NIL NET and the new landscape

[DomeHolmes]

Reading all of the negative posts and all the people that are shocked and surprised by where we are, are in my opinion, missing the biggest reality. There’s a reason that the rise of the SEC is coinciding with the fall of the BIG EAST and the ACC. There are lots of good schools in our shoes. Small schools without “State Flagship support”

Some posters on this board were huge advocates of NIL. They thought a free 300k education for the 98 percent of players not going pro wasn‘t enough. “The kids should get paid for their jersey sales, local ads for car dealers, video game likenesses, etc”. I agree with all that except for the “etc. part”. That’s the part that was going to get out of control, and has made the playing field mostly “SEC and everybody else”.

It was too predictable. As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. Oddly, some of the “pro NIL people” are the ones screaming the loudest now.

-Arkansas has 2 Billionaire, Arkansas alums, funding TENS of millions to a school with only “ok“ pedigree. Historically not a selector school. Not any more.
-Kentucky paid a D league center more than our whole team’s budget
-States like Kentucky and Tennessee consider their schools their de facto pro teams and they Represent state pride, so people with nothing to do with the schools support NIL
-Conversely, Joe Blow from Ronkonkoma could give a flip about Syracuse if not an alum.

$1000 from 500 posters here would be great and out pace 90% of true “fanbases”. But it’s not even a drop in the bucket vs what we are up against. Our alum base and 200k metro area population is competing with schools with twice the alumni and ten times the “local“ support. Can Red do better, YES but it’s 20% of the problem


NET has also changed the game. I had a friendly back and forth with another poster who though the Mountain West was not Necessarily gaming the system better than others, just playing more quad 2 games. I said they were destroying bad teams to get the rankings. Should have said destroying “mediocre” teams. Their 6 tournament teams had a total of 6 wins vs ranked non conference or .500 or better power 5. That’s it. Two of the teams had ZERO good wins at all, except vs their own conference!!!

You got the same credit last year for beating UC Davis or Duquesne on a neutral court, as beating Cuse, Indiana, V Tech or Maryland on the road. It’s a “Quad 2 win” lol. That is how the NET is used by Mid Majors. Beat no one of note, get a high ranking, then play each other for Q1 Q2 wins. Listen to Seth Greenberg, Charles Barkley and Seth Davis talk about how good the Mountain West conference is, then watch them go 3-6 in the tournament.

ACC and Big East need to schedule non conference like Mountain West if they can’t beat SEC, because you’re better off beating up cupcakes than scheduling good teams. That is what NET brought us.

Last night Tennessee had 3 starters on the floor with a 25 point lead with 2 minutes left, gunning 3s with 10 seconds off the clock to run up the score. Their #10 player got 1 minute. # 11-13 and walkons didn’t play, in a blowout, and they ran up the score to help NET, or because Barnes is a douche, (or both).

All that being said, if we had Kadary Richmond at pg we are likely a tournament team, (but no where near a contender). We are close to competing but $ Millions from what we once were.

 

[djcon57]

Reading all of the negative posts and all the people that are shocked and surprised by where we are, are in my opinion, missing the biggest reality. There’s a reason that the rise of the SEC is coinciding with the fall of the BIG EAST and the ACC. There are lots of good schools in our shoes. Small schools without “State Flagship support”

Some posters on this board were huge advocates of NIL. They thought a free 300k education for the 98 percent of players not going pro wasn‘t enough. “The kids should get paid for their jersey sales, local ads for car dealers, video game likenesses, etc”. I agree with all that except for the “etc. part”. That’s the part that was going to get out of control, and has made the playing field mostly “SEC and everybody else”.

It was too predictable. As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. Oddly, some of the “pro NIL people” are the ones screaming the loudest now.

-Arkansas has 2 Billionaire, Arkansas alums, funding TENS of millions to a school with only “ok“ pedigree. Historically not a selector school. Not any more.
-Kentucky paid a D league center more than our whole team’s budget
-States like Kentucky and Tennessee consider their schools their de facto pro teams and they Represent state pride, so people with nothing to do with the schools support NIL
-Conversely, Joe Blow from Ronkonkoma could give a flip about Syracuse if not an alum.

$1000 from 500 posters here would be great and out pace 90% of true “fanbases”. But it’s not even a drop in the bucket vs what we are up against. Our alum base and 200k metro area population is competing with schools with twice the alumni and ten times the “local“ support. Can Red do better, YES but it’s 20% of the problem


NET has also changed the game. I had a friendly back and forth with another poster who though the Mountain West was not Necessarily gaming the system better than others, just playing more quad 2 games. I said they were destroying bad teams to get the rankings. Should have said destroying “mediocre” teams. Their 6 tournament teams had a total of 6 wins vs ranked non conference or .500 or better power 5. That’s it. Two of the teams had ZERO good wins at all, except vs their own conference!!!

You got the same credit last year for beating UC Davis or Duquesne on a neutral court, as beating Cuse, Indiana, V Tech or Maryland on the road. It’s a “Quad 2 win” lol. That is how the NET is used by Mid Majors. Beat no one of note, get a high ranking, then play each other for Q1 Q2 wins. Listen to Seth Greenberg, Charles Barkley and Seth Davis talk about how good the Mountain West conference is, then watch them go 3-6 in the tournament.

ACC and Big East need to schedule non conference like Mountain West if they can’t beat SEC, because you’re better off beating up cupcakes than scheduling good teams. That is what NET brought us.

Last night Tennessee had 3 starters on the floor with a 25 point lead with 2 minutes left, gunning 3s with 10 seconds off the clock to run up the score. Their #10 player got 1 minute. # 11-13 and walkons didn’t play, in a blowout, and they ran up the score to help NET, or because Barnes is a douche, (or both).

All that being said, if we had Kadary Richmond at pg we are likely a tournament team, (but no where near a contender). We are close to competing but $ Millions from what we once were.

Looking at your post history who appeared to enjoy the football season. “Be careful what you wish for”. You mean a great football season?

 

[BomberOrange]

Reading all of the negative posts and all the people that are shocked and surprised by where we are, are in my opinion, missing the biggest reality. There’s a reason that the rise of the SEC is coinciding with the fall of the BIG EAST and the ACC. There are lots of good schools in our shoes. Small schools without “State Flagship support”

Some posters on this board were huge advocates of NIL. They thought a free 300k education for the 98 percent of players not going pro wasn‘t enough. “The kids should get paid for their jersey sales, local ads for car dealers, video game likenesses, etc”. I agree with all that except for the “etc. part”. That’s the part that was going to get out of control, and has made the playing field mostly “SEC and everybody else”.

It was too predictable. As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. Oddly, some of the “pro NIL people” are the ones screaming the loudest now.

-Arkansas has 2 Billionaire, Arkansas alums, funding TENS of millions to a school with only “ok“ pedigree. Historically not a selector school. Not any more.
-Kentucky paid a D league center more than our whole team’s budget
-States like Kentucky and Tennessee consider their schools their de facto pro teams and they Represent state pride, so people with nothing to do with the schools support NIL
-Conversely, Joe Blow from Ronkonkoma could give a flip about Syracuse if not an alum.

$1000 from 500 posters here would be great and out pace 90% of true “fanbases”. But it’s not even a drop in the bucket vs what we are up against. Our alum base and 200k metro area population is competing with schools with twice the alumni and ten times the “local“ support. Can Red do better, YES but it’s 20% of the problem


NET has also changed the game. I had a friendly back and forth with another poster who though the Mountain West was not Necessarily gaming the system better than others, just playing more quad 2 games. I said they were destroying bad teams to get the rankings. Should have said destroying “mediocre” teams. Their 6 tournament teams had a total of 6 wins vs ranked non conference or .500 or better power 5. That’s it. Two of the teams had ZERO good wins at all, except vs their own conference!!!

You got the same credit last year for beating UC Davis or Duquesne on a neutral court, as beating Cuse, Indiana, V Tech or Maryland on the road. It’s a “Quad 2 win” lol. That is how the NET is used by Mid Majors. Beat no one of note, get a high ranking, then play each other for Q1 Q2 wins. Listen to Seth Greenberg, Charles Barkley and Seth Davis talk about how good the Mountain West conference is, then watch them go 3-6 in the tournament.

ACC and Big East need to schedule non conference like Mountain West if they can’t beat SEC, because you’re better off beating up cupcakes than scheduling good teams. That is what NET brought us.

Last night Tennessee had 3 starters on the floor with a 25 point lead with 2 minutes left, gunning 3s with 10 seconds off the clock to run up the score. Their #10 player got 1 minute. # 11-13 and walkons didn’t play, in a blowout, and they ran up the score to help NET, or because Barnes is a douche, (or both).

All that being said, if we had Kadary Richmond at pg we are likely a tournament team, (but no where near a contender). We are close to competing but $ Millions from what we once were.

"Our alum base and 200k metro area population"

You make some good points, but the metro area is 3x what you think:

Census profile: Syracuse, NY Metro Area

Census data for Syracuse, NY Metro Area (pop. 652,956), including age, race, sex, income, poverty, marital status, education and more.

censusreporter.org

 

[kingtidge]

Reading all of the negative posts and all the people that are shocked and surprised by where we are, are in my opinion,

Last night Tennessee had 3 starters on the floor with a 25 point lead with 2 minutes left, gunning 3s with 10 seconds off the clock to run up the score. Their #10 player got 1 minute. # 11-13 and walkons didn’t play, in a blowout, and they ran up the score to help NET, or because Barnes is a douche, (or both).

He's not a douche.

Improving your NET is what good and relatively good teams need to do now.

That means running up the score and embarrassing teams that can't stop you.

It's no longer a sign of being a douche... it's ensuring your team is in an optimal spot with NET when the NCAA tournament seeding and bubblewatch starts.

 

[Trueblue25]

If donors are given reason to believe in a staffs ability to perform their jobs the money will be there. Never SEC levels, but enough.

 

[Newhouser]

Eh story is the same - we stink in the new environment so the new environment stinks. It's not on everyone else to wait on us to figure it out.

 

[DomeHolmes]

Looking at your post history who appeared to enjoy the football season. “Be careful what you wish for”. You mean a great football season?

getting Mccord was huge. We paid market price for him (and a huge chunk of our $) .

But if NIL didn’t exist we STILL would have got him, and maybe more top guys too. On a level playing field. We wouldn’t be “out bid”. That is the point. ( same with Diggs, Zeed and Meeks). They would all be here. We didn’t get them BECAUSE of NIL. We got them because of Fran, then with competitive nil for them.

Back up QBs get no minutes or exposure. We had what McCord wanted in terms of coaching and receivers, and guaranteed starter.

7th men in basketball however get 20+ minutes a game to showcase talent. They can get paid and get exposure.

Our biggest challenge competing with SEC And BIG long term will be money. More is better.

whether you like NIL or not, the reality is that we will never regularly compete with teams with ALOT more money with this system.

the Royals and Pirates can have good years but will never truly compete with Yankees and Dodgers due to $$$$$$.

 

[jncuse]

Reading all of the negative posts and all the people that are shocked and surprised by where we are, are in my opinion, missing the biggest reality. There’s a reason that the rise of the SEC is coinciding with the fall of the BIG EAST and the ACC. There are lots of good schools in our shoes. Small schools without “State Flagship support”

Some posters on this board were huge advocates of NIL. They thought a free 300k education for the 98 percent of players not going pro wasn‘t enough. “The kids should get paid for their jersey sales, local ads for car dealers, video game likenesses, etc”. I agree with all that except for the “etc. part”. That’s the part that was going to get out of control, and has made the playing field mostly “SEC and everybody else”.

It was too predictable. As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. Oddly, some of the “pro NIL people” are the ones screaming the loudest now.

-Arkansas has 2 Billionaire, Arkansas alums, funding TENS of millions to a school with only “ok“ pedigree. Historically not a selector school. Not any more.
-Kentucky paid a D league center more than our whole team’s budget
-States like Kentucky and Tennessee consider their schools their de facto pro teams and they Represent state pride, so people with nothing to do with the schools support NIL
-Conversely, Joe Blow from Ronkonkoma could give a flip about Syracuse if not an alum.

$1000 from 500 posters here would be great and out pace 90% of true “fanbases”. But it’s not even a drop in the bucket vs what we are up against. Our alum base and 200k metro area population is competing with schools with twice the alumni and ten times the “local“ support. Can Red do better, YES but it’s 20% of the problem


NET has also changed the game. I had a friendly back and forth with another poster who though the Mountain West was not Necessarily gaming the system better than others, just playing more quad 2 games. I said they were destroying bad teams to get the rankings. Should have said destroying “mediocre” teams. Their 6 tournament teams had a total of 6 wins vs ranked non conference or .500 or better power 5. That’s it. Two of the teams had ZERO good wins at all, except vs their own conference!!!

You got the same credit last year for beating UC Davis or Duquesne on a neutral court, as beating Cuse, Indiana, V Tech or Maryland on the road. It’s a “Quad 2 win” lol. That is how the NET is used by Mid Majors. Beat no one of note, get a high ranking, then play each other for Q1 Q2 wins. Listen to Seth Greenberg, Charles Barkley and Seth Davis talk about how good the Mountain West conference is, then watch them go 3-6 in the tournament.

ACC and Big East need to schedule non conference like Mountain West if they can’t beat SEC, because you’re better off beating up cupcakes than scheduling good teams. That is what NET brought us.

Last night Tennessee had 3 starters on the floor with a 25 point lead with 2 minutes left, gunning 3s with 10 seconds off the clock to run up the score. Their #10 player got 1 minute. # 11-13 and walkons didn’t play, in a blowout, and they ran up the score to help NET, or because Barnes is a douche, (or both).

All that being said, if we had Kadary Richmond at pg we are likely a tournament team, (but no where near a contender). We are close to competing but $ Millions from what we once were.

NET is flawed, but a number of your claims are incorrect. Following the "MWC model" is not getting the ACC or Syracuse anywhere this year in NET.

Q2's against non P5 schools are not cupcakes. Power conferences, including the SEC, are 8-11 in Q2 games against non power conference teams this year. The 6 MWC schools that made the tourney last year went 13-4 in Q2 games out of conference. Beating those teams is not nearly as easy as you think. You still have to win the games, and the ACC has shown no ability to that against good or bad (in terms of margin)

If your solution is to play more Q4 games that will fail again. That is where the ACC loses the most ground to the Big 3 conferences. Margins in Q4 games:
B12 - 28.8
SEC - 28.2
B10 - 25,3
BE - 22.1
ACC - 19.1
(The B12 in particular seems to excel at this)

The delta of 19.1 vs 28.8 in margin, is the difference between a team of #30 in KP vs #110 in KP. That is how much the ACC fell behind in Q4 games.

I'm going to analyze why the MWC got 6 teams last year in my other thread "Tracking the OOC". Feel free to discuss there. It wasn't scheduling that got them in -- but it was the composition of the conference that helped them... something the ACC can't achieve.

They might get 3 teams this year. Schedule is about the same, but its top teams are just not doing nearly as good in OOC. It ultimately comes down to member teams doing well no matter how you schedule.

 

[jncuse]

The ACC and Syracuse is not good enough to game anything this year.

 

[djcon57]

Eh story is the same - we stink in the new environment so the new environment stinks. It's not on everyone else to wait on us to figure it out.

You mean you missed the NIL is ruining the sport posts this year on the football board? Me either

 

[djcon57]

getting Mccord was huge. We paid market price for him (and a huge chunk of our $) .

But if NIL didn’t exist we STILL would have got him, and maybe more top guys too. On a level playing field. We wouldn’t be “out bid”. That is the point. ( same with Diggs, Zeed and Meeks). They would all be here. We didn’t get them BECAUSE of NIL. We got them because of Fran, then with competitive nil for them.

Back up QBs get no minutes or exposure. We had what McCord wanted in terms of coaching and receivers, and guaranteed starter.

7th men in basketball however get 20+ minutes a game to showcase talent. They can get paid and get exposure.

Our biggest challenge competing with SEC And BIG long term will be money. More is better.

whether you like NIL or not, the reality is that we will never regularly compete with teams with ALOT more money with this system.

the Royals and Pirates can have good years but will never truly compete with Yankees and Dodgers due to $$$$$$.

We’re not asking to compete with the Yankees!!!

We’re trying to make the playoffs once in 4 years. Once.

 

[DomeHolmes]

Power conferences are 9-16 in Q2 games against teams from non power conferences.


NET is flawed, but a number of your claims are significantly incorrect. Following the "MWC model" is not getting the ACC or Syracuse anywhere this year in NET.

Q2's against non P5 schools are not cupcakes. Power conferences, including the SEC, are 8-11 in Q2 games against non power conference teams this year. The 6 MWC schools that made the tourney last year went 13-4 in Q2 games out of conference. Beating those teams is not nearly as easy as you think. You still have to win the games, and the ACC has shown no ability to that against good or bad (in terms of margin)

If your solution is to play more Q4 games that will fail again. That is where the ACC loses the most ground to the Big 3 conferences. Margins in Q4 games:
B12 - 28.8
SEC - 28.2
B10 - 25,3
BE - 22.1
ACC - 19.1

The delta of 19.1 vs 28.8 in margin, is the difference between a team of #30 in KP vs #110 in KP. That is how much the ACC fell behind in Q4 games.

I'm going to analyze why the MWC got 6 teams last year in my other thread "Tracking the OOC". It wasn't scheduling that got them in -- but it was the composition of the conference that helped them... something the ACC can't achieve.

If you go by the metric of who did you play, who did you beat, and tourney records when you got there, these conferences never measure up.

If they did they would show it. All the metrics in the world won’t convince me these 6 teams would be all tourney teams if they played in a power conference. They are in because they don’t play many really good teams, then it shows the tournament when they tank.

If the SEC/Big 12 was a 22 team conference with these 6 teams added, how many make the Dance? One or two maybe? Maybe 3 in ACC.

 

[jncuse]

He's not a douche.

Improving your NET is what good and relatively good teams need to do now.

That means running up the score and embarrassing teams that can't stop you.

It's no longer a sign of being a douche... it's ensuring your team is in an optimal spot with NET when the NCAA tournament seeding and bubblewatch starts.

The biggest issue for Syracuse in NET is that we are incapable of even being able to decide if we are going to be "Strategic" or "Noble" in Q4 blowout games. We can't control our narrative against the ******** teams in the country.. We can't control our narrative in any way when we are constantly fighting for our lives against these teams.

The average P5 team wins it Q4 games by 24.7 points. We have won them by 3.8 points. I'm sure some of that 24.7 is influenced by some teams running up the score, and some choosing not to.

When you don't even have the choice to whether to push up the score in 4 games because you are fighting just to win them, its not "NET" that is against us. Its not that we need to do a better job of taking advantage of NET -- because Q4 are exactly those games. Its that we aren't good and the current NET of 160 is probably quite fair.

