[Kalen Braley]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

AG,

I'm glad you pointed this out, but I don't think NIL is the primary beef.

What people hate, and by people i mean coaches and alumni, is the effects of the Transfer Portal system which also went into effect the same year in 2021.  Does anyone really care if their star players gets a few sponsors?  Not really I suspect, but if they jump ship to a top notch program the following year, that's what grinds their gears.

[Rob Marshall]

For the time being the Ivy League will not form school NIL collectives, but some athletes do have an NIL. It’s rare. This may be the reason why Harvard and Yale’s top basketball players transferred to Georgetown and Michigan, respectively, although one could make the  case that they wanted more visibility and competition to establish their NBA credibility. The new agreement is about revenue sharing, so I ask the question: should the lead violinist in the university orchestra get a percentage of ticket and recording revenue?  Where does it end?

Ivy League not having scholarships. Sure, right right right……

[Rob Marshall]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

[A.G._Crockett]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

[Rob Marshall]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

Their most marketable years a supposed to be after they graduate. That’s where the system fails them.


BTW AG, my family has FOUR division one national champions in D1 lacrosse at SU. I went to many games for 3 of them. I can tell you that they would not trade them for anything. They got full to partial scholarships. Graduated and have done very well in life. They played for the love of the game. That’s what it’s all about. My 5’9” son played D3 college basketball. Didn’t get a nickel. Worked his ass off for the love of the game. That’s what college athletics is all about. I had season tickets for 12 years at SU including 2003. My biggest memory of that season was the smile on the face of Melo every game. Never saw that on his face in the NBA.

[Tim_Weiman]

For the time being the Ivy League will not form school NIL collectives, but some athletes do have an NIL. It’s rare. This may be the reason why Harvard and Yale’s top basketball players transferred to Georgetown and Michigan, respectively, although one could make the  case that they wanted more visibility and competition to establish their NBA credibility. The new agreement is about revenue sharing, so I ask the question: should the lead violinist in the university orchestra get a percentage of ticket and recording revenue?  Where does it end?

Ivy League not having scholarships. Sure, right right right……

Rob,


The Ivy League eliminated athletic scholarships in 1956.


It is amazing that so many years later, people still don’t understand.


Tim

[Tim_Weiman]

Sean,


Princeton’s Board of Trustees recently made three announcements:


1) the target for undergraduates who are eligible for financial aid is 70%
2) the university will continue to show preference for legacy candidates
3) the university will continue to show preference for athletes


These announcements were part of a review the university took following the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action at Harvard.


Essentially, Princeton will favor applicants based on low to middle level family income with legacies and athletes being the exception.


The university announced that legacies comprise 10% of the undergraduate student body; athletes are a slightly higher figure.


None of these announcements change financial aid. It is strictly based on family income with the calculation including the income of both parents and the students. Hence, any NIL income will be part of the financial aid calculation and may simply be a trade off between direct financial aid from the university and any NIL income.


The absence of athletic scholarships does make the Ivies different IMO. A scholarship athlete today at, say, Ohio State will not have any NIL income deducted from tuition grants. The NIL income is in addition to the athletic scholarship.


Going forward, I would not be surprised to see changes in how universities and the IRS consider scholarships. How long will it not be considered income?


In any case, revenue sharing won’t provide much if anything for Ivy League golfers or other athletes. As it is today, revenues don’t cover expenses. The universities themselves do.

Tim,


You are mostly right, but many of the Prnceton coaches, including men’s golf, have their salaries covered by an endowment via generous donors who set them up. Some travel expenses are also covered through the varsity club and other donor vehicles. But, as you say, ticket revenue and broadcasting rights don’t cover all costs.


M

Michael,


To my knowledge there have never been any Ivy League rules against alumni contributions to coaches salary and expenses.


Actually, these schools have increasingly made clear that support for athletics must be provided by alumni. The schools just aren’t interested in covering all the costs themselves.


Tim

[Kevin_Reilly]

Tim, not to speak for Rob, but to many the "wink wink" of no scholarships in the Ivies is that while financial aid is available for all eligible students, it can be more available for good athletes. 


I know a lot of former Ivy league athletes (hockey, lacrosse, football) who all received aid, notwithstanding their need.


That is the jist of what many think about the "no scholarships" mantra.

[Rob Marshall]

For the time being the Ivy League will not form school NIL collectives, but some athletes do have an NIL. It’s rare. This may be the reason why Harvard and Yale’s top basketball players transferred to Georgetown and Michigan, respectively, although one could make the  case that they wanted more visibility and competition to establish their NBA credibility. The new agreement is about revenue sharing, so I ask the question: should the lead violinist in the university orchestra get a percentage of ticket and recording revenue?  Where does it end?

Ivy League not having scholarships. Sure, right right right……

Rob,


The Ivy League eliminated athletic scholarships in 1956.


It is amazing that so many years later, people still don’t understand.


