NIL and Reality | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

NIL and Reality

I agree with some others in this thread that the entity that should be paying the players is the university. Student athletes should be employees, and there needs to be a league with collective bargaining and a salary cap (coaches included). I think if the universities start having to pay the kids you'll see the donations start flowing back to the university because they'll need the money for facilities.

Yeah, NIL/bag men won't go away, but hopefully this would level the playing field a bit, and get all players paid.
 
My issue is the university should be footing the bill not the fans. Schools are making millions and have the audacity to bang the drum on how the collectives need your help. There needs to be contracts for these players. The portal and nil is ruining college sports.
And where does the university get their revenue? Athletic departments are not profit centers, despite what many think. In most cases they struggle to break even. The revenue sports (football and men's basketball support the entire enterprise. When schools start paying players directly, one of two things have to happen. Either they find a way to cut costs - likely by relegating non revenue sports to club status - or they increase revenue. Beyond media rights where many experts feel we are in a bubble right now, the next biggest source of revenue is ticket prices. You can't expect everything to happen solely with OPM.
 
And where does the university get their revenue? Athletic departments are not profit centers, despite what many think. In most cases they struggle to break even. The revenue sports (football and men's basketball support the entire enterprise. When schools start paying players directly, one of two things have to happen. Either they find a way to cut costs - likely by relegating non revenue sports to club status - or they increase revenue. Beyond media rights where many experts feel we are in a bubble right now, the next biggest source of revenue is ticket prices. You can't expect everything to happen solely with OPM.
Cuse received ~$39 million in TV contract payouts in 2022.

Real hard to cry poverty when you've bloated yourself in overhead.
 
Cuse received ~$39 million in TV contract payouts in 2022.

Real hard to cry poverty when you've bloated yourself in overhead.
Nobody crying poverty, and I would argue against the overhead statement in the traditional sense. There are some other areas where costs can be cut - support staff, charter flights, facilities - and you can argue against including scholarships as a cost beyond the marginal cost to the University of additional students, but $39MM is not a lot of money when looking at an enterprise of this magnitude. We likely spend more than half of that just on football salaries.
 
Nobody crying poverty, and I would argue against the overhead statement in the traditional sense. There are some other areas where costs can be cut - support staff, charter flights, facilities - and you can argue against including scholarships as a cost beyond the marginal cost to the University of additional students, but $39MM is not a lot of money when looking at an enterprise of this magnitude. We likely spend more than half of that just on football salaries.
What is the claim of "non-revenue sports will have to be cut" if not a cry of poverty?
 
What is the claim of "non-revenue sports will have to be cut" if not a cry of poverty?
Guess it depends on your definition of poverty. Looking at a hierarchy of needs for college athletics I would consider non revenue sports as a “nice to have” rather than a must have. If my property taxes go up and I have to cut the number of streaming services I subscribe to to fund that I don’t consider myself impoverished.
 
And where does the university get their revenue? Athletic departments are not profit centers, despite what many think. In most cases they struggle to break even. The revenue sports (football and men's basketball support the entire enterprise. When schools start paying players directly, one of two things have to happen. Either they find a way to cut costs - likely by relegating non revenue sports to club status - or they increase revenue. Beyond media rights where many experts feel we are in a bubble right now, the next biggest source of revenue is ticket prices. You can't expect everything to happen solely with OPM.

They aren't meant to be.

The same way your marketing dept doesn't directly make your company money.

The athletic dept has to PAY for scholarships with the idea that these athletes are taking a spot from a normal student that just wants to attend the school, which seems extremely far fetched, especially at these massive public schools.

When the basketball team goes on a run and applicants go up...isn't that a sign of a successful athletic dept?

 
My issue is the university should be footing the bill not the fans. Schools are making millions and have the audacity to bang the drum on how the collectives need your help. There needs to be contracts for these players. The portal and nil is ruining college sports.
This will eventually be the road that gets traveled. The schools are still having the least amount of skin in the game in terms of paying players - it's the last vestige of "oh that is beneath us, we are educators". the college athletic scam of the last 40 years is that it has been about the education. It's about the schools making as much money as possible without getting their hands dirty.
 
I don't think any one thinks we're going back, just needs to either be a true NIL or college paying directly. What's happening now is a true Cluster**** that is not sustainable.
Not sustainable for SU or not sustainable in general?
 
They aren't meant to be.

The same way your marketing dept doesn't directly make your company money.

The athletic dept has to PAY for scholarships with the idea that these athletes are taking a spot from a normal student that just wants to attend the school, which seems extremely far fetched, especially at these massive public schools.

When the basketball team goes on a run and applicants go up...isn't that a sign of a successful athletic dept?

Not sure I get your point or if it’s relevant to my posts. I am saying the the position some are making that the fans shouldn’t be funding NIL, the schools should is flawed and that the schools are sitting on huge cash reserves. They would need to either cut costs or increase revenues.
 
