ADVERTISEMENT

Okay, so let's talk N I L - Name Image Likeness

savvyandsassier

All Star
Dec 16, 2013
22,957
5,960
113
Okay party people, it's time to get serious about the biggest, most earth-shattering, cataclysmic change on the CFB scene, of course I mean the so-called NIL business, the acronym referring to name, image, likeness, which we all know means that players, when the new legislation is finalized, are now free to get paid, and cannot be blacklisted and expelled by the evil NCAA the way they have been up until now. This new regime of course does not mean that ND or any school has to share their winnings with the players like in the NFL or any other professional league, but merely that they can no longer enforce some brutish involuntary amateurism on the players under pain of permanent ineligibility.

This is a touchy subject, because it brings out a real ugly side in a lot of sports fans, and quite frankly it's that ugliness that has allowed the NCAA to get away with being such a vicious outfit like they are for as long as they have. And naturally, the NCAA wants no part of this new state of affairs, and is doing everything they can to prevent it, and forestall and drag their feet. And so state governments, and possibly the feds have to step in and make shit happen where the NCAA is far too corrupt and depraved to ever willingly to do it themselves.

And so with that little intro out of the way, let's talk about this shit! And so the way it breaks down pretty much as a practical matter is that it legalizes boosters paying players, which you could imagine in the form of signing autographs at a local car dealership or some cheesy scenario like that. And that is my understanding. Nothing too sophisticated, but nevertheless a huge change. I don't know if they will attempt to put a cap on what players can earn, or if you're only allowed to collect some market rate for a signed photo, or what some or all of the key details will look like. But that's the basic upshot it. It legalizes heretofore under the table payments. We don't even need to talk about 'gaming the system' or something like that, because presumably that is the whole point, and the direct intent and obvious consequence of the legislation on its face.

So I'm going to get out of the way, but one final thought, and it should be the elephant in the room on this subject for ND fans. ND is known as squeaky clean, and we don't pay our players and we definitely do not condone any sort of 'boosters' paying our players. We are legitimately clean, and that is certainly our 'brand' and presumably our reality. I don't know how completely true that actually is, but I've always felt it to be more or less correct, and incidents like with Kim Dunbar are wild exceptions to the otherwise dependable rule. And that's about to change forever. Now we won't be cheating, naturally, on account of these watershed new rules changes. But we better get used to the idea, institutionally, and get our balls in gear, because if we don't, and the old cultural default of defining ourselves by our status as one of the good guys, and the city on the hill that doesn't sully itself with such activities, could sink our recruiting and the program itself conceivably overnight. Or at least it's fair to say that things will happen quickly once the new rules are in place. But this can be a massive boon for ND as well. This can level the playing field for us. It could sink our recruiting if we're not ready, but if we are ready our recruiting might very well soar.

So please everyone share their thoughts. Obviously coronavirus has dominated sports and sports coverage, and this huge looming change in the sport of CFB has been underreported. But it's here, and it's time to get ourselves up to speed on it in a big way. And it's a good thing to chew the cud over in the offseason.
 
Yea Savy... this is a big deal, and those schools that cheat now will have a broader array of ways to cheat. I fully expect ND to be on top of this issue, and to develop ways to support their athletes within the rules, and in a way that does not hinder our recruitment efforts. The following recent statement by JS is the right posture on one of the more obvious issues.

Notre Dame Athletics welcomes the return of EA Sports College Football, a video game series that has historically helped promote interest in college football. Notre Dame will not, however, participate in the game until such time as rules have been finalized governing the participation of our student-athletes.

"As those rules are developed, it is our strong desire that student-athletes be allowed to benefit directly from allowing their name, image and performance history to be used in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: savvyandsassier
I don't think a fair discussion can take place until true parameters have been put in place.

You can still take a stab at it. But it is true, the imagination does run almost limitlessly wild with possibilities, and the scope for how creative you could get so as to exploit this new state of affairs is pretty wide. You'd have to think there will be some parameters, and it won't simply be open season and anything goes.

But maybe it will, and we'll just have to let the market decide. I wonder if the schools will be able to effectively pay the players directly if they feel like it. What's to stop ND itself from paying Tyler Buchner directly for his 'autograph'? So indeed there's all kinds of taking shape that's gonna happen. And this is in any case a truly momentous change.
 
Funny quote from a person on another board talking about the EA Sports College Football game coming out in a few years and Swarbrick saying today that ND won't officially take part until everything surrounding NIL is sorted out:

"My dynasty won't be as authentic if they aren't there being severely overrated and getting beaten down in big games."
 
Could care less about.

I can understand where you're coming from, but it's obviously going to be a very big deal, like it or not. Ultimately when the dust settles I expect the top powers to remain the top powers, but you're going to have to be willing to play ball. Of course it remains unclear what that will consist of. I've definitely heard a couple CFB pundits who already speak of these changes, and pending new laws, at least as they appear to stand now as the floodgates opening, effectively legalizing booster payments. Naturally, the NCAA and other important powers that be will work to prevent that and will at a minimum disavow any complicity in something like that. But all PR-rhetoric aside, I'm guessing the smart money is on the expectation that the floodgates are going to open up, and it will be out of the NCAA's hands.

But I'm not a lawyer. Maybe the P5 schools breaking away from the NCAA is inevitable. But first things first.
 
Okay party people, it's time to get serious about the biggest, most earth-shattering, cataclysmic change on the CFB scene, of course I mean the so-called NIL business, the acronym referring to name, image, likeness, which we all know means that players, when the new legislation is finalized, are now free to get paid, and cannot be blacklisted and expelled by the evil NCAA the way they have been up until now. This new regime of course does not mean that ND or any school has to share their winnings with the players like in the NFL or any other professional league, but merely that they can no longer enforce some brutish involuntary amateurism on the players under pain of permanent ineligibility.