Tim

Tim,
I do understand. My business partners son played hockey at Cornell. They ran him thru the Ag school. It may not be a “scholarship” but he got a degree from Cornell and didn’t pay for it. Call it what you want. Played Hockey got a degree. Has done very well in life from his education. Its mind boggling to me that anyone believes the no scholarship BS.

[Tim_Weiman]

Rob,


A while back I had a long conversation with Buddy Teevens, the former Dartmouth football coach who sadly died from injuries after being hit by a truck when he was out riding a bicycle with his wife.


Teevens confirmed exactly what I have learned from Princeton sources. There are no athletic scholarships. Financial aid is strictly based on family income and the formulas each school uses to provide aid.


But Teevens pointed out some differences: Harvard, Princeton and Yale have larger endowments and more generous financial aid grants than Dartmouth. That is true for Cornell as well. Essentially this means that Harvard, Princeton and Yale can offer full tuition grants to higher income families than the lessor well endowed Ivies.


Sure, Ivy League football programs would have loved a quarterback like Matt Barkley who played at USC. But his family income exceeded the limit for even Harvard, Princeton and Yale, so couldn’t get a scholarship to play in the Ivy League.


He was recruited and could walk on, but no scholarship money was available.


Athletes are recruited by Ivy League schools and are shown preference in Admissions, but when it comes to financial aid it is all family income formula based.


Tim

[A.G._Crockett]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

Their most marketable years a supposed to be after they graduate. That’s where the system fails them.


BTW AG, my family has FOUR division one national champions in D1 lacrosse at SU. I went to many games for 3 of them. I can tell you that they would not trade them for anything. They got full to partial scholarships. Graduated and have done very well in life. They played for the love of the game. That’s what it’s all about. My 5’9” son played D3 college basketball. Didn’t get a nickel. Worked his ass off for the love of the game. That’s what college athletics is all about. I had season tickets for 12 years at SU including 2003. My biggest memory of that season was the smile on the face of Melo every game. Never saw that on his face in the NBA.

Lovely stories and memories for you and your kids, and not unlike my own as a college tennis player a long, long time ago.


But this was your original statement:


“NIL has ruined college football and basketball…”

You are deciding what college athletics should be about.  There is no conflict between “love of the game” and NIL or the transfer portal.  You not only think kids should stay at one school (or at least face sitting out a year if they transfer), but they they shouldn’t share in the profits being made by the school, the NCAA, or corporations.

[Peter Sayegh]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

They played for the love of the game. That’s what it’s all about. My 5’9” son played D3 college basketball. Didn’t get a nickel. Worked his ass off for the love of the game. That’s what college athletics is all about.

Any rational sports fan over the age of fifty who has ever used the term "student athlete" is an imbecile (unless they were referencing D-3 institutions).

[Tim Martin]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

They played for the love of the game. That’s what it’s all about. My 5’9” son played D3 college basketball. Didn’t get a nickel. Worked his ass off for the love of the game. That’s what college athletics is all about.

Any rational sports fan over the age of fifty who has ever used the term "student athlete" is an imbecile (unless they were referencing D-3 institutions).

[Peter Sayegh]

Tim, you're right in shaming me.
My bad.

[Tim Martin]

Tim, you're right in shaming me.
My bad.

Peter-No worries as I removed my post after thinking more about the role that scholarships play.

[Rob Marshall]

NIL has ruined college basketball and football…….

If by “ruined” you mean that college athletes are now able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, instead of the school, the NCAA, the television networks, and corporations like Nike being the ones to profit, then college football and basketball were “ruined” for a good purpose, and it was long, LONG overdue.

Sure, now they just jump from school to school every year to get the most money. Don’t have to sit out a year. They always should have gotten something on top of their education. Spending money. Something because they couldn’t work. They are supposed to be amateur STUDENT athletes. Whatever schools boosters raise the most cash to pay the players wins.

So what you meant by "ruined" was the freedom for a college athlete to move to what they believe are greener pastures for playing time, or money, or both. 

College athletics is a very brief window in a kid's life, no matter how it works out.  They get recruited over and sit, coaches leave (or get fired), and so on.  But the kid is supposed to stay for four years regardless.  Nobody gave a tinker's damn about a kid who came to a school because of lofty recruiting promises, then got recruited over and never really played much.  Nobody cared about kids who were recruited by a coach, helped him or her win, and then saw them leave for a big contract elsewhere, or get fired and replaced by a guy who wanted his own recruits.  C'mon...

Literally, there are NO other college students, including those on some type of a scholarship, that are NOT free to leave to go to another school, or to pursue profit, or whatever.  Scholarship athletes were the only college students who were under transfer restrictions, or to benefit from marketable skills that they might possess.  All for the revenue stream and the pleasure of fans.
There is tremendous angst among fans now because the rosters of their favorite teams are changing year to year.  Kids come and go now, in part to pursue a profit motive.  That's the basis of the American economy, but college athletes aren't supposed to participate for their most marketable years because it's somehow inconvenient for fans.  Again, c'mon...

