STrib: Gophers NIL deals: social media, female athletes and football lead the way

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,982
Reaction score
18,172
Points
113
Per STrib:

Football is king​

The leading sport for number of NIL deals? No surprise: football, with 59 reported NIL deals in this timeframe (22% of the total). Members of the basketball and hockey teams stay busy here, too, as you might have guessed (72 total deals for members of those four teams). Softball (41), women's soccer (23), gymnastics (21) and volleyball (12) also reached double-digits. Football players also landed a few of the highest-paying deals, ranging from $5,000 to $20,000 for lunches, autographs and social media posts.

www.startribune.com

Gophers NIL deals: social media, female athletes and football lead the way

A review of 272 NIL deals signed by Gophers athletes revealed a few surprises and some findings you could have guessed.
www.startribune.com www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!
 



"Football players also landed a few of the highest-paying deals, ranging from $5,000 to $20,000 for lunches, autographs and social media posts."
This is pretty depressing...not a lotta money and those are the highest-paying deals. The ones we are proud of!
And we are still doing it with bake sales and meat raffles.
Not believing we are mid tier NIL players.
 

Like everything else in our economy, a tiny group of athletes will get nearly all of the actual NIL money. Judging from all the ads I see it looks like Caitlin Clark is getting over half the total pie by herself.

In any given year there are going to be a couple "it" college athletes who may or may not be the best players. Everyone else is going to need to just get paid for playing sports and call it "NIL"

Heck, over half the pro athletes doing ads are former players, not current ones. Once again, the guys who are already wealthiest and best known continue to get richer and more exposed.
 


fmlizard said:
Like everything else in our economy, a tiny group of athletes will get nearly all of the actual NIL money. Judging from all the ads I see it looks like Caitlin Clark is getting over half the total pie by herself.

In any given year there are going to be a couple "it" college athletes who may or may not be the best players. Everyone else is going to need to just get paid for playing sports and call it "NIL"

Heck, over half the pro athletes doing ads are former players, not current ones. Once again, the guys who are already wealthiest and best known continue to get richer and more exposed.
Click to expand...
e2820bca-5e10-4abe-a180-84370ce03c4e_text.gif
 

fmlizard said:
Like everything else in our economy, a tiny group of athletes will get nearly all of the actual NIL money. Judging from all the ads I see it looks like Caitlin Clark is getting over half the total pie by herself.

In any given year there are going to be a couple "it" college athletes who may or may not be the best players. Everyone else is going to need to just get paid for playing sports and call it "NIL"

Heck, over half the pro athletes doing ads are former players, not current ones. Once again, the guys who are already wealthiest and best known continue to get richer and more exposed.
Click to expand...
Exactly why all the ideologues crowing about how NIL is allowing players to finally make money off the sport is a joke. Most aren't really getting anything close to a "fair" share. (I am by no means saying that every player should make equal money, of course not.)

It's nothing of the sort a panacea, other than for a select few.


Salaries will be far superior, just as they are in every other pro league.
 

MplsGopher said:
Exactly why all the ideologues crowing about how NIL is allowing players to finally make money off the sport is a joke. Most aren't really getting anything close to a "fair" share. (I am by no means saying that every player should make equal money, of course not.)

It's nothing of the sort a panacea, other than for a select few.


Salaries will be far superior, just as they are in every other pro league.
Click to expand...
Caitlin Clark is the textbook example of someone who now has an opportunity to cash in on her success in a way she would not have had pre-NIL. This is probably the most marketable year of her life and she doesn't likely have millions of dollars waiting for her to play basketball professionally. So she gets an opportunity to capitalize. Good for her.

But for most, NIL will tilt extremely heavily into the pockets of a few athletes in the most visible sports, teams, and team roles that accrue the most stats. These will almost always be the guys who have the biggest fortunes waiting for them in the pro leagues.

There's a limited market for ads starring college athletes and not nearly enough for true "NIL" marketing featuring everyone. Brands want recognizable faces and names for their ads and tend to use former stars over current ones because the old guys are better known. Even Caitlin Clark has to wear her Iowa jersey in ads so people know who she is. I don't see the LSU girls who won last year or the South Carolina girls in any ads at all.

The only way to make NIL at all "fair" is to just pay players. Then the offensive tackles of the world get paid their worth to the team, and it's not just about who's the best looking, got the most social media followers, or puts up the most offensive stats.
 

MplsGopher said:
Exactly why all the ideologues crowing about how NIL is allowing players to finally make money off the sport is a joke. Most aren't really getting anything close to a "fair" share. (I am by no means saying that every player should make equal money, of course not.)

It's nothing of the sort a panacea, other than for a select few.