This is a touchy subject, because it brings out a real ugly side in a lot of sports fans, and quite frankly it's that ugliness that has allowed the NCAA to get away with being such a vicious outfit like they are for as long as they have. And naturally, the NCAA wants no part of this new state of affairs, and is doing everything they can to prevent it, and forestall and drag their feet. And so state governments, and possibly the feds have to step in and make shit happen where the NCAA is far too corrupt and depraved to ever willingly to do it themselves.

And so with that little intro out of the way, let's talk about this shit! And so the way it breaks down pretty much as a practical matter is that it legalizes boosters paying players, which you could imagine in the form of signing autographs at a local car dealership or some cheesy scenario like that. And that is my understanding. Nothing too sophisticated, but nevertheless a huge change. I don't know if they will attempt to put a cap on what players can earn, or if you're only allowed to collect some market rate for a signed photo, or what some or all of the key details will look like. But that's the basic upshot it. It legalizes heretofore under the table payments. We don't even need to talk about 'gaming the system' or something like that, because presumably that is the whole point, and the direct intent and obvious consequence of the legislation on its face.

So I'm going to get out of the way, but one final thought, and it should be the elephant in the room on this subject for ND fans. ND is known as squeaky clean, and we don't pay our players and we definitely do not condone any sort of 'boosters' paying our players. We are legitimately clean, and that is certainly our 'brand' and presumably our reality. I don't know how completely true that actually is, but I've always felt it to be more or less correct, and incidents like with Kim Dunbar are wild exceptions to the otherwise dependable rule. And that's about to change forever. Now we won't be cheating, naturally, on account of these watershed new rules changes. But we better get used to the idea, institutionally, and get our balls in gear, because if we don't, and the old cultural default of defining ourselves by our status as one of the good guys, and the city on the hill that doesn't sully itself with such activities, could sink our recruiting and the program itself conceivably overnight. Or at least it's fair to say that things will happen quickly once the new rules are in place. But this can be a massive boon for ND as well. This can level the playing field for us. It could sink our recruiting if we're not ready, but if we are ready our recruiting might very well soar.

So please everyone share their thoughts. Obviously coronavirus has dominated sports and sports coverage, and this huge looming change in the sport of CFB has been underreported. But it's here, and it's time to get ourselves up to speed on it in a big way. And it's a good thing to chew the cud over in the offseason.
Interesting no one I’ve read mentions one of the most ruinous aspects of specifically this but, more generally, the entire pay for play movements. Sadly, it opens the doors to unionizatiin which will quickly lead to disruption, chaos and incessant self centered squabbling. Just take a quick look at the NFL, NBA and MLB and the total disregard the have for those whom they owe their existence....the fans.
 
Interesting no one I’ve read mentions one of the most ruinous aspects of specifically this but, more generally, the entire pay for play movements. Sadly, it opens the doors to unionizatiin which will quickly lead to disruption, chaos and incessant self centered squabbling. Just take a quick look at the NFL, NBA and MLB and the total disregard the have for those whom they owe their existence....the fans.
No fault at all on the ownership side of things ? Blaming it all on the players reeks of a real lack of educated insight of the subject matter.
 
Okay party people, it's time to get serious about the biggest, most earth-shattering, cataclysmic change on the CFB scene, of course I mean the so-called NIL business, the acronym referring to name, image, likeness, which we all know means that players, when the new legislation is finalized, are now free to get paid, and cannot be blacklisted and expelled by the evil NCAA the way they have been up until now. This new regime of course does not mean that ND or any school has to share their winnings with the players like in the NFL or any other professional league, but merely that they can no longer enforce some brutish involuntary amateurism on the players under pain of permanent ineligibility.

This is a touchy subject, because it brings out a real ugly side in a lot of sports fans, and quite frankly it's that ugliness that has allowed the NCAA to get away with being such a vicious outfit like they are for as long as they have. And naturally, the NCAA wants no part of this new state of affairs, and is doing everything they can to prevent it, and forestall and drag their feet. And so state governments, and possibly the feds have to step in and make shit happen where the NCAA is far too corrupt and depraved to ever willingly to do it themselves.

And so with that little intro out of the way, let's talk about this shit! And so the way it breaks down pretty much as a practical matter is that it legalizes boosters paying players, which you could imagine in the form of signing autographs at a local car dealership or some cheesy scenario like that. And that is my understanding. Nothing too sophisticated, but nevertheless a huge change. I don't know if they will attempt to put a cap on what players can earn, or if you're only allowed to collect some market rate for a signed photo, or what some or all of the key details will look like. But that's the basic upshot it. It legalizes heretofore under the table payments. We don't even need to talk about 'gaming the system' or something like that, because presumably that is the whole point, and the direct intent and obvious consequence of the legislation on its face.

So I'm going to get out of the way, but one final thought, and it should be the elephant in the room on this subject for ND fans. ND is known as squeaky clean, and we don't pay our players and we definitely do not condone any sort of 'boosters' paying our players. We are legitimately clean, and that is certainly our 'brand' and presumably our reality. I don't know how completely true that actually is, but I've always felt it to be more or less correct, and incidents like with Kim Dunbar are wild exceptions to the otherwise dependable rule. And that's about to change forever. Now we won't be cheating, naturally, on account of these watershed new rules changes. But we better get used to the idea, institutionally, and get our balls in gear, because if we don't, and the old cultural default of defining ourselves by our status as one of the good guys, and the city on the hill that doesn't sully itself with such activities, could sink our recruiting and the program itself conceivably overnight. Or at least it's fair to say that things will happen quickly once the new rules are in place. But this can be a massive boon for ND as well. This can level the playing field for us. It could sink our recruiting if we're not ready, but if we are ready our recruiting might very well soar.

