Boom! Miami Player Wong will enter transfer portal if NIL isn’t increased!

CPTMidnight

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
541
Reaction score
413
Points
63
They already were paid. The idea was that the college would take a chance and offer you 4 years of education and you would agree to that bargain and develop over 4 years. The benefit for the player is obvious- gain maturity, a college education, a chance in a lifetime opportunity to play before crowds and win games for the university you chose. This idea that money is everything in our choices is a really really bad one. I personally think that a kid going through 4 years of having to develop and stick with something is likely better statistically for the kids than making $100k a year at age 19 for being able to run and jump with no long term commitment to team or university.

Considering that 60- 80% of adult pro athletes end up BROKE a couple of years after they retire tells me that the straight emphasis on getting paid during college might not be so great. Maturity, character and commitment > cash IMO.

Look, for the kids that want the cash and not the education, they should be free to go pro to the NBA G League, Europe or where ever. College was supposed to be amateur sports.

Here is a point of reference to my above guess:
Statistics suggest that up to 78% of NFL players go bankrupt or fall into severe financial stress within just two years of retirement. For basketball players, the figures are only slightly better at 60% of financial ruin within five years of retirement.

A lot of money comes to draftees as a lump sum signing bonus, essentially front-loading their careers while they're still getting their toes wet in the world. As a direct consequence, many of them fall into a lavish lifestyle characterized by million-dollar cars, mansions, extravagant parties and more.
By the third or fourth year of their careers, players are already straining to live up to their former lavish lifestyle without their bonuses. This unsustainability spirals over time and creates a financial burden, even before players approach retirement.

You cap it at "payment in kind" of ~4 years of college, someone else suggests a salary on top of that, another person suggest it should be unlimited. What is the difference except a few dollars?

Seems to me the only people not making a ton of money these days are the players. Weird...
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
49,202
Reaction score
9,827
Points
113
You cap it at "payment in kind" of ~4 years of college, someone else suggests a salary on top of that, another person suggest it should be unlimited. What is the difference except a few dollars?

Seems to me the only people not making a ton of money these days are the players. Weird...
The difference is the focus on money. At that age learning commitment and maturing is better than money.
 

PhiloVance

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
1,057
Reaction score
627
Points
113
Ruiz is not smart. He is an egotistical fanatic that thinks he is helping "his" team by throwing his money around. He is destroying the team.

OK, so he pays these transfers top dollar to come join the team to make it better. He thinks by adding these players to the current roster that it will be even better and "worth the NIL costs" of these new players". But in doing so, he just pissed off the current players that then leave the team. So his dream team never materializes.

And the coach just stands there as this idiot meddles with the team.
If you can't afford a pro franchise buy a team for your favorite college.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
30,291
Reaction score
12,625
Points
113
I'll fully admit that I do not have the legal knowledge to speak confidently on this, but how can they justifiably pass a law that says "college athletes can't be paid more than $100K", or whatever figure they choose. Doesn't make sense to me, but again I am open to being proven wrong.

Playing a college sport isn't a right. The NCAA could justifiably put a rule in place limiting NIL deals in order to keep the sports from getting out of hand from a competitive standpoint. If the athletes don't like it....they can play professionally somewhere else.
 

leib0039

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
1,330
Points
93
Not Wong (or bball) related, but Jordan Addison WR is reportedly leaving Pitt in a bidding war between USC and Bama. I'm fine with kids getting money but if/when this is the norm in college it will talk something away from the game
 




CPTMidnight

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
541
Reaction score
413
Points
63
The difference is the focus on money. At that age learning commitment and maturing is better than money.
It just seems interesting that the people suggesting these kids are far better off not making money - are the ones making money on it. ...or the ones wanting to see kids play for free for a "purer" college basketball fan experience.

Its the wild west right now which probably is the worst way to approach it. Find a way or lower my tickets back down to $5.
 

alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,445
Reaction score
1,957
Points
113
Ok but how are players going to agree to any sort of deal that limits their ability to profit off of their name image and likeness? The NFL doesn't cap how much Aaron Rodgers gets paid to do state farm commercials.
But you know that the high priced college NIL‘s are not a real advertisement agreement like the NFL deals. They are recruitment bribes that are not a source of profit for the businesses that pass them out.
 



alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,445
Reaction score
1,957
Points
113
Maybe. We don't know though.