Salaries will be far superior, just as they are in every other pro league.
Click to expand...
Football programs would have the money to better pay players (iff) if & only if they were not forced to subsidized all the non-revenue generating sport programs. NIL helps fans to only support players and programs they feel are worthy of their direct donations. DIM (democracy in motion) voting with one's dollars. NIL states which programs have great leadership & deserving of one's money. Follow the money as it tells the true story not misinformation.
 



fmlizard said:
Like everything else in our economy, a tiny group of athletes will get nearly all of the actual NIL money. Judging from all the ads I see it looks like Caitlin Clark is getting over half the total pie by herself.

In any given year there are going to be a couple "it" college athletes who may or may not be the best players. Everyone else is going to need to just get paid for playing sports and call it "NIL"

Heck, over half the pro athletes doing ads are former players, not current ones. Once again, the guys who are already wealthiest and best known continue to get riche
Click to expand...
You’re saying NIL money should be evenly distributed?
 


GVLCGopherFan said:
You’re saying NIL money should be evenly distributed?
Click to expand...
Not exactly, but a system that pays players for their contributions to the team's success (like a pro team) is going to be more equitable and balanced than a system that primarily rewards notoriety.

The star left tackle is never getting his fair share under a true NIL-based compensation system.
 

fmlizard said:
Not exactly, but a system that pays players for their contributions to the team's success (like a pro team) is going to be more equitable and balanced than a system that primarily rewards notoriety.

The star left tackle is never getting his fair share under a true NIL-based compensation system.
Click to expand...
I can't even name another NFL player besides Mahomes (and Kelce very recently because of you know who) that gets national ads. I'm sure there are, but off the top of my head he's the main one.
 



60's Guy said:
"Football players also landed a few of the highest-paying deals, ranging from $5,000 to $20,000 for lunches, autographs and social media posts."
This is pretty depressing...not a lotta money and those are the highest-paying deals. The ones we are proud of!
And we are still doing it with bake sales and meat raffles.
Not believing we are mid tier NIL players.
Click to expand...
If I gambled I'd wager Taylor makes a lot more than that
 

Off-GridTNgopher said:
If I gambled I'd wager Taylor makes a lot more than that
Click to expand...
I hope it is lousy reporting. Logic says if half dozen to dozen football players spoke up in unison, at the same time saying they were happy enough with their Dinkytown money to stay and endorse the collective...logic says it wasn't insignificant money they received. They were unified...doesn't happen for a couple thousand dollars.
 

fmlizard said:
Caitlin Clark is the textbook example of someone who now has an opportunity to cash in on her success in a way she would not have had pre-NIL. This is probably the most marketable year of her life and she doesn't likely have millions of dollars waiting for her to play basketball professionally. So she gets an opportunity to capitalize. Good for her.

But for most, NIL will tilt extremely heavily into the pockets of a few athletes in the most visible sports, teams, and team roles that accrue the most stats. These will almost always be the guys who have the biggest fortunes waiting for them in the pro leagues.

There's a limited market for ads starring college athletes and not nearly enough for true "NIL" marketing featuring everyone. Brands want recognizable faces and names for their ads and tend to use former stars over current ones because the old guys are better known. Even Caitlin Clark has to wear her Iowa jersey in ads so people know who she is. I don't see the LSU girls who won last year or the South Carolina girls in any ads at all.

The only way to make NIL at all "fair" is to just pay players. Then the offensive tackles of the world get paid their worth to the team, and it's not just about who's the best looking, got the most social media followers, or puts up the most offensive stats.
Click to expand...
I dunno about your "make NIL fair" comment. Your first 3 paragraphs make it seem pretty fair to me now. "Go out and get what you can on the market with no one impeding you" seems pretty fair to me. It's how the rest of us earn money. There are tons of software developers making more than me, tons who went to companies with stock plans whereas I didn't, etc. Just because they are wealthier than I am doesn't mean the employment market wasn't fair to me.

EDIT: now that I finished reading the thread, I think you're complaining more about replacing NIL with a more balanced payout system, which is perfectly valid. I'm fine with marketable stars getting way more than others, but to each their own.
 

60's Guy said:
"Football players also landed a few of the highest-paying deals, ranging from $5,000 to $20,000 for lunches, autographs and social media posts."
This is pretty depressing...not a lotta money and those are the highest-paying deals. The ones we are proud of!
And we are still doing it with bake sales and meat raffles.
Not believing we are mid tier NIL players.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that these figures are per event and not the maximum level the football players earned. In other words, a player can make multiple appearances and earn $5-$20,000 for each appearance.
 

MNPete said:
My understanding is that these figures are per event and not the maximum level the football players earned. In other words, a player can make multiple appearances and earn $5-$20,000 for each appearance.
Click to expand...
I get that but just call me skeptical that several players are getting $5,000 to $20,000 a lunch meeting or social media post. And if that is how we are doing it, it isn't sustainable in my opinion.