As for the ACC, when you are 7-29 in Q1 games, and 15-34 in Q1+Q2 games, and your margin in Q4 games is far worse than the best of the P5, there is no magical formula to make NET work any better for you,

 

[kingtidge]

The biggest issue for Syracuse in NET is that we are incapable of even being able to decide if we are going to be "Strategic" or "Noble" in Q4 blowout games. We can't control our narrative against the ******** teams in the country.. We can't control our narrative in any way when we are constantly fighting for our lives against these teams.

The average P5 team wins it Q4 games by 24.7 points. We have won them by 3.8 points. I'm sure some of that 24.7 is influenced by some teams running up the score, and some choosing not to.

When you don't even have the choice to whether to push up the score in 4 games because you are fighting just to win them, its not "NET" that is against us. Its not that we need to do a better job of taking advantage of NET -- because Q4 are exactly those games. Its that we aren't good and the current NET of 160 is probably quite fair.

As for the ACC, when you are 7-29 in Q1 games, and 15-34 in Q1+Q2 games, and your margin in Q4 games is far worse than the best of the P5, there is no magical formula to make NET work any better for you,

Don't disagree, just pointing out that Barnes isn't a douche for running up the score.

It's what good teams do now to optimize NET rank.

We're not a good team.

 

[jncuse]

If you go by the metric of who did you play, who did you beat, and tourney records when you got there, these conferences never measure up.

If they did they would show it. All the metrics in the world won’t convince me these 6 teams would be all tourney teams if they played in a power conference. They are in because they don’t play many really good teams, then it shows the tournament when they tank.

If the SEC/Big 12 was a 22 team conference with these 6 teams added, how many make the Dance? One or two maybe? Maybe 3 in ACC.

I'm going to attempt to answer why the MWC got 6 teams in last year in the tracking thread later today or tomorrow (they were all mostly right on the line). Feel free to respond there. I don't want to turn this into a numbers thread, when you raised bigger concerns than the NET in my view.

You are 100% correct that some of those MWC teams would have had a hard time getting in if it was a 22 team league with the SEC or ACC.

The MWC does have one critical inherent advantage when it comes to metrics and schedules (my theory) but its not OOC ... its bottom feeders are really bad, and its far harder to lose to them then the bottom feeders of the ACC. I have tried to figure out if the ACC could benefit from their scheduling, but in the end I couldn't. Really what it comes down to is their really bad teams are far worse than us, and far distinct from the top half of the conference. And it works to their advantage if they have a sufficient number of good teams in OOC like they did last year -- the ACC will never get that spread of "good" vs "bad".

I'll take the example of Louisville (if they were in the MWC last year) -- they would easily run through the bottom 40% of that conference... while running through the bottom 40% of the ACC without a few land mines is much tougher (winning and margin wise). But then the MWC had just enough good teams last year, that all run through the bottom of the league, and it allows them to pile up enough Q1 and Q2 victories.

 

[DomeHolmes]

Eh story is the same - we stink in the new environment so the new environment stinks. It's not on everyone else to wait on us to figure it out.

When an SEC team offers Choppa 2x what we can pay him, (having to also pay our new recruits and a portal center and point guard) how do you “figure it out?” Clemson still has a few dudes. Duke and Unc will be ok. Let’s see how many of our peer ACC and BIG East schools figure it out over the next few years. We are not alone. More money is better than less money. Not sure how anyone argues that.

 

[Newhouser]

When an SEC team offers Choppa 2x what we can pay him, (having to also pay our new recruits and a portal center and point guard) how do you “figure it out?” Clemson still has a few dudes. Duke and Unc will be ok. Let’s see how many of our peer ACC and BIG East schools figure it out over the next few years. We are not alone. More money is better than less money. Not sure how anyone argues that.

That is my point - we won't figure it out. A bunch of us will be playing at a different level. College sports and the schools playing change - Fordham's 7 Blocks of Granite and CCNY's NCAA/NIT titles, etc. A new evolution is here. I'm on record that when the dust settles we (and a ton of other schools) won't be in the top tier. I don't blame the schools that are upping the ante, and I won't blame SU if they tap out.