Not sure I get your point or if it’s relevant to my posts. I am saying the the position some are making that the fans shouldn’t be funding NIL, the schools should is flawed and that the schools are sitting on huge cash reserves. They would need to either cut costs or increase revenues.
Your belief is schools (not the athletic dept) are or are not sitting on huge cash reserves?
 
Will a collectively bargained agreement restrict earnings from entities like current NIL collectives? Otherwise, you could make an argument that nothing will really change, players will just be cashing checks from two sources instead of one.
 
Your belief is schools (not the athletic dept) are or are not sitting on huge cash reserves?
My belief is that the athletic departments are not sitting on huge cash reserves. I don't pretemd to understand the finances of large universities.

I do agree that a successful athletic program can provide some tangible and intangible return on a University's investment, but am reasonably certain that any cash payments to athletes would come out of the Athletic Department which would be expected to, again, cut costs or increase revenues. There is no magic bullet that will solve a player payroll in the tens of millions without an impact on the fans. Not sure what makes this controversial.
 
Will a collectively bargained agreement restrict earnings from entities like current NIL collectives? Otherwise, you could make an argument that nothing will really change, players will just be cashing checks from two sources instead of one.
Don't see how it would. Just like in pro sports, Patrick Mahomes is paid by the Kansas City Chiefs under terms amenable to the NFL - NFLPA CBA and the Chiefs take a hit against their salary cap. But he also gets paid for State Farm and T Mobile commercials above and beyond that compensation.

What it may do is lessen the pressure to pay for play and return NIL to true compensation for use of a player's name, image and likeness. However I am not naive enough to think State U's collective won't offer a deal to QB1 that includes quid pro quo services being paid for well above reasonable market value.
 
My belief is that the athletic departments are not sitting on huge cash reserves. I don't pretemd to understand the finances of large universities.

I do agree that a successful athletic program can provide some tangible and intangible return on a University's investment, but am reasonably certain that any cash payments to athletes would come out of the Athletic Department which would be expected to, again, cut costs or increase revenues. There is no magic bullet that will solve a player payroll in the tens of millions without an impact on the fans. Not sure what makes this controversial.
I don't disagree with your take that the Athletic Dept will be expected to come up with the money.

I disagree with the notion and the general story that the AD isn't in the black. It's an accounting trick with scholarships. If they want to "cut costs" from the AD, stop requiring them to pay themselves
 
Don't see how it would. Just like in pro sports, Patrick Mahomes is paid by the Kansas City Chiefs under terms amenable to the NFL - NFLPA CBA and the Chiefs take a hit against their salary cap. But he also gets paid for State Farm and T Mobile commercials above and beyond that compensation.

What it may do is lessen the pressure to pay for play and return NIL to true compensation for use of a player's name, image and likeness. However I am not naive enough to think State U's collective won't offer a deal to QB1 that includes quid pro quo services being paid for well above reasonable market value.
Your last sentence is my main point. Just because players will soon be getting a (well-deserved) slice of the pie that won't stop collectives from operating just as they do now. It will likely be harder to convince fans/donors to give at the same rate that they currently are but I think that people who believe that the drastic changes coming to college athletics will put an end to NIL being a huuuge recruitment inducement could be in a for a big surprise. Not directly speaking about anybody on this website, just in general.

I don't have the time or desire to be completely up to speed with the pertinent litigation or thoughts on how badly the athletes will get raked over in their attempt to collectively bargain so I cannot even make an actual educated guess to any of this but it is all very interesting. And frustrating as a junkie of college sports.
 
I don't disagree with your take that the Athletic Dept will be expected to come up with the money.

I disagree with the notion and the general story that the AD isn't in the black. It's an accounting trick with scholarships. If they want to "cut costs" from the AD, stop requiring them to pay themselves
Basically what I said a few posts back. It is fair to argue any cost beyond marginal cost of attendance is just balance sheet. There are certainly marginal costs associated with room and board plus team benefits such as health care, but tuition costs are a bit more nebulous.
 
I mean how many programs are running in the RED? Just look at Rutgers? Imagine if the government stopped funding college sports for public universities.
 
I mean how many programs are running in the RED? Just look at Rutgers? Imagine if the government stopped funding college sports for public universities.
Make sure you are sitting down before looking at UConn’s balance sheet.
 
Guess it depends on your definition of poverty. Looking at a hierarchy of needs for college athletics I would consider non revenue sports as a “nice to have” rather than a must have. If my property taxes go up and I have to cut the number of streaming services I subscribe to to fund that I don’t consider myself impoverished.
The NCAA is advertising a lot of non-revenue sports as "Olympics Training", so it's obvious the angle they're taking there.
 
The NCAA is advertising a lot of non-revenue sports as "Olympics Training", so it's obvious the angle they're taking there.
I wonder if they get any support from the USOC? Unlikely, but might be an avenue for some sports in the future.
 
I wonder if they get any support from the USOC? Unlikely, but might be an avenue for some sports in the future.
From what I've read, there is no funding, which is why the USOC has to rely on college programs.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,383
Messages
4,771,544
Members
5,949
Latest member
Laxmom2317

Online statistics

Members online
12
Guests online
698
Total visitors
710


Top Bottom