Say one guy spent $50,000 and it was divided among a few or several players. I can see that. How many guys are there like that? At those numbers if you are doing it for value there are several legitimate influencers and celebrities you can hire for a promotion or organized event that people will actually pay attention to.

The $4 a T Shirt is laughable when it comes to adding up to a substantial payday for one person.
 

GVLCGopherFan said:
You’re saying NIL money should be evenly distributed?
Click to expand...
You were not talking to me but I think there needs to be a base that it starts with. Everybody on the team gets X amount of dollars per month. Or in football by position groups. But you need a base.
Then you find money for the star on top of that.
Players obviously should be educated on how they market themselves to pitch deals to businesses. They can have an agent who does this.
Going to be tough if you are not a social media star with a large number of followers or a standout all conference type of player....so the collective needs a base to pay everybody.
 

60's Guy said:
You were not talking to me but I think there needs to be a base that it starts with. Everybody on the team gets X amount of dollars per month. Or in football by position groups. But you need a base.
Click to expand...
Why? For years we had scholarship players who were getting free tuition and room and board, playing alongside non-scholarship players who got none of that.

How is NIL players playing alongside non-NIL players any different? Back in the day, if a non-scholly person was "jealous" the answer was to work hard and earn the scholly. How about the same here? If you don't have NIL and someone else does, work hard and earn some NIL, don't just expect their NIL to be divided with you "just because".
 

People's wages - salaries are based on what value they bring to the business or government agency. Low salary low value. High salary high value. Education is not the only factor, that's why Starbucks has PHD baristas. Common sense, morals, strong belief system plus normal parents helps the road into adulthood smoother. Teaching & or government are jobs where everyone should be paid the same wage as it is a monopolistic system. Just another cog in the machine.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
Why? For years we had scholarship players who were getting free tuition and room and board, playing alongside non-scholarship players who got none of that.

How is NIL players playing alongside non-NIL players any different? Back in the day, if a non-scholly person was "jealous" the answer was to work hard and earn the scholly. How about the same here? If you don't have NIL and someone else does, work hard and earn some NIL, don't just expect their NIL to be divided with you "just because".
Click to expand...
It's a new day. Times are different, people are different. You need the numbers in football. You need continuity to build teamwork. We don't pay nothing to the 25 to 85th player and school X does...new trucks for everybody, $10,000 for everybody etc...will be tough to keep continuity.
The playing field was more level, just 5 years ago...it's not now. Times change.
 

MplsGopher said:
Exactly why all the ideologues crowing about how NIL is allowing players to finally make money off the sport is a joke. Most aren't really getting anything close to a "fair" share. (I am by no means saying that every player should make equal money, of course not.)

It's nothing of the sort a panacea, other than for a select few.


Salaries will be far superior, just as they are in every other pro league.
Click to expand...
They have decidedly varying levels of exposure, which directly translates into their level of ability to cash in on their NIL. That's pretty much how it was set up to work.
 

PMWinSTP said:
They have decidedly varying levels of exposure, which directly translates into their level of ability to cash in on their NIL. That's pretty much how it was set up to work.
Click to expand...
An OL will never have anywhere near marketability as a QB, yet top tackles these days are paid quite well and drafted high.

Not paid as well as QBs but certainly more than the nothing that NIL would dictate.
 

MplsGopher said:
An OL will never have anywhere near marketability as a QB, yet top tackles these days are paid quite well and drafted high.

Not paid as well as QBs but certainly more than the nothing that NIL would dictate.
Click to expand...
I used exposure, you used marketability...not the same in my estimation.
 


fmlizard said:
Caitlin Clark is the textbook example of someone who now has an opportunity to cash in on her success in a way she would not have had pre-NIL. This is probably the most marketable year of her life and she doesn't likely have millions of dollars waiting for her to play basketball professionally. So she gets an opportunity to capitalize. Good for her.

But for most, NIL will tilt extremely heavily into the pockets of a few athletes in the most visible sports, teams, and team roles that accrue the most stats. These will almost always be the guys who have the biggest fortunes waiting for them in the pro leagues.

There's a limited market for ads starring college athletes and not nearly enough for true "NIL" marketing featuring everyone. Brands want recognizable faces and names for their ads and tend to use former stars over current ones because the old guys are better known. Even Caitlin Clark has to wear her Iowa jersey in ads so people know who she is. I don't see the LSU girls who won last year or the South Carolina girls in any ads at all.

The only way to make NIL at all "fair" is to just pay players. Then the offensive tackles of the world get paid their worth to the team, and it's not just about who's the best looking, got the most social media followers, or puts up the most offensive stats.
Click to expand...
Caitlin Clarke's net worth is $3.2 million.

www.womenshealthmag.com

Caitlin Clark Could Make This Much *After* March Madness

She’s raking it in.
www.womenshealthmag.com www.womenshealthmag.com
 

College athletes with national ads:

Caitlin Clark
Caleb Williams

Any others?
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom