“AJ Dybantsa’s NIL number was close to $7 million“ Adam Zagoria on X

[Anfernee]

“We can never become a place where the culture is pay to play. We would undermine everything at BYU if that wins out. It’s tempting (but) if they don’t fit the mission, we’d unravel everything.” Commissioner of Church Education Elder Clark Gilbert during an interview with Dave McCann earlier this year.

If you have the donors and it’s in the rules, then absolutely do it. I wish Utah did. But don’t talk out both sides of your mouth. Either own it or don’t do the hypocritical PR bulls**t.

[TheNuschler]

100% agree

I maintain NIL benefits schools like BYU, Notre Dame, USC more than public institutions. They avoid being audited by a state legislature that gets p**sed that their school somehow got left out of a conference.

[UteFrancais]

How is this sustainable? I listened to Joel Klatt talk about the Michigan kid that got $11 mil for his deal but said it will be null in the coming months with profit sharing on the horizon. Anyone have any insight or knowledge on this, and what that will look like going forward?
The current model just isn’t it.

[TheNuschler]

It’s sustainable through having 1 billionaire donor that is crazy about hoops and wants to create a mini G league at his Alma mater. For BYU, not for most public institutions. I still am confused as to how the donors monetize their donations but when money doesn’t matter (essentially they are throwing it into a raging fire with no monetary return), then I guess its good for them, personally?

[Stone]

I totally agree that there is no real monetization. The “investment” by a booster in NIL is one with extremely limited (if any) financial returns for the booster. It is essentially a hobby for the booster. But that has largely always been the case. There is no real financial return to donate large sums to an athletic department or buy a box seat. It is a status thing.

[Stone]

I will add that it is possible for ANY university, public or private to benefit from NIL. All it takes is a booster that has plenty of money and is willing to put it toward the school’s athletic success. That is the crazy thing about NIL. A billionaire, such as Phil Knight or Ryan Smith, can offer huge sums to recruits and completely transform and buy a potential championship team.

The only thing limiting unfettered spending is there is no real financial return. The owner of professional team (take the Yankees) can spend huge sums of money to buy a championship team, but there is at least some financial reward involved (the value of the team that you OWN increases or you get more sponsorship money, etc.) NIL is this bizarre animal where boosters are asked (expected?) to pay money to a player, but get no financial return on the investment. This is fine if have money to burn, but not sustainable. Phil Knight arguably gets a return because Oregon is synonymous with his company (Nike), so Oregon’s success somewhat benefits his business. Beyond that, it seems like a tough sell for a booster. I do not fault any booster for not wanting to pony up the money for NIL.

[Rick Walker]

byu better hope college athletes become employees or the athletics programs split off from the actual school in some capacity soon. It’s not sustainable and higher church leaders will probably have problems with it, along with everyone who isn’t a dumb byu fan. I don’t have anything against this rules wise, it’s just dumb. Maybe if we’re lucky this becomes a crapshow and byu loses their athletics entirely and ryan smith goes bankrupt.

[Stone]

Look, I understand the gripe. But is Clark Gilbert paying the athlete? Is the athletic department paying the athlete? If Nike wants to pay a guy to sign with Oregon, does the Oregon Athletic Director get to void that contract? What is Clark Gilbert’s role in deciding whether a booster can pay an athlete? The whole point of NIL is that players get sell their name, image, likeness to anyone. The schools do not have the authority to shut that down any more than the Lakers can tell Lebron that he is not allowed to sell his NIL to Nike.

[Rick Walker]

Agreed, as far as the lds church is concerned they aren’t doing anything wrong. Ryan Smith is just making an interesting financial decision.

[BD]

Clark Gilbert is not paying nor is the church nor is BYU.

However, he DID make the statement when asked about NIL money. And he is a church General Authority.

The timing of his statement absolutely makes it relevant, and regardless of the fact that it is a booster (Ryan Smith) doing the paying, one cannot just disconnect Gilbert’s statement from the “pay-to-play” culture that this $7 million NIL deal necessarily creates – that Gilbert clearly stated Byu should not do.

It is 100% hypocrisy by Byu and their fans that support this.

[HATUman]

I disagree, this is merely Smith not giving a damn about what said General Authority stated. What can BYU or the Church do to stop him? They can council him, but they can’t prohibit him from paying ludicrous amounts in NIL.

