More potential NCAA changes

Carlsbad7 said:
Personally I think that some schools will drop football and make other sports their focus.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but at the D1 level I think the odds are much greater of it going the other way. Football not influences the viability of other sports but influences the growth of the university.
 
watfly said:
Theoretically the money that the NCAA makes goes back to the member schools. The NCAA is a well organized entity and provides a very valuable and extensive service for college athletes. The CEO makes $3m a year which seems low for a billion dollar organization. The NCAA is not perfect and arguably greedy. However, compared to US Soccer, FIFA, the IOC and many other sports organization entities, the NCAA seems like a saint.
Click to expand...
The NCAA makes the majority of their $1B annually from March Madness ($870M annually from MM). If the basketball colleges decided one day to do what football does (conferences or colleges negotiate their own TV deals), then the NCAA would run out of money pretty quickly. Those colleges would prob make more money going direct, but many colleges programs would probably fold.
 
Slobodan said:
Sure. But what was so wrong with what we had 5 years ago? Was it not working? If a 320-lb lineman at Alabama is going to bed hungry because his meal pass doesn't cut it, fine. Add 10 meals a week to the plan. Hell, give an athlete 2 free round trip flights home to see his/her mama every year. Whatever. When my daughter was looking at Santa Barbara for soccer, we heard that 'Paul is a great guy and obviously UCSB is a strong school with a great location, but he tends to carry too many players and that means less sugar for the players that don't start every match'. How do you travel? Does everyone get to travel? So that became a factor in the decision. That said, what a trade off. Do you want to stay in a Holiday Inn Express in Fresno or watch online (from your dorm) overlooking some of California's best coastal views?

I don't know how all those programs do their thing but I don't think a few tweaks would have been worse than essentially undoing the system. This bit about transferring because someone promised you NIL money (that didn't come) or you didn't play as much as you wanted, seems ridiculous. When you start seeing athletes at 3 or 4 different schools... I'd say it's not helping the cause.
Click to expand...

I think the point I'm trying to make is that I agree with your nostalgic feeling around this. In that this is an example in society where collectivism is necessary for the non-revenue generating sports to even exist. It would be easy for the revenue generating sports to say, "you're not contributing to the pot of money, therefore, you shouldn't exist". I think this nostalgic feeling for me, is what this country is about. It's who we are; we help each other out. At the same time, some of these athletes were absolutely being taken advantage of. That should be fixed. Finding the right balance is the hard part I suppose.
 
NorCalDad said:
I think the point I'm trying to make is that I agree with your nostalgic feeling around this. In that this is an example in society where collectivism is necessary for the non-revenue generating sports to even exist. It would be easy for the revenue generating sports to say, "you're not contributing to the pot of money, therefore, you shouldn't exist". I think this nostalgic feeling for me, is what this country is about. It's who we are; we help each other out. At the same time, some of these athletes were absolutely being taken advantage of. That should be fixed. Finding the right balance is the hard part I suppose.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm romanticizing college athletics but the optics are it's still a relatively pure process. It's a bit like the Olympics. They're somewhat underdogs and we root for them. What concerns me more than them getting paid is knowing NIL is promised by boosters... which I didn't know until someone here posted it. That's frightening. That was the kiss of death for programs like SMU and Miami just a few decades ago. God only knows how that story is going to end. Who is more vulnerable than a starving kid 2,000 miles away from home and who is managing the process?
 
Slobodan said:
Maybe I'm romanticizing college athletics but the optics are it's still a relatively pure process. It's a bit like the Olympics. They're somewhat underdogs and we root for them. What concerns me more than them getting paid is knowing NIL is promised by boosters... which I didn't know until someone here posted it. That's frightening. That was the kiss of death for programs like SMU and Miami just a few decades ago. God only knows how that story is going to end. Who is more vulnerable than a starving kid 2,000 miles away from home and who is managing the process?
Click to expand...
You're a purest and I respect that. I loved college sports back in the day but when the NCAA agreed to allow a man to be a woman all because the cheater considers himself to be a lady will be the "death penalty" for NCAA. What comes around goes around. Once you go woke, you will go broke and be toast. NBA is a joke and unwatchable now and I only watch college basketball when I have time and that is barely hanging together. It's all about March Madness as Nocal said. I'm in Vegas for a few months helping a dear friend and I will be watching March Madness at the Winn. The whole college system is a complete and utter mess because of Mr. Rich Booster and all the other elites. They got their hands in everything.

The SMU case was the first modern "death penalty" – that is, the first one utilized under the "repeat violator" rule. It is the only modern death penalty handed down to a Division I school. SMU football had already been placed on three years' probation in 1985 for recruiting violations.
 