So please everyone share their thoughts. Obviously coronavirus has dominated sports and sports coverage, and this huge looming change in the sport of CFB has been underreported. But it's here, and it's time to get ourselves up to speed on it in a big way. And it's a good thing to chew the cud over in the offseason.
This is a can of f’up waiting to happen. And with government n politics in play you can bet they will f it up and the college game will be forever ruined

what should happen; no legitimacy for booster or paying players ever. There should be a fund established for money generated for each college team for use of nil. . The school should annually divvy the fund to its players

this way it becomes an every player wins scenario. The alternative is less high profile players would not get much if any money and the WB and skill players would benefit

If you allow money making outdside of contacts and licensing deals, which is boosters for example, you ruin the game
 
The only way this doesn't get out of control is if some governing body mandates that each Power 5 school sets aside X amount of dollars for a player payment pool. It has to be the same for every school. For example, say $2 million per school. I'm not saying that's too high or too low, just using it as an example. How the school divvys that money up among the players is up to them. If no limit is put on the amount of money that can be spent, then the same handful of schools that are dominating CFB now will be the ones paying the most to get the high end talent. Now ND surely could be among those schools that could afford to compete to pay players like an Alabama, Clemson, USC, etc., but it probably would not do that out of principle, and I can't fault them for that. You have to copy the NFL and have the college version of the salary cap and then it is up to ADs or the coach to figure out how to win within that system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theskibro
The only way this doesn't get out of control is if some governing body mandates that each Power 5 school sets aside X amount of dollars for a player payment pool. It has to be the same for every school.
I am sure that is what is going to happen. It's still the grown ups decision on how much of an allowance to dole out to the kids. When the dust settles the players will get enough to feel good about but it won't seriously eat in to the bottom line on the game.

And of course the adults will say everyone gets the same, we really don't need another thing for the kids to fight over.
 
S&S,

I think that it’s going to be a distraction to the players, like reading your own headlines, on steroids !

Will it divert the players focus from performance to promotion ?

I think so.

Time will tell.
 
Okay party people, it's time to get serious about the biggest, most earth-shattering, cataclysmic change on the CFB scene, of course I mean the so-called NIL business, the acronym referring to name, image, likeness, which we all know means that players, when the new legislation is finalized, are now free to get paid, and cannot be blacklisted and expelled by the evil NCAA the way they have been up until now. This new regime of course does not mean that ND or any school has to share their winnings with the players like in the NFL or any other professional league, but merely that they can no longer enforce some brutish involuntary amateurism on the players under pain of permanent ineligibility.

This is a touchy subject, because it brings out a real ugly side in a lot of sports fans, and quite frankly it's that ugliness that has allowed the NCAA to get away with being such a vicious outfit like they are for as long as they have. And naturally, the NCAA wants no part of this new state of affairs, and is doing everything they can to prevent it, and forestall and drag their feet. And so state governments, and possibly the feds have to step in and make shit happen where the NCAA is far too corrupt and depraved to ever willingly to do it themselves.

And so with that little intro out of the way, let's talk about this shit! And so the way it breaks down pretty much as a practical matter is that it legalizes boosters paying players, which you could imagine in the form of signing autographs at a local car dealership or some cheesy scenario like that. And that is my understanding. Nothing too sophisticated, but nevertheless a huge change. I don't know if they will attempt to put a cap on what players can earn, or if you're only allowed to collect some market rate for a signed photo, or what some or all of the key details will look like. But that's the basic upshot it. It legalizes heretofore under the table payments. We don't even need to talk about 'gaming the system' or something like that, because presumably that is the whole point, and the direct intent and obvious consequence of the legislation on its face.

So I'm going to get out of the way, but one final thought, and it should be the elephant in the room on this subject for ND fans. ND is known as squeaky clean, and we don't pay our players and we definitely do not condone any sort of 'boosters' paying our players. We are legitimately clean, and that is certainly our 'brand' and presumably our reality. I don't know how completely true that actually is, but I've always felt it to be more or less correct, and incidents like with Kim Dunbar are wild exceptions to the otherwise dependable rule. And that's about to change forever. Now we won't be cheating, naturally, on account of these watershed new rules changes. But we better get used to the idea, institutionally, and get our balls in gear, because if we don't, and the old cultural default of defining ourselves by our status as one of the good guys, and the city on the hill that doesn't sully itself with such activities, could sink our recruiting and the program itself conceivably overnight. Or at least it's fair to say that things will happen quickly once the new rules are in place. But this can be a massive boon for ND as well. This can level the playing field for us. It could sink our recruiting if we're not ready, but if we are ready our recruiting might very well soar.

So please everyone share their thoughts. Obviously coronavirus has dominated sports and sports coverage, and this huge looming change in the sport of CFB has been underreported. But it's here, and it's time to get ourselves up to speed on it in a big way. And it's a good thing to chew the cud over in the offseason.

This is where the issue was as of a month ago.

.

A Congressional bill, it says, would go well beyond what the NCAA appears to want. And that's just the first potential conflict. But it's germane. The NCAA deals in rules while Congress enacts laws.

My sense is that if Congress gets control of this through legislation, it will result in a much more liberalized system. But, if so, who gets compensated how much for what could become an extremely interesting question.

On the one hand, if the law is written more from a free enterprise/non-restraint-of-trade perspective, it could very well favor the right of individual players to earn -- based on their performance level -- WHATEVER THE TRAFFIC WILL BEAR.

On the other hand, if WOKE ideology creeps into it, the demand will be for EQUITY as defined as EQUALITY OF OUTCOME AS AN AXIOM OF SOCIAL JUSTICE vs. EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AS DETERMINED BY MERIT ALONE.