If what we have now is so obvious ... then why aren't billionaires giving NFL players so much money in NIL deals that it overtakes what they make in league salary?

Why not set it up so that everyone on the team makes the league minimum, and then let NIL deals make up the rest of it in an unlimited/unregulated manner?


Why is there such a difference, here?
Because the dollar amounts are different. You can make a difference in college at 100’s of thousands/player, but it would be millions/player in the NFL. Also, boosters are more interested in impacting their favorite college team more than NFL team.
 

alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,445
Reaction score
1,957
Points
113
I'll fully admit that I do not have the legal knowledge to speak confidently on this, but how can they justifiably pass a law that says "college athletes can't be paid more than $100K", or whatever figure they choose. Doesn't make sense to me, but again I am open to being proven wrong.
You sure are having a problem with placing any rules, restraints or limits on these NIL’s.

Many parts of our lives have rules, guidelines, laws, etc in order to prevent disorder.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
8,882
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
Because the dollar amounts are different. You can make a difference in college at 100’s of thousands/player, but it would be millions/player in the NFL. Also, boosters are more interested in impacting their favorite college team more than NFL team.
Agree it's cheaper to make an impact ... and yet we're seeing a Miami player here not satisfied with the seven figure deal he was offered and accepted.

Also agree that, for some reason, boosters want to impact things in college more than NFL.

Maybe another reason is that in college it's also the wild west on where/how players can play. There are no contracts. You can up and leave on a whim, and be eligible anywhere the next season. And of course, there is no draft.
 

leib0039

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
1,330
Points
93
At some point I think NCAA is going to have to go to actual contracts, just like NFL NBA etc. If you think you can do better, sign a 1 yr deal then you can leave, but if you sign a 4yr deal, sorry bout it. Same goes for the college or booster. You sign a kid for 4 years and he/she are a total flop, sorry they are locked into a scholly and NIL money
 




MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
13,736
Reaction score
9,188
Points
113
Would truly love to know what percentage of NIL money is going to legit NIL ventures and what percentage is just being used as a handout to get players to various schools?

Take Ruiz for an example. Is he using these players Name, Image, or Likeness to promote his products or is he just handing out big checks and relying on the publicity that comes with doing that?

I know there is no way to answer this question, but we all see the way huge sums of money are being tossed around in basketball and football under the guise of NIL but I really do wonder how often it is getting used as intended vs. exploited the way it is at the most high profile levels.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
8,882
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
Would truly love to know what percentage of NIL money is going to legit NIL ventures and what percentage is just being used as a handout to get players to various schools?

Take Ruiz for an example. Is he using these players Name, Image, or Likeness to promote his products or is he just handing out big checks and relying on the publicity that comes with doing that?

I know there is no way to answer this question, but we all see the way huge sums of money are being tossed around in basketball and football under the guise of NIL but I really do wonder how often it is getting used as intended vs. exploited the way it is at the most high profile levels.
Exactly. Ruiz's "deals" are nothing more than providing primary income/salary to be a professional player for the U of Miami. That's precisely what it is.
 


Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
8,882
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
I find it difficult to argue with this point:
I don't find it difficult, at all. Two main counter-arguments:

1) the "(which, questionable)" is absurdly incorrect. It absolutely is not questionable. Lot of folks predicted what a s__tshow that unregulated NIL would be, if they went down that path. And here it is. Lot of the same folks are worried that this is going turn people off and drive down college football viewership.

2) even if it doesn't drive down viewership ... the sentiment of the post is essentially "try to trick rich boosters into giving as much money to you upfront, even though you haven't earned anything yet on the field". In a sense, that is just wrong. You should earn your pay, in my opinion.
 

coolhandgopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
4,831
Reaction score
1,335
Points
113
I don't find it difficult, at all. Two main counter-arguments:

1) the "(which, questionable)" is absurdly incorrect. It absolutely is not questionable. Lot of folks predicted what a s__tshow that unregulated NIL would be, if they went down that path. And here it is. Lot of the same folks are worried that this is going turn people off and drive down college football viewership.