[Stone]

But how exactly is Clark hypocritical? Has he stated that he supports Ryan Smith sponsoring an athlete? Does he have the ability to prohibit Ryan Smith from paying an athlete? Also, how are BYU fans hypocritical in this? For supporting a booster paying an athlete to go to the school they support? Did they collectively say that they would never support a booster paying an athlete, but then support such a move?

If the Lakers organization said we don’t like Lebron getting a sponsorship with Nike, but then Lebron still got a sponsorship with Nike, are the Lakers and their fans hypocrites?

[BD]

But how exactly is Clark hypocritical? Has he stated that he supports Ryan Smith sponsoring an athlete?

I have no criticism of Clark at all. He simply made a statement about not making Byu a “pay to play” culture. I agree with that statement, given Byu’s mission.

Also, how are BYU fans hypocritical in this?

Byu’s mission is obvious in contrast to a “pay to play” culture – that is what the Clark’s statement is about.

Byu fans will gladly bring up their claim that Byu athletics is a “missionary tool” and “chastise” LDS Ute/Aggie fans when we root for Byu to lose. How dare we LDS Ute fans not support the missionary tool that is Byu football! So, when they do this, and then they themselves go against the GA statement that Byu athletics mission is not to be “pay to play”, while they fully support the pay-to-play culture, they themselves are shooting down their own mission while gladly pointing the finger at LDS Ute fans (and Aggie fans) as described.

Anybody could go on and on and on and on about their moral superiority claims and broadcasting to the whole world (Cougarboard, X, etc.) anything they see as remotely bad behavior by a Ute fan/athlete. So it’s our turn to return the favor and note their hypocrisy.

Sooooo much more could be said about this, but this is enough.

[TheNuschler]

NIL

[ProudUte]

It would be nice if Ryan Smith could make the Jazz competitive. It seems that his priority is BYU.

[The Miami Ute]

Well, the issue there is that in the NBA there are a multitude of persons who are both smarter and richer than Smith.

[Yergensen]

Will Ryan Smith be able to draft any BYU player that he funds with NIL?

[Rick Walker]

This is actually a really intriguing thought. What rules could be put in place that limit Ryan Smith’s decisions to pay NIL to college athletes and then draft them. I mean if he’s donating NIL to individual players he probably has some relationship with them, and what’s stopping him from promising them a spot on the jazz if they get a chance to draft them.

[AlohaUte]

As long as it’s not Church money being used at BYU – and it’s not – then more power to them. Rumor has it that there are multiple billionaires supporting BYU basketball. There’s nothing hypocritical about it whether from the Church or from BYU.

[TruckStopTerrors]

Gotta disagree with this. It’s a learning institution pushing a particular religion. Whether it’s the university itself or private donors, you can certainly make the argument that the church should not allow such practices and instead encourage those donors to donate that money to more worthy causes. You can make the argument that they can walk and chew bubble gum. Well, resources aren’t unlimited. If these individuals were going to make a 7 million dollar donation to a worthy cause while also giving this player 7 million, wouldn’t it be better to just give the 14 million to the worthy cause to begin with? What they’re doing is certainly within the rules, but you can’t convince me it isn’t hypocritical when we know the institution’s misson. BYU has always talked about getting the right kids to buy into the culture etc. Is there any doubt for a minute this kid wouldn’t have gone elsewhere if he wasn’t being offered this king’s ransom to go to BYU? No. It doesn’t look good.

[Stone]

Is it your position that all Utah boosters should donate to more worthy causes than Utah athletics? The University of Utah’s mission is to educate, not pay people to bounce and throw a ball through a hoop. So is the University of Utah hypocritical to allow boosters to sponsor recruits?

Who decides what is a “worthy cause”? Is every non-essential dollar YOU spend going to a “worthy cause”? Or are you suggesting someone else abide by a rule that you are have no intention of following? If so, it sounds strangely hypocritical.

I agree that the recruit would not go to byu absent money being offered. But that does not mean he is a bad fit or unable to buy into the culture. Both things can be true. Should byu ban the recruit because boosters are offering him money? Should byu tell private individuals that they are not allowed to make contracts regarding NIL? And what if, after being told that, those individuals do not care?