Not here to argue EQUITY vs. EQUALITY but only to point out two possible ways a Congressional bill like this could swing.

Right now, the Congressional impetus appears to be with the Dems, and it could get a bit risky for them as while they'll probably want to give the individual athlete the greatest degree of financial opportunity, how do they square that with their increasing belief that rewards need to be socialized throughout society? Or, in this case, among teammates as per the pool idea.

BTW, racial tensions could arise over this. In most of society, the EQUITY CONCEPT favors minorities at the expense of whites. But in CFB, that would likely be significantly reversed, given the predominance of minority star-athletes. What a headache for Dems that would be. How to deal with EQUITY and a potential anti-minority feature in the SAME BALL OF WAX.

Would they dare argue in favor of forcing the sharing of star-minority-players' proceeds with white walk-ons? Yet, THAT would be EQUITY.

Thankfully, not my problem. As a hard-core CENTRIST, I get to watch from the cheap seats as this all plays out as I don't care beans about just how -- either for Congress or the players. What will be will be, and there will still be 11-man football.

As to the technical definition of NIL itself -- does it only pertain to autographing photos at car dealers? What about commercials and TV appearances and all manner of "monetize-able" digital display on any platform whatever? All of these media involve images. You don't see a person on TV hawking a product. You see an image of that person doing it.

This is payment for use of one's image for a commercial purpose, right? Does that mean that if this change is to be implemented on a legal basis that ANY USE OF ONE'S IMAGE for this purpose might arguably be monetize-able?

And again, if it's up to Congress, my thought is that they'll instinctively be looking to enact as NON-RESTRICTIVE a law as possible, so as not to RUN AFOUL OF OTHER LAWS HAVING TO DO WITH FOUNDATIONAL ECONOMIC FREEDOM ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. In other words, there could even be Constitutional issues that come into play.

I mean, how do you PARSE OUT economic proceeds and then call it something as grand as ECONOMIC FREEDOM. That's only ECONOMIC FREEDOM LITE. Or more to the point, hyperbolic hooey. If you have a law regarding some principle of economic freedom, wouldn't it more likely be treated as an up-or-down issue, rather than some mere distribution scheme?

I'd hope so if it's a PRINCIPLE we're dealing with.

Yet, as I suggested above, one could also argue that the right to earn is not exactly the same as who gets to keep what. And if that's how Congress were to regard it, they'd need, indeed, to thread a very slender needle. And, of course, there's the whole question of unionization which Congress is already SERIOUSLY considering but which for me is grist for another post's milling.

But, hey . . .

Thank you for raising the issue. It was high time.
 
Last edited:
TLDR but this Congress won't ruffle the feathers of the Us, that's their retirement job come 2022.
 
I think it will shock people how few players will benefit from this .
You have an 85 player squad.

Hopefully a few stars but the majority of your team isn't.

The Stars will get the money----the others might get a few crumbs but nothing of any significance.

I think it will start off as a $$$$$ windfall for some of these players with autograph signings and meet and greets. It will be interesting to see how NIL plays out in the different markets. I assume markets without Pro Teams will benefit.
 
The only way this doesn't get out of control is if some governing body mandates that each Power 5 school sets aside X amount of dollars for a player payment pool. It has to be the same for every school. For example, say $2 million per school. I'm not saying that's too high or too low, just using it as an example. How the school divvys that money up among the players is up to them. If no limit is put on the amount of money that can be spent, then the same handful of schools that are dominating CFB now will be the ones paying the most to get the high end talent. Now ND surely could be among those schools that could afford to compete to pay players like an Alabama, Clemson, USC, etc., but it probably would not do that out of principle, and I can't fault them for that. You have to copy the NFL and have the college version of the salary cap and then it is up to ADs or the coach to figure out how to win within that system.

The schools aren't paying the players, private companies are. If I hire Kyle Hamilton to be the spokesman for my Sandwich shop why should Drew Pyne get a cut when he didn't do any work?
 
This is a can of f’up waiting to happen. And with government n politics in play you can bet they will f it up and the college game will be forever ruined

what should happen; no legitimacy for booster or paying players ever. There should be a fund established for money generated for each college team for use of nil. . The school should annually divvy the fund to its players

this way it becomes an every player wins scenario. The alternative is less high profile players would not get much if any money and the WB and skill players would benefit

If you allow money making outdside of contacts and licensing deals, which is boosters for example, you ruin the game

Just make it all legal. College Football players shouldn't be held to a hire standard then the rest of the student body.

Allow the boosters to pay players, allow kids to market themselves within reason.

in the end it all balances out.
 
Just make it all legal. College Football players shouldn't be held to a hire standard then the rest of the student body.

Allow the boosters to pay players, allow kids to market themselves within reason.

in the end it all balances out.

This is the latest I’ve seen on this.


The REAL SPORTS episode itself was much more informative, and I urge anyone interested in this matter who gets HBO to watch it. A lot to be gleaned from between the lines.

Here’s the challenge for ND as I see it.

College athletes are going to become even more a class unto themselves than they already are. Their media visibility will rise and with it, their PERCEIVED social rank. That totally flies in the face of ND’s drive to keep them as undifferentiated a part of the “regular student body” as possible.

That’s already a myth to a certain extent. But once college athletes become full-on, coin-earning media celebrities, it will completely blow the lid off the ND model. What will ND’s response be?

Whether there’s a state law in Indiana – and I don’t know where this issue stands there – or a national law, any student-athlete at ND will have THE RIGHT to commercialize his role in that capacity.

Will ND play ball? Will it even have the legal right not to?

The other issue, of course, is the question of what will happen to recruiting if no national law is passed. In that case, those states that have not passed legislation allowing student-athletes to make money off their name, image or likeness will be at a DISTINCT DISADVANTAGE.