2) even if it doesn't drive down viewership ... the sentiment of the post is essentially "try to trick rich boosters into giving as much money to you upfront, even though you haven't earned anything yet on the field". In a sense, that is just wrong. You should earn your pay, in my opinion.
Counterpoint to that line of thinking…

1. I’d agree that it seems likely at this point that college sports will likely be affected negatively; however, there is no sample size whatsoever for us to judge this by, unless you are concerned that the likes of Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, and Clemson dominate the national championship playoffs year after year—oh wait, that’s already happening.

All this talk about regulation makes me wonder, who exactly would be in charge of that? The NCAA? College administrators? The same fellas who had years and years to come up with an equitable plan with the players and arrogantly hid behind the “full scholarship” argument while their pockets got lined with greenbacks?

2. Earn your pay by hoping you make it unscathed by serious injury for 3-5 years, climb through the dog-eat-dog mentality of the depth charts, all while being shuttled towards college coursework that doesn’t get in the way of the reason you are on campus? Making sure that you tie the required lines of the coaches so you don’t end up in their doghouse? And you do all that, become a standout for your program and, as Sherman points out, still end up scrapping and clawing for a contract in the NFL? I would rather these kids find some money in their pocket rather than more $$$ in the pockets of hypocritical coaches or administrators.

One thing NIL should do is at least lay everything out in the open—HS recruits have been getting wooed for years with illegal payments and it seems only those programs located in major metropolitan areas with big league reporters—SMU, Minnesota, Miami, U. of Washington, Ohio St, USC-have found themselves under the scrutiny that actually results in severe repercussions.
 

GopherPlaya

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
810
Reaction score
554
Points
93
Agree it's cheaper to make an impact ... and yet we're seeing a Miami player here not satisfied with the seven figure deal he was offered and accepted.

Also agree that, for some reason, boosters want to impact things in college more than NFL.

Maybe another reason is that in college it's also the wild west on where/how players can play. There are no contracts. You can up and leave on a whim, and be eligible anywhere the next season. And of course, there is no draft.
Where did it say he was offered 7 figures
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
8,882
Reaction score
1,109
Points
113
Counterpoint to that line of thinking…

1. I’d agree that it seems likely at this point that college sports will likely be affected negatively; however, there is no sample size whatsoever for us to judge this by, unless you are concerned that the likes of Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, and Clemson dominate the national championship playoffs year after year—oh wait, that’s already happening.

All this talk about regulation makes me wonder, who exactly would be in charge of that? The NCAA? College administrators? The same fellas who had years and years to come up with an equitable plan with the players and arrogantly hid behind the “full scholarship” argument while their pockets got lined with greenbacks?

2. Earn your pay by hoping you make it unscathed by serious injury for 3-5 years, climb through the dog-eat-dog mentality of the depth charts, all while being shuttled towards college coursework that doesn’t get in the way of the reason you are on campus? Making sure that you tie the required lines of the coaches so you don’t end up in their doghouse? And you do all that, become a standout for your program and, as Sherman points out, still end up scrapping and clawing for a contract in the NFL? I would rather these kids find some money in their pocket rather than more $$$ in the pockets of hypocritical coaches or administrators.

One thing NIL should do is at least lay everything out in the open—HS recruits have been getting wooed for years with illegal payments and it seems only those programs located in major metropolitan areas with big league reporters—SMU, Minnesota, Miami, U. of Washington, Ohio St, USC-have found themselves under the scrutiny that actually results in severe repercussions.
Solid post, thanks for the discussion!

1) I'm talking about national interest in viewership in college football, the CFP, the CFP championship game. A good amount of the viewership were not alumni or necessarily even fans of those two teams. Same thing as, though on a smaller level than, the Super Bowl.

I have no proof that it will go down. I just think it is a worry, when/if we get to pay-for-play. Technically now, it is not, but NIL defacto certainly seems to be that.

2) I don't think they should withhold your money until the end or until you've earned a trophy or All-American for the team. But the sentiment of the post, to me, reads all the way the opposite. "Take em for everything their worth, who cares if you never amount to anything on the field". Maybe that's wrong to take it that way.

There is a reason that NFL rookies don't get to make the big bucks their first four or five years. Indeed, some players bomb out and never make it huge, for various reasons. Including some who were stars in college.

