his ass and knock him down a few pegs.
Now, said business who donates a lot of money to the University......and maybe is taking some credit that this kid is there in the first place.........has the face of the 3rd string QB all over their stuff and are writing him checks. Don't think they will be too happy. And can you cut a kids deals if he gets hurt?
I just feel like they have opened up a door that is going to lead to a whole lot of awful things. And I really do want kids to get what they can get, I just think its going to come with a lot of collateral damage.
For example, what if 5-star Johnny QB comes in and gets 100 G in endorsements his Freshman year.......then he gets a little too comfortable and starts playing like a dog. Saban or Debo (I mean where else would he be going) bench his ass and knock him down a few pegs.
Now, said business who donates a lot of money to the University......and maybe is taking some credit that this kid is there in the first place.........has the face of the 3rd string QB all over their stuff and are writing him checks. Don't think they will be too happy. And can you cut a kids deals if he gets hurt?
I just feel like they have opened up a door that is going to lead to a whole lot of awful things. And I really do want kids to get what they can get, I just think its going to come with a lot of collateral damage.
Theres no way to do it without exponentially increasing the corruption and the unevening of the playing field.
We're going to find it out over the next decade and I expect people will just start to loose interest in college sports and tune in more to the pros.
Best case scenario is after a while enough schools get sick of it and kick the ncaa to the curb and replace it with something that isn't just a self serving glorified event planner that acts as nothing but a parasite 11 months out of the year.
I think you are on to something here. If the college sports become just an extension of the pro sports but without the competitiveness brought on by the draft and free agency, it could reach a tipping point. Schools may also decide that participating in this doesn't fit their mission and just step out of college athletics altogether.
I do think this round of conference realignment is the forerunner to the major conferences separating from the NCAA. NCAA already doesn't govern football, all they would need to do is break off the other sports. Don't think these conferences don't think they are more deserving of that college basketball tournament TV money than the NCAA. If, big if, the super conferences form their own coalition they could actually put teeth in enforcement. I know, that is a pipe dream.
I don't think its that much of a pipe dream because right now the ncaa just siphones off money and basically provides nothing in return.
They were supposed to govern college sports but all they did was exploit it for their own means.
Im sure most of the schools that stand to get shafted by this nil stuff, and thats a huge majority, aren't happy about it.
The problem will be just like everything else theres a small super rich majority that will benefit from this nil and they have disproportionate sway.
This is something you could really see coming .... and it makes me sad.
Well, I guess this is progress. 🥺
Well, I guess this is progress. 🥺
I am confused as to how making everything above board is going to increase corruption compared to the current situation which involves envelopes of bills being handed to players and fake jobs for parents
I suppose corruption is the incorrect word.
Its going to exponentially increase the money being spent on players because there's a return that can be had right away.
Once Nike starts using college players from only certain teams in their marketing and recruiting free agents for their teams it will start to sink in for people.
Before shoe companies were spreading out their money all over in hopes of eventually signing the best ones in the nba that they could then get a return investment on.
Now they're going to be using college as a vehicle to sell.
They will try to manufacture marketable teams in college.
They'll be trying to create the next unlv of the 90s or fab5.
Now they're going to be using college as a vehicle to sell.
They will try to manufacture marketable teams in college.
They'll be trying to create the next unlv of the 90s or fab5.
Nike is too big to be concerned with one school getting players. They would rather sign up all the players at all the schools. It is simply better business.
Their business is selling shoes, not giving money to people for playing basketball.
They might sign a lot of guys to small deals for peanuts but there's virtually no value in the majority of college players so paying all the players big money would accomplish very little in terms of marketing their product.
They funnel most of the best players to a few schools now just so they can get first crack with a small amount of superstars when they arive in the nba.
Now they can turn college into its own medium for advertising players. They will try to create college superstar teams to market on a national level.
Its going to happen whether people understand it at this point or not.