But let’s assume the legal aspect gets worked out, and we now move into a world of highly commercialized collegiate student-athletes.

How does this affect the ND football program? And how does ND maintain the by now almost PIOUS BROMIDE that its football players are STUDENTS FIRST who merely play football? Will the motto now become God, Country, Money and Notre Dame? Or, in reality, has that ALWAYS been the motto?

NIL constitutes a sea change that will alter the packaging of college sports. Once the beneficiary pool is extended to include the players, the commercial balance of power will have shifted significantly. And maybe more over time than we can now foresee.

How will ND THREAD THIS NEEDLE? And how much SPIN will it need to apply to its MISSION to protect its BRAND? And is it still so important for ND to do that? My sense is -- it had better be willing to BEND.

SOUTH or in whatever direction is required.
 
Yeah, it will be a sea change.... And ND, perhaps, is not terribly culturally cut out, if you will, to thrive in the brave new world that's coming down the pike. So they better make sure they're ready to prosper, even if it's unclear at this time what that will actually mean. They've said, and expressed, if I'm not mistaken, that they are all for this new state of affairs, and have made no public remonstrance, unlike with the possible 'paying' of players over which they threatened to de-emphasize football rather than being involved in such a thing.

So they're not putting up a fight, and one of the critiques of this new state of affairs is that since the rules have the potential to effectively legalize boosters paying players, that schools like ND which presumably did not cheat at all previously when it comes to that sort of thing, now they can get it on the act - legally - and maybe it will be a recruiting boost for us, and create a relative improvement in our recruiting fortunes... that it will 'level the playing field', though I'm not so sure about that.

So we'll see how it goes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4-4-3
Yeah, it will be a sea change.... And ND, perhaps, is not terribly culturally cut out, if you will, to thrive in the brave new world that's coming down the pike. So they better make sure they're ready to prosper, even if it's unclear at this time what that will actually mean. They've said, and expressed, if I'm not mistaken, that they are all for this new state of affairs, and have made no public remonstrance, unlike with the possible 'paying' of players over which they threatened to de-emphasize football rather than being involved in such a thing.

So they're not putting up a fight, and one of the critiques of this new state of affairs is that since the rules have the potential to effectively legalize boosters paying players, that schools like ND which presumably did not cheat at all previously when it comes to that sort of thing, now they can get it on the act - legally - and maybe it will be a recruiting boost for us, and create a relative improvement in our recruiting fortunes... that it will 'level the playing field', though I'm not so sure about that.

So we'll see how it goes!

I assume the NIL will hurt these teams that stockpile talent like Bama, Ohio State and UGA. If you're Mac Jones why would you want to wait until your Senior year to start when you could go to Kentucky and be the face of the program for 4 years
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4-4-3
well, obviously this will definitely change how we look at college football. For decades there has been this, "if you come to (insert school) we will take care of you " (wink wink). Now you won't have to "wink" . The question remains how will this be implemented ? Would players be considered employees? What about team morale ? Are endorsements allowed ? I think the real elite players would take the least path of resistance to get to the NFL. So schools like ND who promote "student" above "athlete" would be on the outside looking in. Just look how things are right now. Realistically there are maybe 10 teams that have a true shot at a national championship every year. Most of the time it's the same teams. Everyone else is window dressing. Does this N I L change that for the better or worse ? I have no idea. I do think there will be unintended consequences when this starts. I'm not sure exactly what the consequences will be, but I do not think it will be a plus for for college sports as a whole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4-4-3
Yeah, it will be a sea change.... And ND, perhaps, is not terribly culturally cut out, if you will, to thrive in the brave new world that's coming down the pike. So they better make sure they're ready to prosper, even if it's unclear at this time what that will actually mean. They've said, and expressed, if I'm not mistaken, that they are all for this new state of affairs, and have made no public remonstrance, unlike with the possible 'paying' of players over which they threatened to de-emphasize football rather than being involved in such a thing.

So they're not putting up a fight, and one of the critiques of this new state of affairs is that since the rules have the potential to effectively legalize boosters paying players, that schools like ND which presumably did not cheat at all previously when it comes to that sort of thing, now they can get it on the act - legally - and maybe it will be a recruiting boost for us, and create a relative improvement in our recruiting fortunes... that it will 'level the playing field', though I'm not so sure about that.

So we'll see how it goes!

Good points. And good selection of this as a rich, motherlode topic.

If ND goes along with whatever comes down – and to remain viable football-wise, how can it not? – it will definitely be engaging in SPIN MOVES, even as it tries to keep its SKIRTS CLEAN.

Booker – who I didn’t realize played for Stanford – is focused squarely on PLAYERS BEING PAID. I’m curious as to how ND fields that one given its already professed aversion to the idea.

The booster method you cite would involve a kind of moral hazard potential ND would have to PARSE very minutely in order to convince people that it wasn’t backstroking away from its principles.

And then there’s the issue of someone eclipsing the program – or even the school itself. Criticism was leveled at both Leahy and Holtz for that “presumptuousness,” and after each of them departed, things were never the same. Would ND take a backseat to some social-media INFLUENCER/running back?

There probably isn’t a spin move in the world to dodge that one. You’re either down with it or you’re not.

These considerations would also apply to ND realizing a potential recruiting benefit. In other words, it would come at the cost of a NARRATIVE ADJUSTMENT. Something ND is especially not keen on.

At the same time, much of this seems like a perfect theater of operations for a guy like Swarbrick who in many ways has already shown himself to be a master of the hidden ball trick.

My understanding is that he pretty much saved the ACC season by having ND join for the year. He was always for playing, pandemic notwithstanding. I’d be very surprised if he doesn’t already have a strategy in place if not a full order of battle.

My guess is that ND’s first move would be to try to tweak this situation in ways it finds acceptable. Problem is, who are its potential allies? The academies and other academic-oriented schools? Hard to say.

