[Stone]

There was another thread last week about what NIL (name, image, likeness) is supposed to be and what it has become. But worth revisiting how bizarre the NIL world has become. Almost none of the players receiving NIL money have any actual NIL market value, if there was a real NIL market. That is, there are practically zero players that provide a financial return in exchange for being a spokesperson for a company (aka Jordan and Nike). The current NIL market is an entirely bizarre, misallocated market. The NIL payees are not getting a financial return for their NIL money.

To me, that is the only real guardrail for NIL – that the payees (i.e., boosters) will eventually realize that they get nothing from the NIL arrangement beyond the social ego-boost of knowing the money they spent helped the team they cheer for win. Of course, for some, that social ego boost may be enough. The NFL does not ask fan clubs to pay players because it would be absurd to do so. Players get their main money from the team owner (who DOES have a financial incentive to pay players) and sponsors supplement that income when warranted (which is rare).

Given where things are, I believe the only path forward to salvage things is to consolidate a certain number of college teams into a single conference, implement revenue sharing and salary caps, and probably eliminate the guise of the players being student athletes (just make them minor league NFL and have a licensing agreement with the school). The remaining schools then drop to D-III model.

[Stone]

It is not just a old white religious guy thing. There are credible arguments to restrict it that have nothing to do with one’s skin pigmentation, age, or religion.

Anecdotally, I have seen it mess up multiple people. But I have seen it do nothing negative to others. My point is there are definitely potential negative consequences to it. And not just to the user, society bears the burden of people who’s lives get messed up by substance abuse.

That said, like other drugs with side effects, I am mostly fine with using all substances for a beneficial medical purpose – but I would propose making it an actual medical use, as in, one gets a legitimate prescription and gets it from a legitimate pharmacy. Make it akin to other pain killers. Not from the local weed shop with a note from an online doctor.

Also, nobody is going to prison for smoking or possessing weed. It just is not happening.

[Stone]

There is no going back. Frankly, the idea of investors purchasing teams is probably the best path forward, if it leads to a super-conference that is NFL-lite.

[Stone]

I am not defending NIL. I am saying that if we are going to have NIL (which we do) and there is no real structure, complaining about tampering is whiney. NIL is officially sponsorship money. Sponsors are not subject to rules about talking to people. If Ken Garff Auto Mall wants to talk to a player at another school and offer him sponsor money if he plays at the U of U, they can do so whether they players is in the transfer portal or not. To the extent it is a violation of some NCAA rule, I would argue it is completely unenforceable as a violation of the first amendment. You cannot restrict speech in that manner.

The players are essentially professional now. Nike and Ken Garff can talk to whomever they want. They are not subject to NCAA rules. Even employers can recruit employees from other employers (Burger King can recruit McDonalds employees). The tampering rule only works if everyone has agreed to it–i.e., the NFL has an agreed upon structure that the entire league follows. NIL is not in the same category because it is boosters and sponsors, not the teams themselves (even assuming all teams have agreed to the terms, which I question).

Why is it not tampering when Utah talks to and hires a coach from New Mexico? Explain that. Utah can hire a coach under contract at another school? Sounds like tampering. That is the real world. People can talk to whomever they want. Employees can talk to whomever they want. If you are sad that another employer offered your employee more, then buck up and pay more or make they employee sign a binding contract for a longer period of time.

There is no meaningful difference between hiring Beck or hiring a player (in fact, hiring the player is less objectionable because it is not technically the school doing it – it is a booster agreeing to pay NIL money). I agree with EagleMountainU – it is cuckish to whine about your player running off to sign with another school because the player was contacted during an improper period of time. Your girlfriend runs off with another dude – do you complain about how your girlfriend was not supposed to talk to other dudes at the time you were dating, or deal with the real issues as to why she left?

[Stone]

I find the “tampering” cries to be whiney sore loser cries. Now that the NIL floodgates are open, it seems hyper-technical and silly to create some arbitrary boundary as to when an individual is allowed to talk to another individual. I question whether such a rule is even enforceable.

NIL is a free for all at this point. If a player gets offered more money by a booster elsewhere, the player can go there. The U of U has the opportunity to try retaining the player with money. The player then makes a decision. Complaining about whether the conversations happened during the proper window of time is a hyper-technical concern that is entirely meaningless. Until there is an organized agreement and structure to this new world of NIL and transfers, all is fair game.

I am not defending the NIL system, I am just saying the complaints about tampering sound whiney. “but…but… your school contacted our player when he was not officially in the portal…” Money talks.

[Stone]

Completely agree. Everyone is doing this – including Utah. The cries about tampering seem whiney to me. Sign players to NIL deals or don’t. Whining about whether there was tampering is asinine.

[Stone]

I keep hearing references to “tampering” – what even does that mean? And who really cares? It seems so trivial to concern oneself with such an arbitrary rule (to the extent there even is one). Is the NCAA actually enforcing some rules about tampering? Does the NCAA even really exist as an entity anymore in the NIL college football landscape? This is the wild west. If a sponsor/booster wants to contact a kid to play for the school they support, they are going to do it. Quibbling over whether there was tampering seems to be missing the point of what is happening with NIL.

[Stone]

I am dense, so please explain this. Wouldn’t there still be roughly the same number of players seeking roughly the same number of opportunities? I can understand that some lower level schools are getting people dropping down from higher level schools, and there are of course players at lower level schools getting spots at higher level schools.

But unless there is an influx of new players generally or a decrease in total opportunities, it would seem that there are still roughly the same number of total players and opportunities, it is just that they are shuffling around a lot more. I imagine I must be missing something in the equation if offers really are down 80%.

[Stone]

“legally off limits” – there is no such thing anymore (if there ever really was). Every team that wants a recruit continues to recruit him on a mission. Hell, teams recruit players that are actively playing for another team. It doesn’t matter. It is pointless to complain about such stuff – if a player wants to go somewhere else, they will go there. These arbitrary boundaries of when a player can be in contact with another school versus not are silly at this point. I have a job and current employer, but other employers reach out to me all the time. That is real life.

[Stone]

Tampering? I am sorry, but the semblance of any structure or rules to transfers and NIL is nearly nonexistent. It is naive to think there is any real boundary at this point. The NCAA has no control over it. Players and teams can talk to whomever they want whenever they want.

If a kid goes to another school, it is going to happen. Who cares when the conversations about the transfer happen? The transfer happened during the transfer window–whether that was planned months or years ago is largely irrelevant and akin to crying foul about an overcooked meal while dining on the sinking Titanic.

[Author]

Posts