[TruckStopTerrors]

Huge difference, we’re talking about a religious institution with a stated goal of promoting the faith and of course education. I hold a school like Notre Dame to the exact same standard.

You asked, what is a worthy cause? Can we both agree paying a guy to play basketball 7 million for 1 year is not a worthy cause? If we can’t, this conversation should end now because there’s no point in continuing it.

Should they ban people from donating to particular players via NIL. I could make that argument. It doesn’t look good for the institution. Especially when they state publicly that they don’t want to be seen as a pay to play institution. Well, that’s what they are with this. Like it or not, when you’re a religious institution, you’re going to be held to a higher standard. Nobody had argued it is not within the rules. The argument is it looks terrible and is hypocritical. Nothing more.

[Stone]

The principle of whether an institution sticks to its mission is the same, no matter the mission. You are picking and choosing which missions need to be adhered to and which do not.

But, regardless, I am not of the opinion that allowing a booster to make a private contract with a student at the school is contrary to ANY school’s mission. Regulating that contract is not the school’s business. I hold all schools to this same standard–I am not picking and choosing based on a school’s particular “mission.”

I would certainly not pay someone $7 million to play basketball, but your argument is based on degree of payment, not on whether the “cause” is worthy. A “cause” does not become more or less worthy based on how much you do or do not give to it. It is either worthy or it is not.

Everyone decides how to spend their discretionary income. Someone poorer than you might find it absurd that you spend money on soda for yourself. Why did you not give that money to a more worthy cause? My point is that your argument lacks any principle–it is just an arbitrary diatribe suggesting that someone else should not be allowed to spend their money in the way that you find unworthy (when you presumably would object to someone auditing your spending and telling you that same thing).

You say you “could” make the argument that schools should ban people from donating to particular players via NIL. How exactly? How can a school “ban” private individuals from making a contract with a student? And does that ban apply to all schools or just the ones that you disfavor?

As stated in my previous posts on here, I think the hypocrisy claim is overblown and reeks more of envy.

[jshame17]

NIL is the dumbest thing since Political Action Committees and Citizen’s United. It’s open bribery. Full stop.

Until AJ stars in a Qualitrics commercial, he should be banned from touching the floor.

Same goes for every “contract”. Name Image and Likeness is supposed to be for marketing a product or company, or using your image in a video game, where all this started, remember?

All these blank checks from donors is straight pay-to-play, and yes, I judge everyone that defends it.

I saw Cam’s picture up next the Rising Bowl at Vessle. That makes sense. For get free lunch!!

I don’t recall ever seeing him in a Truck commercial or a Les Olsen Printer commercial, so he probably shouldn’t getting a check for that either.

[Stone]

Totally agree that NIL is a joke. I am no defender of the system. It is laughable that it is under the auspices of name, image, likeness–none of the money being paid is actually tied to that. Like you said, we are not seeing ads with these players. It is straight up bribes. I think it has made a mess of things. I would rather see players become professionals paid by the teams. Do some sort of collective bargaining like the NFL and just make it all a minor league system (loosely associated with the university, if wanted). Universities could then go back to having STUDENT-athletes. No pay. Maybe even no tuition benefits. I don’t know. But the current system is, in my opinion, unsustainable.

[TruckStopTerrors]

I’m actually not though. I’m saying that a religious institution’s primary functions are to obviously educate, but to also spread the faith. This just looks completely bad for a religious institution regardless of whether they are using private donors providing the funds or not, for the reasons I pointed out.

You can hold them to the standard you see fit. I can hold them to a different standard. That’s purely opinion based. I wouldn’t for one second believe they don’t hold themselves to a higher standard being a religious institution. It’s obvious with their honor code etc. Also, their comments on pay to play. So while you want to hold them to the same standard, it’s quite clear they wouldn’t agree with your standard. I mean compare them with ASU(STD U) for instance. Do you think the s**t you can get away with at ASU is the same if the appropriate people learned about it? No. So why would you argue the standards are across the board the same. Makes no sense at all. Serious question. Are you a Utah or BYU fan? I’m not asking as a gotcha or anything. I don’t know, and that’s why I’m asking.