But I doubt that USC, which consistently scores slightly higher academically than ND in US News & World Report’s college rankings, will be one of them. NIL will be GOLD in L.A. And everyone with a PRETEXT will be feeding at the trough.
 
Good points. And good selection of this as a rich, motherlode topic.

If ND goes along with whatever comes down – and to remain viable football-wise, how can it not? – it will definitely be engaging in SPIN MOVES, even as it tries to keep its SKIRTS CLEAN.

Booker – who I didn’t realize played for Stanford – is focused squarely on PLAYERS BEING PAID. I’m curious as to how ND fields that one given its already professed aversion to the idea.

The booster method you cite would involve a kind of moral hazard potential ND would have to PARSE very minutely in order to convince people that it wasn’t backstroking away from its principles.

And then there’s the issue of someone eclipsing the program – or even the school itself. Criticism was leveled at both Leahy and Holtz for that “presumptuousness,” and after each of them departed, things were never the same. Would ND take a backseat to some social-media INFLUENCER/running back?

There probably isn’t a spin move in the world to dodge that one. You’re either down with it or you’re not.

These considerations would also apply to ND realizing a potential recruiting benefit. In other words, it would come at the cost of a NARRATIVE ADJUSTMENT. Something ND is especially not keen on.

At the same time, much of this seems like a perfect theater of operations for a guy like Swarbrick who in many ways has already shown himself to be a master of the hidden ball trick.

My understanding is that he pretty much saved the ACC season by having ND join for the year. He was always for playing, pandemic notwithstanding. I’d be very surprised if he doesn’t already have a strategy in place if not a full order of battle.

My guess is that ND’s first move would be to try to tweak this situation in ways it finds acceptable. Problem is, who are its potential allies? The academies and other academic-oriented schools? Hard to say.

But I doubt that USC, which consistently scores slightly higher academically than ND in US News & World Report’s college rankings, will be one of them. NIL will be GOLD in L.A. And everyone with a PRETEXT will be feeding at the trough.

I think the NIL will be mixed in LA... Maybe if the player is Pretty Boy QB (Sanchez or Leinart) he'll be able to make some serious coin. But the USC players will also be competing with Lebron, the Lakers, Clippers, Rams, Chargers, Dodgers, Angeles, Kings, Ducks, Galaxy and LAFC so I can't see the market being their too make a ton of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4-4-3
I assume the NIL will hurt these teams that stockpile talent like Bama, Ohio State and UGA. If you're Mac Jones why would you want to wait until your Senior year to start when you could go to Kentucky and be the face of the program for 4 years

I take your point.

But then, one year in the spotlight at USC or UCLA, for example, might -- monetarily speaking -- be worth riding the bench for. In fact, we could perhaps see a full-on recruiting shift to HIGHER VISIBILITY markets. And others have already suggested this.

So stockpiling could continue -- but merely at different schools.

And it doesn't necessarily just apply to L.A. Cities such as Miami, Seattle, Dallas, New Orleans, Chicago and Atlanta could also be factors. Wherever there's a strong media presence and a sizeable population. I've omitted New York as, for the most part, it's simply not as college football-interested a place.

But vis a vis the others, how do Tuscaloosa, Athens or Norman stack up? Are there sufficient marketing possibilities in remoter locations?
 
Good points. And good selection of this as a rich, motherlode topic.

If ND goes along with whatever comes down – and to remain viable football-wise, how can it not? – it will definitely be engaging in SPIN MOVES, even as it tries to keep its SKIRTS CLEAN.

Booker – who I didn’t realize played for Stanford – is focused squarely on PLAYERS BEING PAID. I’m curious as to how ND fields that one given its already professed aversion to the idea.

The booster method you cite would involve a kind of moral hazard potential ND would have to PARSE very minutely in order to convince people that it wasn’t backstroking away from its principles.

And then there’s the issue of someone eclipsing the program – or even the school itself. Criticism was leveled at both Leahy and Holtz for that “presumptuousness,” and after each of them departed, things were never the same. Would ND take a backseat to some social-media INFLUENCER/running back?

There probably isn’t a spin move in the world to dodge that one. You’re either down with it or you’re not.

These considerations would also apply to ND realizing a potential recruiting benefit. In other words, it would come at the cost of a NARRATIVE ADJUSTMENT. Something ND is especially not keen on.

At the same time, much of this seems like a perfect theater of operations for a guy like Swarbrick who in many ways has already shown himself to be a master of the hidden ball trick.

My understanding is that he pretty much saved the ACC season by having ND join for the year. He was always for playing, pandemic notwithstanding. I’d be very surprised if he doesn’t already have a strategy in place if not a full order of battle.

My guess is that ND’s first move would be to try to tweak this situation in ways it finds acceptable. Problem is, who are its potential allies? The academies and other academic-oriented schools? Hard to say.

But I doubt that USC, which consistently scores slightly higher academically than ND in US News & World Report’s college rankings, will be one of them. NIL will be GOLD in L.A. And everyone with a PRETEXT will be feeding at the trough.

I don't want to be all snarky about ND's.... whatever you'd call it, holier than thou-ness I suppose..... about paying players. Not to mention what I would characterize as their false threats and bluffs that they would actually shut the football program down rather than make athletes employees, etc.

They could afford to be haughty and arrogant on that particular subject, as it was all just rhetoric and talk, and there was no tangible threat on the horizon, only impotent blather. But this abolishing of the NCAA's brutishly enforced amateurism at the state level.... ND has no say over that. And naturally they're going right along with it - even though there is indeed real potential for things to get very messy - because of course there's no room for them to self-righteously declare themselves above it all. They either get with the program or be very quickly left in the dust. And ND, I would say at least, never has had or will have any intention of de-emphasizing football. That was just bullshit, quite frankly. But I don't know that, that's just my guess.