Slobodan said:
Maybe I'm romanticizing college athletics but the optics are it's still a relatively pure process. It's a bit like the Olympics. They're somewhat underdogs and we root for them. What concerns me more than them getting paid is knowing NIL is promised by boosters... which I didn't know until someone here posted it. That's frightening. That was the kiss of death for programs like SMU and Miami just a few decades ago. God only knows how that story is going to end. Who is more vulnerable than a starving kid 2,000 miles away from home and who is managing the process?
Click to expand...
The American Olympic Committee stands tall on the shoulders of college sports and contributes nothing to it. Not just that but how many times do you recall hearing of international athletes being talked up at the games and they went to this or that US college. All that "investment" is paid for by US colleges. At the elite end, many Olympic athletes are millionaires or making a very nice living traveling the world to various meets, paid appearance money and winning bonuses - they are full time pro athletes. There is the wider group who obviously struggle, the plucky underdogs, but the sports are awash with money. The AOC takes in hundreds of millions annually. The IOC takes in billions in the 4 year cycle with the biggest chunk from media rights for the games, with the biggest chunk of that coming from NBC (with a portion of that coming back to the AOC).

WRT the starving kid, look these "kids" are 18 and older; they are adults, can join the military, vote, buy a gun, get married ... if Daddy & Mommy are still helicopter parenting, then the parents are the problem and how they raised their adults kids. If the kids need Daddy & Mommy to guide their every moment, then they shouldn't be in a college 2000 miles away as they lack the maturity to go to college, never mind be a student athlete with all the additional pressures that can bring.

For NIL, I asked ChatGPT if NIL was new or redistributed and it said (below)
The money generated from Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) agreements in college sports represents a combination of "new" money and redistributed money from existing revenue streams. Here's a breakdown:

1. New Money​

  • Non-traditional Sponsors: Businesses and individuals who were not previously involved in college sports are now entering the market to sponsor athletes directly. Examples include local businesses, influencers, and startups looking for affordable marketing options.
  • Niche Endorsements: NIL deals allow athletes to tap into specialized markets (e.g., social media influencer deals, personal training, or camps). These opportunities didn't previously exist in the NCAA framework.
  • Athlete-driven Merchandising: Athletes creating and selling their own branded merchandise or offering services such as appearances, social media promotions, or personalized content are generating entirely new revenue.

2. Redistributed Money​

  • From Athletic Departments or Conferences: Some sponsorship dollars that previously went directly to schools or conferences are now being redirected to individual athletes.
  • Reallocation of Marketing Budgets: Brands and companies that used to sponsor NCAA events, programs, or teams may now allocate part of their budget to individual athletes, leading to a redistribution within the sports marketing ecosystem.
  • Shifts in Booster Contributions: Boosters, who might have previously donated to universities for facilities or scholarships, are now channeling money into NIL collectives to fund athletes directly.

Key Observations​

  • NIL is adding to the overall financial ecosystem of college sports but is also diverting and redistributing funds within that ecosystem.
  • The introduction of NIL has created opportunities for athletes at all levels, especially those in non-revenue-generating sports, to capitalize on personal branding in ways that were previously unavailable.
In summary, while NIL introduces some "new" money into college sports, much of the funding is redistributed from existing pools, reflecting a shift in how revenue is allocated and who benefits from it.
 
cont .. I then asked ChatGPT what proportion was new/redistributed and it said


There is no definitive, widely accepted percentage breakdown of how much NIL revenue in college sports comes from "new" money versus "redistributed" money, as the market is still evolving and lacks comprehensive tracking. However, there are some observations and estimates based on current trends:

Estimates and Observations​

  1. Redistributed Money: ~60-80%
    • A significant portion of NIL revenue appears to come from existing sources in the sports ecosystem:
      • Sponsorship Reallocation: Brands redirect budgets from sponsoring teams, conferences, or events to sponsoring individual athletes. For example, a company may shift part of its college football advertising budget to work directly with a star quarterback.
      • Booster Contributions: Money from boosters, previously directed to athletic departments or facilities, is now funneled into NIL collectives to support athletes directly.
      • University-related Funds: Some NIL agreements involve indirect funding tied to universities, such as collectives formed by alumni or boosters.
  2. New Money: ~20-40%
    • New revenue is entering the ecosystem from previously untapped sources:
      • Local Businesses: Smaller businesses that couldn’t afford traditional sponsorships with universities now find NIL deals with athletes more accessible and affordable.
      • Emerging Industries: NIL deals from non-traditional sectors, such as tech startups, fitness apps, and social media influencers, contribute new money.
      • Athlete-driven Initiatives: Opportunities like personalized merchandise, social media monetization, and hosting camps are creating entirely new revenue streams for athletes.

Challenges in Estimation​

  • Lack of Centralized Data: The NCAA and universities don’t systematically track the origins of NIL money.
  • Varied Athlete Reach: High-profile athletes may attract more redistributed money from existing sponsors, while lesser-known athletes might generate new revenue from niche opportunities.

