NIL is getting out of control in college football

[Sibster]

I'm sure most of you have seen this but former Tennessee QB Nico Iamaleava, who had a $2.25 million NIL deal, skipped spring practices and meetings because he demanded that his deal be increased to $4 million.   This is after a season where he was supposedly not a good guy to be around in the locker room, had been missing workouts and team meetings, and not showing up for fan meet & greets/autograph sessions.   

Tennessee decided they were moving on from him and he enters the transfer portal.   He signs with UCLA for a deal worth about $1.75 million.   So that's a huge paycut because he's now making half a mil less and going from paying no state income tax in Tennessee to a pretty friggin high state income tax in California.   

Is this what college football has come to now?   Players holding out for more money?   I'm glad Tennessee decided to put their foot down and I hope other schools do the same until this NIL bullshit can be reigned in.   I'm all for college players getting paid, but not this kind of money.  They haven't earned it nor deserve it.

[Fau Teixeira]

"earned it and deserved" has no place in a capitalistic system, the players will get what the market will bear. Supply and demand drive the valuations.

Your talk of paying them less because you don't feel like they should get it is some straight up communist stuff. Don't be a pinko.

[Dave Gray]

I don't mind the players getting value for their talent.  However, without checks on it and with players leaving to bigger school, it just becomes a donor battle where winners and losers and determined by capitalism and that doesn't make for good sports.

I'd like to see the opposite.  Teams can only pay a certain amount, so if you use your money on the best player, the second best player will want to go somewhere else.  Also, loyalty, so that players don't leave teams that have already agreed on a payment amount....  there are ways to fix this within the system, but the Wild West approach really screws small colleges.  ..not that they weren't screwed already.

[Spider-Dan]

Any argument that players "don't deserve money" is an argument that schools deserve more.  The tickets are not getting cheaper, nor are the conference network TV packages.

There is a solution to players wanting to leave and go to another school: we call them employment contracts.  But if the schools want to continue to pretend that these athletes aren't employees, then they should get what they deserve.

[Sibster]

"earned it and deserved" has no place in a capitalistic system, the players will get what the market will bear. Supply and demand drive the valuations.

Your talk of paying them less because you don't feel like they should get it is some straight up communist stuff. Don't be a pinko.

This is not about capitalism vs communism.  This is about college football being corrupted and becoming more like the NFL, which fans don't want.  College football was never meant to be about the money.   It was about developing your game and your character.   When a guy like Nico Iamaleva starts "holding out" for more money, what does that say about his character?   Screw what the market bears.  

I don't mind the players getting value for their talent.  However, without checks on it and with players leaving to bigger school, it just becomes a donor battle where winners and losers and determined by capitalism and that doesn't make for good sports.

I'd like to see the opposite.  Teams can only pay a certain amount, so if you use your money on the best player, the second best player will want to go somewhere else.  Also, loyalty, so that players don't leave teams that have already agreed on a payment amount....  there are ways to fix this within the system, but the Wild West approach really screws small colleges.  ..not that they weren't screwed already.

This I can somewhat agree with.   College players should get SOME money, perhaps enough for a nice apartment and a nice car, but not the millions the NFL players make.  Because then it takes away the value of making it to the NFL.  

Perhaps they can make it like arena ball where every player makes the same base salary to start with, then bonuses get paid out for players who make plays.  

You start giving out seven figure money to 18 year old kids who have never taken a snap of college football, it is going to get them in big trouble and that money will run like water through their fingers.

[Dave Gray]

This I can somewhat agree with.   College players should get SOME money, perhaps enough for a nice apartment and a nice car, but not the millions the NFL players make.  Because then it takes away the value of making it to the NFL.   

That's just not how pay works.  The money is coming in.  ...someone is getting it.  Why would you limit what a player can make but then pay the AG or the coach or whoever else?

I support salary cap type of stuff for parity's sake, but not from a "they don't deserve it" place.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think college sports are going to face the same issues of inequality and an inability to improve programs as prosports have with no salary cap.

[Fau Teixeira]

I'm playing the tiniest violin ever for the big schools who have to pay players to get them to attend their schools.

[Spider-Dan]

College players should get SOME money, perhaps enough for a nice apartment and a nice car, but not the millions the NFL players make.  Because then it takes away the value of making it to the NFL.

Strange that this same logic doesn't apply to college coaches.  How are they supposed to be motivated to improve at their craft and make it to the NFL level if they are paid millions of dollars to coach unpaid "amateur" student-athletes?

College coaches should also be paid just enough to afford an apartment and a car, in order to ensure they remain Properly Motivated to get better so they can make it to the big leagues.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

How many of you think this new expense will be absorbed by the coaches, AD, and college president taking a pay cut?  How many think it will be absorbed by cutting student programs and raising fees on students?

[Sibster]

How many of you think this new expense will be absorbed by the coaches, AD, and college president taking a pay cut?  How many think it will be absorbed by cutting student programs and raising fees on students?

But, but, there's millions of dollars coming in.  They shouldn't have to cut programs and raise student fees.   

[CF DolFan]

I don't care who gets paid what but if CFB does not come up with some kind of structure, the college game will suffer considerably in the end. Unfortunately it needs to be agreed on or created by the SEC and Big Ten. Otherwise CFB has no control over them and they could start their own thing. 

[Pappy13]

It's not just college football, it's all sports. A lot of players in other sports are getting more money from NIL than from the sport they play these days (I'm looking at you women's soccer and basketball). This is the new normal. Better get used to it, because it's not going away.

Like anything new it's going to take a bit of time to adjust, but it's all going to work itself out and honestly I think sports will be better off for it eventually. Players might actually be able to choose between staying in school and going pro. I think there's been a few college players that have decided to stay in school rather than turn pro because there's other ways to make a living. That's a good thing in my opinion.

[Sibster]

It's not just college football, it's all sports. A lot of players in other sports are getting more money from NIL than from the sport they play these days (I'm looking at you women's soccer and basketball). This is the new normal. Better get used to it, because it's not going away.

Like anything new it's going to take a bit of time to adjust, but it's all going to work itself out and honestly I think sports will be better off for it eventually. Players might actually be able to choose between staying in school and going pro. I think there's been a few college players that have decided to stay in school rather than turn pro because there's other ways to make a living. That's a good thing in my opinion.

And now the Supreme Court may strip away the NCAA eligibility rule.   Meaning you might be right because you'll have athletes staying in college for seven or eight years.

[CF DolFan]

I didn't catch the name of the guy, but Joe Rose was talking about a guy who has changed 3 times since last season. This means he has been on 4 teams in a year. I think most people would agree that is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with making rules for eligibility in college but they refuse to do so. I would love for us to go back to sitting out a year for unnecessary transfers. I'm all for allowing players to change if the coach leaves.