In any case the NCAA, truly evil institution that it is, swears it is their new bounden duty, now that they are no longer empowered to threaten all athletes everywhere with permanent ineligibility, to at least prevent boosters from de facto paying players legally. And that is their current stated position in this whole unfolding business. (The NCAA's evil knows no bounds, they are a truly despicable entity with as close to a nearly literal plantation-style philosophy as you could get, and thus at every step the intention appears to be to take a position as inimical to the players' interest and welfare as circumstances will allow them.)

So the upshot is we don't know yet how this will all shake out and what will become the new normal when it comes to actually getting money into the players' hands. Even if at a glance, the legal implications, and the letter of the law as it were would allow for 'boosters' to pay players seemingly whatever the market will bear, as consideration for, what have you.... an autograph signing or whatnot. They have not finalized all the various new legislation, so we'll have to see. But I think we are all familiar with the intended gist of it.

So we will see what happens!
 
I think the NIL will be mixed in LA... Maybe if the player is Pretty Boy QB (Sanchez or Leinart) he'll be able to make some serious coin. But the USC players will also be competing with Lebron, the Lakers, Clippers, Rams, Chargers, Dodgers, Angeles, Kings, Ducks, Galaxy and LAFC so I can't see the market being their too make a ton of money.

Sure, no question. But at the same time, the more the merrier.

More clients mean more work for talent agents and the whole rigmarole of expanding REALITY reality. It's still a voracious business out there and the lifeblood of that economy. They're always looking to expand it.

If you get a consistent pipeline of talent into USC, they can hold their own in that market.
 
I take your point.

But then, one year in the spotlight at USC or UCLA, for example, might -- monetarily speaking -- be worth riding the bench for. In fact, we could perhaps see a full-on recruiting shift to HIGHER VISIBILITY markets. And others have already suggested this.

So stockpiling could continue -- but merely at different schools.

And it doesn't necessarily just apply to L.A. Cities such as Miami, Seattle, Dallas, New Orleans, Chicago and Atlanta could also be factors. Wherever there's a strong media presence and a sizeable population. I've omitted New York as, for the most part, it's simply not as college football-interested a place.

But vis a vis the others, how do Tuscaloosa, Athens or Norman stack up? Are there sufficient marketing possibilities in remoter locations?

I think it's going to help the teams in the Mid Size markets that lack Pro Teams but I also think it will spread the talent around. I just can't see Kaden Slovis getting a signifigant endorsement over Matt Stafford, Lebron or Justin Herbert.
 
well, obviously this will definitely change how we look at college football. For decades there has been this, "if you come to (insert school) we will take care of you " (wink wink). Now you won't have to "wink" . The question remains how will this be implemented ? Would players be considered employees? What about team morale ? Are endorsements allowed ? I think the real elite players would take the least path of resistance to get to the NFL. So schools like ND who promote "student" above "athlete" would be on the outside looking in. Just look how things are right now. Realistically there are maybe 10 teams that have a true shot at a national championship every year. Most of the time it's the same teams. Everyone else is window dressing. Does this N I L change that for the better or worse ? I have no idea. I do think there will be unintended consequences when this starts. I'm not sure exactly what the consequences will be, but I do not think it will be a plus for for college sports as a whole.

You may be right as to it not benefiting college sports as they now exist. But, for me, it exemplifies the inevitable further monetization of anything that has a massive potential earnings stream attached to it. In other words, it's the next step in the FINANCIAL EVOLUTION of the sport. Without the players, there's no game. And they've finally figured that out.

As to whether or not this is a GOOD THING, I'm agnostic. I'm simply interested in the process at work here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tkirish
I want to add that I don't know exactly what the intended gist of this whole movement, I would be speaking out of turn if I said I did. I am not that familiar with the detailed history of it all and I'm not a lawyer. Maybe it's not simply a workaround to allow boosters pay players legally. Though that definitely seemed to be the takeaway as to what would effectively become legal if the legislation went through as expected.

The NCAA at least publicly states that they would sabotage that much of it if they could, scumbags that they are.
 
I don't want to be all snarky about ND's.... whatever you'd call it, holier than thou-ness I suppose..... about paying players. Not to mention what I would characterize as their false threats and bluffs that they would actually shut the football program down rather than make athletes employees, etc.

They could afford to be haughty and arrogant on that particular subject, as it was all just rhetoric and talk, and there was no tangible threat on the horizon, only impotent blather. But this abolishing of the NCAA's brutishly enforced amateurism at the state level.... ND has no say over that. And naturally they're going right along with it - even though there is indeed real potential for things to get very messy - because of course there's no room for them to self-righteously declare themselves above it all. They either get with the program or be very quickly left in the dust. And ND, I would say at least, never has had or will have any intention of de-emphasizing football. That was just bullshit, quite frankly. But I don't know that, that's just my guess.

In any case the NCAA, truly evil institution that it is, swears it is their new bounden duty, now that they are no longer empowered to threaten all athletes everywhere with permanent ineligibility, to at least prevent boosters from de facto paying players legally. And that is their current stated position in this whole unfolding business. (The NCAA's evil knows no bounds, they are a truly despicable entity with as close to a nearly literal plantation-style philosophy as you could get, and thus at every step the intention appears to be to take a position as inimical to the players' interest and welfare as circumstances will allow them.)

So the upshot is we don't know yet how this will all shake out and what will become the new normal when it comes to actually getting money into the players' hands. Even if at a glance, the legal implications, and the letter of the law as it were would allow for 'boosters' to pay players seemingly whatever the market will bear, as consideration for, what have you.... an autograph signing or whatnot. They have not finalized all the various new legislation, so we'll have to see. But I think we are all familiar with the intended gist of it.