No, as you point out their business is selling shoes. They can now sign kids to contracts in college that will extend into their NBA years so they have no need for "super teams" in college. They can simply buy the future rights to advertise the best players no matter where they go to college or if they skip in entirely and play G League or what not.
Laughable to think a publicly traded company's board of directors is going to sit around trying to pick out which schools they want to win at college hoops.
I mean it's good fear mongering, but not based in reality.
The schools that are already paying their players, and I think we all know who they are, will be breathing a sigh of relief, now doing in the open what they've had to do on the sly before.
And to think the shoe companies aren't going to try to establish winners by throwing money at the blue chip players, and then market their products based on the success of "their" teams is naive.
And to think the shoe companies aren't going to try to establish winners by throwing money at the blue chip players, and then market their products based on the success of "their" teams is naive.
Last edited:
A, They already do it. The money that the assistant coaches were giving players in the FBI investigation a couple years ago was coming from agents connected to shoe companies.
B You clearly don't understand the role image plays in marketing.
C. You're completely missing the point that college basketball will become its own vehicle now. Your thinking in outdated terms. You can try to buy future rights but addidas will out bid you and make money on it now instead of two years from now.
D. If you think the board of directors micro manages an entity that large you're crazy. Theres probably a dozen positions between them and who ever would be even thinking about.
Wouldn't it be something if a bunch of lower tier schools said "screw this" and dropped sports scholarships and NCAA affiliation? Not saying this issue is the deciding factor. Just one among many reasons they might consider it and would probably be better off financially in the long run.
Are you suggesting shoe companies were trying to make schools like NC State their flagship showcase schools? Because they got hammered for Dennis Smith getting paid.
Your naivete is funny to me.
The reality is the shoe companies want the best players and DGAF where they go to school. They want them for 20 years selling shoes. The 8 months they spend on a college campus is irrelevant in their grand scheme.
If you think the opportunity to use college basketball as a marketing vehicle is not going to be fully exploited now you're just an idiot.
Like I said, It will happen whether you grasp it at this point or not.
The short time frame of college players is why the brand building will be centered around certain high profile schools and will necessitate keeping those partners as high profile as possible.
And it will be extraordinarily easy to accomplish which is why I'm positive it will happen.
The fact that you don't think employers will have a vested interest in where their employees go , when the entire concept revolves around exposure, is whats unbelievably naive.
Last edited:
I'm thinking the founder of Nike is a backer and grad from Oregon. Their facilities are the best in college athletics.
And you really don't think he will have contracts signed ahead of time for a recruit he wants to go to school there?
Increased scope and there was always a danger that you might run into a family with morals that would report you if you tried something. Also now, that there will be a lot more money floating around, schools in association with businesses will work together to exert influence over players which outside of sports would be considered illegal. Also bet that there is a whole lot more drugs in the sport, particularly if the NCAA is kicked to the side.
Nike already brands their athletic wear with their swoosh. If outsiders get involved financially, are we going to see "Eat at Joes" banners on our jerseys. Or a website link?
Last edited:
so much LOL in this thread it is hard to keep track of.
let’s just say that schools that have played by the rules have the most to gain from NIL rights because now they can actually offer them money as opposed to in the past they could offer nothing while rule breakers sent 6 figures under the table.
let’s just say that schools that have played by the rules have the most to gain from NIL rights because now they can actually offer them money as opposed to in the past they could offer nothing while rule breakers sent 6 figures under the table.
As was mentioned before if the money was under the table these companies had limits on their recourse if Johnny got benched or whatever. It's not like they could come out publicly with their issue. Now who knows, including if these companies are courting high school players. They don't even need to hide their pushing Johnny to school A or B.....
Phil Knight/Nike is more than a little biased to University of Oregon. There is no doubt the rise of Oregon in football and basketball coincides with infusion of Knight money/direct access to Nike. Nike is going to maintain relationships with all schools, but Oregon is more like Nike U.
Similar threads
