“Most NIL deals are b———-.” | Page 4 | Syracusefan.com

“Most NIL deals are b———-.”

MLB has a bunch of these 8+ year mega deals now and I can say with authority that won’t increase the game’s overall popularity.

Arguably increased player movement in pro sports over the past 4 decades has *increased* overall interest… because it has brought about more parity. I remember when my early 80s Red Sox and early 90s Pats had a lot of roster stability… and that SUCKED because those players stunk. Teams can literally go from worst to first much more easily today, and that’s great for interest.

Of course, none of that has anything to do with college spots.

College hoops stunk long before the portal and NIL. NBA early entries killed that sport. It’s been borderline unwatchable for years.

College football has always been far more about the name on the front of the jersey than the name on the back. What’ll harm interest in CFB is continued concentrating of the haves vs the have nots.

As in, new QBs every season hasn’t hurt interest in Oklahoma. But whittling down the number of teams that feel part of high level college football from, say, 75 to 35 will do the trick.
Couldn't be more wrong. Your parity argument is completely backwards. There is no cap in MLB therefor there is less parity. Small market teams cannot keep their best players. Fans want to connect to the players on their team so how can you possibly say player movement increases interest?
 
Couldn't be more wrong. Your parity argument is completely backwards. There is no cap in MLB therefor there is less parity. Small market teams cannot keep their best players. Fans want to connect to the players on their team so how can you possibly say player movement increases interest?
Working backwards…. Data. That’s how I know there’s more interest. Literally every major pro sport has grown their fanbase size relative to the US population over the past 3 decades. And that has corresponded with increased player movement and purposeful attempts by the leagues to foster greater parity.

I’m not speaking about feelings here. I’m proffering data-backed facts.

And you’re totally wrong about MLB (since you enjoy being snippy). There is no major pro sport that has had a wider array of champs in the past two+ decades than MLB.

Since 2001, 16 different MLB franchises have won a World Series. That’s more than half the league.

In the same span there’s been 13 NFL franchises that won a Super Bowl, 12 NBA franchises that won a Finals, and 12 NHL franchises that won a Stanley Cup.

Younger fans are FAR less invested in seeing players stay with the same team for years and years. Again, I know this from running surveys that asked them. Data. They’re more likely to follow said athlete as he switches teams. It’s less about the laundry for them than it is for older fans.

But please, tell me again how I’m couldn’t be more wrong because you feel that way. I’m sure you’re feelings are more viable than 20 years of fan and media research.
 
MLB has a bunch of these 8+ year mega deals now and I can say with authority that won’t increase the game’s overall popularity.

Arguably increased player movement in pro sports over the past 4 decades has *increased* overall interest… because it has brought about more parity. I remember when my early 80s Red Sox and early 90s Pats had a lot of roster stability… and that SUCKED because those players stunk. Teams can literally go from worst to first much more easily today, and that’s great for interest.

Of course, none of that has anything to do with college spots.

College hoops stunk long before the portal and NIL. NBA early entries killed that sport. It’s been borderline unwatchable for years.

College football has always been far more about the name on the front of the jersey than the name on the back. What’ll harm interest in CFB is continued concentrating of the haves vs the have nots.

As in, new QBs every season hasn’t hurt interest in Oklahoma. But whittling down the number of teams that feel part of high level college football from, say, 75 to 35 will do the trick.
there are fans of the NBA that are more obsessed with hypothetical trades, contracts, salary cap and transactions that they are actually watching games or root for 1 team. As soon as the season starts people begin trading players to this team and that from day 1.

NBA is 90% youtube highlight watchers and fantasy GM types. I bet there are 100 pods right now calling for Phoenix to trade Durant and that same pod was probably calling for the Phoenix Suns dynasty when they traded for Bradley Beal over the summer. Or the Warriors need to trade for this guy or that guy! They can't get enough of the merry go round
 
Last edited:
Too lazy to look it up but I think NIL has been around long enough that we should start seeing some stories about the IRS showing up to get theirs.
 
Working backwards…. Data. That’s how I know there’s more interest. Literally every major pro sport has grown their fanbase size relative to the US population over the past 3 decades. And that has corresponded with increased player movement and purposeful attempts by the leagues to foster greater parity.

I’m not speaking about feelings here. I’m proffering data-backed facts.

And you’re totally wrong about MLB (since you enjoy being snippy). There is no major pro sport that has had a wider array of champs in the past two+ decades than MLB.

Since 2001, 16 different MLB franchises have won a World Series. That’s more than half the league.

In the same span there’s been 13 NFL franchises that won a Super Bowl, 12 NBA franchises that won a Finals, and 12 NHL franchises that won a Stanley Cup.

Younger fans are FAR less invested in seeing players stay with the same team for years and years. Again, I know this from running surveys that asked them. Data. They’re more likely to follow said athlete as he switches teams. It’s less about the laundry for them than it is for older fans.