So we will see what happens!

All true.

As I understand it, Booker wants no restrictions to player compensation of any kind. But then he's a black former college football player and by no means emblematic of the overall Senate or its members or how each of them thinks or will vote.

To use a term of art, Booker, I suspect, will take the WOKE approach on this -- which may even include a reparations sidebar. Just guessing here, but there's a neat tie-in to that should one be inclined to utilize it. As for me, that's not a political statement pro or con, just an observation. Process is my thing, not partisanship. But this, too, will get political.

Yet, the truer route for all of us following this will be THE MONEY TRAIL. Always an interesting pursuit as respects ND where both RHETORIC and MONEY never stop flowing.
 
Last edited:
I want to add that I don't know exactly what the intended gist of this whole movement, I would be speaking out of turn if I said I did. I am not that familiar with the detailed history of it all and I'm not a lawyer. Maybe it's not simply a workaround to allow boosters pay players legally. Though that definitely seemed to be the takeaway as to what would effectively become legal if the legislation went through as expected.

The NCAA at least publicly states that they would sabotage that much of it if they could, scumbags that they are.

I see it as socio-economic/political and as a definite wealth redistribution strategy undertaken by stakeholders who have a defensibly logical case since without them, there's no sport. It also comports with much of the social upheaval celebrity culture and social media have unleashed.

Bottom line, there's this inexorable push to distribute fame as a kind of product to those who can't attain it. There's MONEY in it.

And the players, equipped with platforms, now want a PIECE, i.e. a means to CASH IN on the greater public's need to CONSUME VICARIOUSLY the players' experience -- that SUGAR HIGH those who don't think eating their vegetables will gain them notoriety always seem to crave.

Plus, it has more in common with the NFL + Amazon than it does with the NCAA or the college sports status quo.

I neither favor nor oppose it, though I couldn't have asked for a more interesting study subject.
 
Last edited:
I think it's going to help the teams in the Mid Size markets that lack Pro Teams but I also think it will spread the talent around. I just can't see Kaden Slovis getting a signifigant endorsement over Matt Stafford, Lebron or Justin Herbert.

Slovis may very well not out-endorse those guys -- true. But he could very well out-endorse whoever is ND's or Bama's QB. And isn't that the real acid test? The oranges to oranges?
 
You may be right as to it not benefiting college sports as they now exist. But, for me, it exemplifies the inevitable further monetization of anything that has a massive potential earnings stream attached to it. In other words, it's the next step in the FINANCIAL EVOLUTION of the sport. Without the players, there's no game. And they've finally figured that out.

As to whether or not this is a GOOD THING, I'm agnostic. I'm simply interested in the process at work here.

there are more questions than answers right now. For example. You have 85 scholarship players on your roster. All have full rides. That has always been the way to get players to the school of choice. That in itself is “ payment” . These players were stud high school players. However , more than half will ever make any contribution in college even though they are on scholarship. So do those players get paid? If so how much? Do only superstars get paid ? Johnny Football was a terrific college QB. How much would a player like that make over a an average QB? It’s just a few questions I have. Again, I have absolutely no idea how this will unfold. If history teaches us anything, it’s this. Power and money corrupt even if the intent is noble and just.
 
there are more questions than answers right now. For example. You have 85 scholarship players on your roster. All have full rides. That has always been the way to get players to the school of choice. That in itself is “ payment” . These players were stud high school players. However , more than half will ever make any contribution in college even though they are on scholarship. So do those players get paid? If so how much? Do only superstars get paid ? Johnny Football was a terrific college QB. How much would a player like that make over a an average QB? It’s just a few questions I have. Again, I have absolutely no idea how this will unfold. If history teaches us anything, it’s this. Power and money corrupt even if the intent is noble and just.

I would broadly agree with you.

The one thing that seems clear though is that there will be change. And I would argue -- just my opinion -- that people, such as Cory Booker will see the political capital in tying this to other ongoing issues he perceives -- as you put it -- as "noble and just."

That's what makes this so fascinating and, in its unique way, a microcosm of larger societal shifts.

Football will still be football and people on boards, such as this one will still lament the loss of 5-star recruits and Messiah coaches, but if the reward system shifts significantly, all may not benefit equally either. Which in a capitalist market-economy is exactly how things are designed to work.

And that for me is the question here. How much of a "free market" approach will be allowed vs. some kind of socialized regulation. Particularly, when you consider that a "free market" approach here might benefit the more materially disadvantaged vs. those who more often call the tune. The irony there would be STUNNING.

So, it's a boxing match I'm eager to see.
 
I would broadly agree with you.

The one thing that seems clear though is that there will be change. And I would argue -- just my opinion -- that people, such as Cory Booker will see the political capital in tying this to other ongoing issues he perceives -- as you put it -- as "noble and just."

That's what makes this so fascinating and, in its unique way, a microcosm of larger societal shifts.

Football will still be football and people on boards, such as this one will still lament the loss of 5-star recruits and Messiah coaches, but if the reward system shifts significantly, all may not benefit equally either. Which in a capitalist market-economy is exactly how things are designed to work.

And that for me is the question here. How much of a "free market" approach will be allowed vs. some kind of socialized regulation. Particularly, when you consider that a "free market" approach here might benefit the more materially disadvantaged vs. those who more often call the tune. The irony there would be STUNNING.

So, it's a boxing match I'm eager to see.

agreed. It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
 
Slovis may very well not out-endorse those guys -- true. But he could very well out-endorse whoever is ND's or Bama's QB. And isn't that the real acid test? The oranges to oranges?

My point is that if Store X wants a local sports personality to endorse there product. I assume the local NFL teams will reap the rewards over their College counterparts.
 
ADVERTISEMENT