It’s not my job to ascertain how they could ban such actions. I’ve been openly against NIL since the start regardless of school. I believe a free education, health insurance etc are the better alternative because it’s ruining college sports. There’s also other ways players could potentially get compensated with collective bargaining etc.

Well, you have a different standard of what is hypocritical. As for envy, I don’t even really follow college basketball. Haven’t for years. Basketball in general is just not entertaining to me any longer.

[Holladay Ute]

Based on his history on here, Stone is obviously a Ute fan.

I’m confused, what standard are you saying BYU should live up to? You’re saying that b/c they’re a religious organization, they should live by the following standards?
– That they shouldn’t allow their athletes to receive NIL deals from third party donors?
– And that, by allowing athletes to receive NIL deals from third party donors, they aren’t fulfilling their mission statement (https://aims.byu.edu/byu-mission-statement)?

Or you’re just saying it bugs you that one of their administrators said something you view as hypocritical?

[TruckStopTerrors]

I’ve made my point quite clear. You can go re-read it, or look for similar threads regarding this very subject to get it. At this point, it’s just talking in circles.

[Holladay Ute]

I’ve read everything you wrote, but I can’t tell if your issue is w/ NIL in general or if you’re just discriminating against religious institutions. Based on everything you wrote, it sounds like both.

[Stone]

I am a Utah fan. Have been my whole life–including many rough decades. Also, I am not a fan of NIL. I am not a defender of the system. Just a defender of fairness within the system (despite its flaws).

My gripe is people calling out another school for doing the very thing our school is doing (and, frankly, wish we could do better).

Yes, BYU has different standards in many respects, no argument there. But honor code and admissions are things the school can control. It cannot control the contracts made between students and outside parties. If I am a considering various schools to attend, and Bill Gates says he will pay me a million dollars to go to UW, UW does not get to tell him or me “no.” That is the same for EVERY school, whether religious or not.

You say it is not your job to ascertain how byu could ban such actions. But you previously said you could make that argument. I am trying to point out that there is no coherent way to institute such a ban. Even if a high level administrator at BYU says they don’t want players to be paid, that is not his decision to make. He can decide the SCHOOL won’t pay the players, but under the current system, the school has no authority over whether other parties pay the players. Like it or not (I do not), the system is now such that anyone can pay the players whatever they want. The schools have no control over it.

That is also why I disagree with the hypocrisy claim. If Oregon’s AD said he doesn’t want players to be paid, it does not make him and the fanbase hypocrites when Phil Knight pays a player. The AD and fans do not get to void the agreement between Phil Knight and the player. That is the current system. Players and boosters are given free reign to do as they wish. Again, I am not a defender of that system; it is beginning to wear on me greatly as a fan.

[TruckStopTerrors]

The argument I made is they shouldn’t allow it. I’m sure there are ways they could enforce it, but again, it’s not my job to provide you with examples on that. If BYU or Notre Dame wanted to stop such things, they most certainly could.

Where we are, NIL is a cancer on college athletics. I’ve never donated to any collective nor will I. So it’s not me being envious. It’s me looking at a broken system. It’s also me pointing out that this religious institution believes it should hold itself to a higher standard. Now they’re openly allowing pay for play which they were just recently vocally against. Doesn’t matter who the donor is, this kid doesn’t go to BYU without this money. To think the church can’t go in and tell these donors, hey that’s not how we operate…. I don’t believe that’s reasonable. So if they’re open to this happening, I do believe it’s very hypocritical for a religious institution. Again, we have different opinions here. That’s fine. I don’t really want to engage any longer on the subject because we’re playing out the exact same arguments over and over. Have a nice day.

[Holladay Ute]

If you’re going to argue that they could/should enforce it, it’s definitely on you to provide an example of how they could do that legally.

[TruckStopTerrors]

Why? Because you believe I should? Here’s one example to satiate your appetite. Standing in the church. We deem these actions as a negative representation of our faith, and if you continue to engage in these actions, there will be repercussions. Seriously, was it that hard to actually come up with that yourself?

[Holladay Ute]

I don’t understand your example. What do you mean by standing in the church?

[TruckStopTerrors]

Is this a troll attempt? It seems like you’re coming at this in bad faith. You know exactly what I mean. If you don’t, you can take the night and figure it out.