It's a new, fairer reality.  That isn't the same thing as "ruined", unless fairness and equity are things you don't really believe in anyway.

Their most marketable years a supposed to be after they graduate. That’s where the system fails them.


BTW AG, my family has FOUR division one national champions in D1 lacrosse at SU. I went to many games for 3 of them. I can tell you that they would not trade them for anything. They got full to partial scholarships. Graduated and have done very well in life. They played for the love of the game. That’s what it’s all about. My 5’9” son played D3 college basketball. Didn’t get a nickel. Worked his ass off for the love of the game. That’s what college athletics is all about. I had season tickets for 12 years at SU including 2003. My biggest memory of that season was the smile on the face of Melo every game. Never saw that on his face in the NBA.

Lovely stories and memories for you and your kids, and not unlike my own as a college tennis player a long, long time ago.


But this was your original statement:


“NIL has ruined college football and basketball…”

You are deciding what college athletics should be about.  There is no conflict between “love of the game” and NIL or the transfer portal.  You not only think kids should stay at one school (or at least face sitting out a year if they transfer), but they they shouldn’t share in the profits being made by the school, the NCAA, or corporations.

What do the players get that work their ass off day in and day out to make the team better. Superstar gets more NIL money. What do they get?


https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2024/03/nick-saban-explains-how-nil-player-attitudes-contributed-to-his-retirement-report.html#:~:text=Nick%20Saban's%20reasons%20for%20retiring,was%20no%20longer%20getting%20through.

[Kalen Braley]

Rob,

Of course Nick Saban has been sour grapes with the whole thing.  Instead of luring very good players to Alabama with visions of glory and national championships, only to spend 4 years on the bench, they can now transfer to other schools and actually get significant playing time.

I think competitive balance is actually better with the Transfer Portal, but I know coaches will certainly disagree.

[Rob Marshall]

Rob,

Of course Nick Saban has been sour grapes with the whole thing.  Instead of luring very good players to Alabama with visions of glory and national championships, only to spend 4 years on the bench, they can now transfer to other schools and actually get significant playing time.

I think competitive balance is actually better with the Transfer Portal, but I know coaches will certainly disagree.

Kalen,
I think the school who can generate the most NIL money wins.


I really don’t have problem with the portal. I do think having to sit out a year doesn’t hurt anyone trying to get an education. I know a girl who parlayed that into a masters degree and I’m sure she wasn’t alone.


Getting recruited and sitting on the bench comes with the territory. You know going in that someone is always going to come in and try and grab your time. No different than professional sports or high school sports for that matter.


I don’t think a guy with his record has sour grapes about anything. But I don’t know him so you could very well be right.

[Michael Morandi]

In reference to the comment that you’d have to be an imbecile to believe student athletes exist outside DIII, my experience both as a student and a Princeton resident in my 50’s and 60’s was that most sports participants were indeed “student athletes”.  Not only were there Rhodes Scholars among them, practice was not allowed to interfere with classes and as an elderly auditor, I had many top level (including Olympic rowers) in my classes. And they weren’t “gut” classes, unless you think astrophysics, computer science and macroeconomics are a cakewalk. In comparison, I’ve become friendly with some former and current top PAC 12 golfers who tell me that their classes have to end by lunch so that they can make practice. One told me he was a communications major because he needed an easy curriculum so he could focus on why he was in school: to play golf at a high collegiate level. The Ivy League is still DI. One doesn’t have to drop to DIII to believe in student athletes, rare as they have become in most power conferences. 

[A.G._Crockett]

Generalizations about people you’ve never met is at best a convenience.  At worst, it can be many many other things, but rarely accurate.



It is one thing to say that the schedules of D1 scholarship athletes are demanding, and tailored to the requirements of their sport.  But it is quite another thing to say that this somehow means that there are not “student-athletes” on scholarship at the D1 Power 5 level. 


There are, and always have been, kids who go to college only to play a sport, and do only enough academic work to remain eligible.  There are also scholarship athletes who play a sport at the highest level and also take great pride in academic excellence. 


Painting all D1 Power 5 scholarship athletes with a broad brush is convenient, but it’s also silly and completely inaccurate.  I was a HS coach for 40 years, and I saw student athletes of every variety.  We had a defensive tackle who played on scholarship at Duke for 3 years after redshirting, got his degree, and did not return for a 5th season, though the coaches wanted him to do so, and despite projecting as a starter. He went directly to law school instead, and is now a successful attorney in Richmond.  I also coached or taught kids who would have never gone to college at all, often due to finances, without an athletic scholarship; some of them leveraged their sport into a career path; others did not. 


But they were all different from one another, and many, many of them were wonderful students at both the HS and college level.  It’s just plain ignorant to think otherwise.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()