Potential for More New Money​

As the NIL ecosystem matures, the percentage of new money may grow as:

  • More brands recognize the value of individual athletes over institutional sponsorships.
  • Athlete-driven content, e-commerce, and social media platforms continue to expand their role in monetization.
To summarize, while the majority of NIL revenue currently seems to stem from redistributed money, the share of new money is growing and may eventually account for a larger portion as the market evolves. A more precise breakdown will require further research and reporting as the NIL market becomes more structured.
 
whatithink said:
cont .. I then asked ChatGPT what proportion was new/redistributed and it said


There is no definitive, widely accepted percentage breakdown of how much NIL revenue in college sports comes from "new" money versus "redistributed" money, as the market is still evolving and lacks comprehensive tracking. However, there are some observations and estimates based on current trends:

Estimates and Observations​

  1. Redistributed Money: ~60-80%
    • A significant portion of NIL revenue appears to come from existing sources in the sports ecosystem:
      • Sponsorship Reallocation: Brands redirect budgets from sponsoring teams, conferences, or events to sponsoring individual athletes. For example, a company may shift part of its college football advertising budget to work directly with a star quarterback.
      • Booster Contributions: Money from boosters, previously directed to athletic departments or facilities, is now funneled into NIL collectives to support athletes directly.
      • University-related Funds: Some NIL agreements involve indirect funding tied to universities, such as collectives formed by alumni or boosters.
  2. New Money: ~20-40%
    • New revenue is entering the ecosystem from previously untapped sources:
      • Local Businesses: Smaller businesses that couldn’t afford traditional sponsorships with universities now find NIL deals with athletes more accessible and affordable.
      • Emerging Industries: NIL deals from non-traditional sectors, such as tech startups, fitness apps, and social media influencers, contribute new money.
      • Athlete-driven Initiatives: Opportunities like personalized merchandise, social media monetization, and hosting camps are creating entirely new revenue streams for athletes.

Challenges in Estimation​

  • Lack of Centralized Data: The NCAA and universities don’t systematically track the origins of NIL money.
  • Varied Athlete Reach: High-profile athletes may attract more redistributed money from existing sponsors, while lesser-known athletes might generate new revenue from niche opportunities.

Potential for More New Money​

As the NIL ecosystem matures, the percentage of new money may grow as:

  • More brands recognize the value of individual athletes over institutional sponsorships.
  • Athlete-driven content, e-commerce, and social media platforms continue to expand their role in monetization.
To summarize, while the majority of NIL revenue currently seems to stem from redistributed money, the share of new money is growing and may eventually account for a larger portion as the market evolves. A more precise breakdown will require further research and reporting as the NIL market becomes more structured.
Click to expand...
That makes sense to me that the bulk of the money is redistributed.

Now try to to make sense of this, or should I say how is all of this going to sort out in the end. On first pass, I have no clue.

sports.yahoo.com

With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval?

College football’s more professionalized era arrives in July, and historic powerhouses like Ohio State and Texas could lose both their inherent recruiting advantage and their financial edge.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
 
watfly said:
That makes sense to me that the bulk of the money is redistributed.

Now try to to make sense of this, or should I say how is all of this going to sort out in the end. On first pass, I have no clue.

sports.yahoo.com

With NIL era ending, college sports is on verge of seismic change. How will schools adapt with industry in upheaval?

College football’s more professionalized era arrives in July, and historic powerhouses like Ohio State and Texas could lose both their inherent recruiting advantage and their financial edge.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
I think the mix will change and the article you posted seems to support that. The other conclusion to me is that it will end up back in court when the clearing committee says not fair market value and the school or athlete say, yes it is > arbitration > court. You also have the Tennessee law which says FU to the whole settlement process 🤷‍♂️.
 
whatithink said:
I think the mix will change and the article you posted seems to support that. The other conclusion to me is that it will end up back in court when the clearing committee says not fair market value and the school or athlete say, yes it is > arbitration > court. You also have the Tennessee law which says FU to the whole settlement process 🤷‍♂️.
Click to expand...
FMV can be incredibly subjective.
 
watfly said:
FMV can be incredibly subjective.
Click to expand...
Yeah or its really simple, i.e. whatever someone is prepared to pay represents an athlete's FMV. What are they going to say, a QB at a tier 1 team can only get paid $x ... Deloitte's should be running from this as fast as they can .. but I'm sure they are charging a pretty penny to be in the middle.

The whole attempt at equality is a crock of shit in any case. The article you linked says in black and white that the power houses are the ones with the biggest budgets. Trying to fix what colleges can spend ... roflmao. It won't hold up in court. Tennessee have already blown it up, and the colleges don't want parity so they'll blow it up if needs be too - the NCAA and conferences are really not in charge, much as they would like to think they are.
 
Slobodan said:
I'll repeat myself. I've watched kids lose their jobs because of this minimum wage increase. That's how it works. Firsthand knowledge. That's not a bullshit argument. Saying California is a wealthy state and the 4th or 5th biggest economic power... blah blah blah... when we're billions in debt and facing massive financial shortcomings is trolling 101. I gave you proof and you chose to ignore it.

That money comes from somewhere and that somewhere is business owners.
Click to expand...
"Slobodan" or whoever you're you sound just like Karen Bass right about now... Anybody wanna work for "Slobodan" the trogladyte??????
 
JeterwastheBEST said:
Ummmmm "CRUSH".... Maybe it's time to drop the rock bro'......
Click to expand...
I want girls treated fair loser and no man should ever be allowed to call himself a lady. No rock to drop, just hammer time Jeter. Your time is coming to an end very soon loser. What a loser. Total loser Jeter!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top