[Holladay Ute]

I’m not a troll. I’m a diehard Ute that’s been a season ticket holder for 15 years (for basketball and football). I’m also an active member of the church. I genuinely don’t understand what you’re saying.

[TruckStopTerrors]

You could be a Utah lifer as a fan and still be trolling. Regardless, there’s nothing to add to this. Have a good night.

[Utah]

I love the ability of people like you to weave this wonderful, not based in reality, reality. It’s awesome.

[TruckStopTerrors]

Expound.

[TheNuschler]

It’s reality, now…. Kinda like Bitcoin when people called it fake money.

[SteelUte]

This is how simple this issue is: The Church leader said that the school should not engage in pay to play. Certainly everyone is free in our capitalistic society and wild west ncaa NIL rules to pay someone to play, or to be paid to play. But the statement has been made by the church. Regardless of who paid the young man, he is playing for the LDS Church’s school basketball team, and therefore the Church is authorizing pay for play “and an insane amount” to do so.
The Church will have to retract that statement, or adjust the schools ethical standards for their athletic programs. Not to open up a can of worms here on this board, but I’d like to see the church stick to their original statement.

[radioUte]

Far be it from me to defend BYU on this issue, but I am happy to defend the Church as an Institution. The claim here is that there is hypocrisy in saying they don’t want BYU to be in a Pay for Play situation. I would actually argue, the current AJ signing and NIL is actually one of the few current exceptions where we have an honest-to-goodness NIL (Name Image Likness) situation and NOT what most moves are these days in NCAA sports, which are essentially pay-for-play.

Most student athletes honestly have very little NIL value they offer to sponsors. Only the elite players (or popular players in more local markets) are actually generating real income based on their marketing value. But with this kid, that seems to be the case. If he isn’t already a household name (he just had his commitment announcement live on ESPN First Take), he is purportedly about to become one. He’s projected as the #1 pick in the 2026 NBA draft. That makes him a big NIL value.

So he’s getting paid millions of dollars during his one year in college. And it happens that he is going to play at BYU for a short stop on his way to making millions more in the NBA. He’s one of the few student athletes that aren’t really being paid to play. He’s being paid for his actual NIL, as evidenced by the fact that his sponsors are not Built Bar, or NuSkin, or even Ken Garff.

The Church isn’t paying him. BYU isn’t paying him. Even Ryan Smith isn’t paying him (relatively speaking). His sponsors are Nike and Red Bull. THAT, is NIL in the true sense, and not pay-for-play.

[Redblood]

So you are saying he is not going there because he is getting paid? That is pay for play, paying someone before they have produced anything money. Only 5.5 mil. If you are a member and Ute fan without blue goggles I am surprised you think this is something you would expect of the church run institution. I know the church isn’t paying, I’m talking about the message it sends about money and ends being more important than means. Maybe your church goggles are really thick and just can’t at all ever question

[Holladay Ute]

If he wasn’t getting paid, he obviously wouldn’t be going there. I don’t think that means the church values winning more than its principles though.

Clark Gilbert didn’t say the university wouldn’t allow pay for play. They obviously had a bunch of NIL deals in place for years before he even made that comment. Per the above, he said that it “can never become a place where the culture is pay to play” and that it has to “fit the mission”.

This is the mission for BYU athletics: https://byucougars.com/about-byu-athletics

I don’t see how this is in conflict w/ their mission.

On the culture part of his comment, I can see where you’re coming from. I think it sounds hypocritical on some level too. That said, I’m not a part of the program and so I don’t know if the culture of the program is changing b/c of something like this. Maybe they think this guy is a great ambassador for the university and so they are fine if an independent third party pays him what the free market would pay him. Maybe they think he’s a great fit for their culture. Maybe they thought the university would be great for his own development as a person too. Anyway, it’d be interesting to hear Clark Gilbert provide an updated insight on this topic.

And I think it’s worth reminding everyone about Brandon Davies all those years ago. That was the year they went to the Sweet 16 w/ Jimmer. They had a great team. Might’ve been a Final 4 team if they hadn’t prevented Brandon Davies from playing for an honor code violation. I’m not saying I agree w/ how that situation was handled by BYU, but they obviously demonstrated there that they don’t value their principles below winning…

[Ute Dub]

The guy probably still believes what he said. The system just overran him.

[Author]

Posts