But please, tell me again how I’m couldn’t be more wrong because you feel that way. I’m sure you’re feelings are more viable than 20 years of fan and media research.
Didn't take into account your detailed research of " Fanbase size", which I'm sure is accurate. I'm sure you did a door to door poll in all major league cities in all decades that negates all the empty stadium assumption I make when I pass by a game on tv on my way to something somebody wants to watch.
 
Didn't take into account your detailed research of " Fanbase size", which I'm sure is accurate. I'm sure you did a door to door poll in all major league cities in all decades that negates all the empty stadium assumption I make when I pass by a game on tv on my way to something somebody wants to watch.
Yeah I think most Orioles fans are praying that the rumors of current ownership selling the franchise are true so that the new ownership might actually pony up to keep some of this great young talent they now have and had to endure years of losing at a record pace to attain. If not they have about a 3 year window to enjoy it while it lasts.
 
Yeah I think most Orioles fans are praying that the rumors of current ownership selling the franchise are true so that the new ownership might actually pony up to keep some of this great young talent they now have and had to endure years of losing at a record pace to attain. If not they have about a 3 year window to enjoy it while it lasts.

Nats fans too!
 
Didn't take into account your detailed research of " Fanbase size", which I'm sure is accurate. I'm sure you did a door to door poll in all major league cities in all decades that negates all the empty stadium assumption I make when I pass by a game on tv on my way to something somebody wants to watch.
Yeah, I’ve done this for a living for 25 years. But I’m sure your anecdotal accounts of what crowds look like on TV is far superior.

Oh, wait, about that…

Attendance per game is higher today, and has been higher every year of the past FOUR decades, than when there was little to no free agency.

 
Anyway.. specific to NIL… it’s possible we see a counterweight, largely in basketball and perhaps at the skill positions in football, that causes some players to stay in school a year longer than they would have pre-NIL.

I’m thinking about the run of early entries we saw at SU in the 2010s. Guys like Wes Johnson and Johnny Flynn would always bolt if they could be assured being a lottery pick.

But in today’s environment, would Tyler Ennis, Malachai Richardson, Tyler Lydon, etc. have stayed another year if they could’ve been paid? I can’t imagine Judah Mintz would have returned if it were 2017 and NIL didn’t exist.

Maybe not. But I think it’s a bit early in the evolution of NIL and the portal to draw definitive conclusions about how things will be forever more going forward.
 
Didn't take into account your detailed research of " Fanbase size", which I'm sure is accurate. I'm sure you did a door to door poll in all major league cities in all decades that negates all the empty stadium assumption I make when I pass by a game on tv on my way to something somebody wants to watch.
Uhm, it's one thing to disagree with me, because my idiocy and history of poor decision-making is well documented, but, uh... you're swimming in the deep end of the pool if you're arguing with Scooch on this stuff.
 
Uhm, it's one thing to disagree with me, because my idiocy and history of poor decision-making is well documented, but, uh... you're swimming in the deep end of the pool if you're arguing with Scooch on this stuff.
I'm very buoyant.
 
Agreed. Make the schools pay the players. This bizarre condition that it’s now passed on to fans to pay up.
School would just raise ticket prices. Consumers always pay
 
Yeah, I’ve done this for a living for 25 years. But I’m sure your anecdotal accounts of what crowds look like on TV is far superior.

Oh, wait, about that…

Attendance per game is higher today, and has been higher every year of the past FOUR decades, than when there was little to no free agency.

Question- what is the ratio to the population in the area, if that is kept
 
Question- what is the ratio to the population in the area, if that is kept
You mean for MLB attendance by team/market? I don’t have that on hand. It can be calculated, just would take time.
 
Guys like Joe Burrow, Josh Allen and before them Farve and Rogers don’t play in the prime of their careers in those markets in MLB. Helps that strong ownership and commish make it so any team can really win.

100%!

Moreover, a legit/true hard salary cap exists. In my view, It’s the main reason the NFL is so popular and the most successful professional sport in the country.

Small/mid market type teams in the NFL not only compete, they win it all, unlike baseball that hasn’t any cap. The NBA has a cap, but it’s a soft cap, where owners simply pay a luxury tax, etc.

The NFL’s system and salary cap structure allows for teams in cities like Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Buffalo, Cincinnati, etc., etc. to win it all. And, not in a ‘one year wonder,’ type capacity, but on a consistent basis. Where in baseball, etc., these or similar size cities have no real shot, and, therefore, don’t.
 
Last edited:
You mean for MLB attendance by team/market? I don’t have that on hand. It can be calculated, just would take time.
Just wondering if the increases are proportional as well as actual. Population moves to suburbs, more cars, more income and leisure time, local broadcasts, lots of moving parts.
FYI - just asking for sake of understanding, not busting chops.

Thanks.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,616
Messages
4,715,885
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
2,198
Total visitors
2,284


Top Bottom