I do think it is worth something that a recruit has worked very hard and achieved a lot in high school/JUCO/lower college levels, to then be in a position to even be courted in this way, in the first place. Sure

But some of these deals seem like levels of money that would be like a player who just brought home a natty for the school ...
 


GopherPlaya

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
810
Reaction score
554
Points
93
$800k + a car? Sorry, I guess it didn't quite get to 7 figures ...

But what about the other player (not sure what school) who signed an $8M deal??
The guy that was upset didn’t get the 800k & a car deal that’s why he’s upset. He’s mad that he was the best player on an elite 8 team and some transfer will come in from a losing team and get more
 
Last edited:

PhiloVance

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
1,057
Reaction score
627
Points
113
They got that was upset didn’t get the 800k & a car deal that’s why he’s upset. He’s mad that he was the best player on an elite 8 team and some transfer will come in from a losing team and get more
Can't imagine there will be some individual resentment. Perhaps they'll have to find a new way to spell team.
 

Ski U Mah Gopher

Member of the Tribe
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
7,274
Reaction score
512
Points
113
The only argument is that college athletics is amateur, not professional.

No athlete is denied the opportunity to work and be compensated as a professional on a pro team. The NBA is the only entity that constrains free trade by requiring one year of college first. If we are seriously concerned with the athletes they should be free to go pro at any age, even while still in high school.

None of that has anything to do with amateur sports.
The NBA does not require one year of college. They require someone to be 19 as of January 1 of the draft year to play in the NBA. It can be college, G-League, being held back in grade school (which I am surprised doesn't happen more), or Europe. If someone wants to start a second minor league for mainly 18-19 year olds, that can be another option.
 

leib0039

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
1,330
Points
93
Again not bball related but Addison (WR PITT) entered the portal yesterday with a wink wink agreement with USC, rumors are $3m plus a house. Again I'm fine with kids getting paid, but I don't like being able to call kids on other teams like they are FA. Also, the price of business is going up, if you don't have money, good luck but it's not likely to work out in a big way.
 

Lion King

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
352
Reaction score
183
Points
43
100%

As it stands right now the sit rule is the only option. If they want to move around to make more- then go to the G League or overseas, don't use what was formerly our higher education system to hawk your wares every year to the highest bidder. There has to be a balance between rights and responsibilities and at the moment, it's all rights.

I said it before and I'll say it again
This is beginning of the end of COLLEGE sports
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
16,338
Reaction score
7,500
Points
113
I don't find it difficult, at all. Two main counter-arguments:

1) the "(which, questionable)" is absurdly incorrect. It absolutely is not questionable. Lot of folks predicted what a s__tshow that unregulated NIL would be, if they went down that path. And here it is. Lot of the same folks are worried that this is going turn people off and drive down college football viewership.

2) even if it doesn't drive down viewership ... the sentiment of the post is essentially "try to trick rich boosters into giving as much money to you upfront, even though you haven't earned anything yet on the field". In a sense, that is just wrong. You should earn your pay, in my opinion.
Why would that be wrong? Are you against signing bonuses in other sports/occupations? If someone wants to pay someone money for something, why would it be wrong? No one is tricking anyone into anything. Paying people upfront is a gamble and it happens in every major industry in the world.

I've seen some arguments against NIL and paying college athletes, I didn't think I'd ever see anyone argue it's unfair to the rich boosters who want to pay the money.
 

Gophers1992

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
1,197
Reaction score
1,334
Points
113
But you know that the high priced college NIL‘s are not a real advertisement agreement like the NFL deals. They are recruitment bribes that are not a source of profit for the businesses that pass them out.
In my mind it doesn't really matter, if someone is willing to pay you for your talent, then by all means go right ahead.
 

Gophers1992

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
1,197
Reaction score
1,334
Points
113
You sure are having a problem with placing any rules, restraints or limits on these NIL’s.

Many parts of our lives have rules, guidelines, laws, etc in order to prevent disorder.
Honestly, if someone could provide a good solid reasoning for regulation besides "this is unfair", "my team won't be able to compete", "these are amateur athletes", I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As far as I can tell these are agreements between consenting adults and nobody is being robbed or done any harm in the process. There is no "disorder" here that is causing anyone harm.
 




Top Bottom