 

[jncuse]

When an SEC team offers Choppa 2x what we can pay him, (having to also pay our new recruits and a portal center and point guard) how do you “figure it out?” Clemson still has a few dudes. Duke and Unc will be ok. Let’s see how many of our peer ACC and BIG East schools figure it out over the next few years. We are not alone. More money is better than less money. Not sure how anyone argues that.

100% agree with that. I think this is most critical aspect of your OP that impacts the ACC. A player like Moore concerns me a lot. He's probably "overplaying" expectations in year 1 -- so now we have to pay him because he's a free agent that can go to anybody. Some players will choose to stay (which I respect), and some players will choose to leave for what is best for them (which I also respect)

I have always been in favour of player compensation, but this end model with NIL and Free Agency after each year was not it -- maybe if the NCAA had been more pro-active something else could have been acheived, or maybe it would have got hear either way.

Its going to be a tough road to climb for the ACC, and I'm concerned that as the SEC gets better, they get more money, and vice versa ACC gets less. Its a dangerous cycle.

I think ACC teams are probably going to have to more than ever develop an "identity" and fit to that and attract based on that, rather than trying to get the best talent they can. Its a bit of the mid-major mentality but hopefully the ACC will be able to adopt that model on steroids, as it still has more money than current mid-majors.

 

[DomeHolmes]

100% agree with that. I think this is most critical aspect of your OP that impacts the ACC. A player like Moore concerns me a lot. He's probably "overplaying" expectations in year 1 -- so now we have to pay him because he's a free agent that can go to anybody. Some players will choose to stay (which I respect), and some players will choose to leave for what is best for them (which I also respect)

I have always been in favour of player compensation, but this end model with NIL and Free Agency after each year was not it -- maybe if the NCAA had been more pro-active something else could have been acheived, or maybe it would have got hear either way.

Its going to be a tough road to climb for the ACC, and I'm concerned that as the SEC gets better, they get more money, and vice versa ACC gets less. Its a dangerous cycle.

I think ACC teams are probably going to have to more than ever develop an "identity" and fit to that and attract based on that, rather than trying to get the best talent they can. Its a bit of the mid-major mentality but hopefully the ACC will be able to adopt that model on steroids, as it still has more money than current mid-majors.

Agree 100%. I never thought I’d say this but I would reluctantly accept BIG and SEC doing their own thing If this doesn’t change. Vandy and Northwestern could decide if that’s for them or not. Everyone used to be on a fairly level playing field, and history, fan support, prestige, etc were up to schools to improve to be more desirable. Now it is money, Then coaching, and player evaluation. One billionaire donor is > history or pedigree now.

people who don’t know SEC fans and culture, have no idea what we are up against if the model doesn’t change.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Why are you worried what Arkansas they aren’t our competition and we are so far away from competing with them anyway.

Before worrying about Arkansas we need to.,.

1st get back to being good enough to make the bubble. It has been 4 years since we could say that.

2nd get back to being a consistent NCAA team. That has been 10 years.

3rd be good enough to routinely get a Top 8 seed.

4th be good enough to be Top 25 every year.

Then we can worry about what Arkansas is doing.

These complaints are acting like we are SU from a dozen years ago and facing an uphill battle. We aren’t even at the hill yet which is an SU problem and not the current landscape.

 

[NYCorange]

Some posters on this board were huge advocates of NIL. They thought a free 300k education for the 98 percent of players not going pro wasn‘t enough. “The kids should get paid for their jersey sales, local ads for car dealers, video game likenesses, etc”. I agree with all that except for the “etc. part”. That’s the part that was going to get out of control, and has made the playing field mostly “SEC and everybody else”.

It was too predictable. As the saying goes “be careful what you wish for”. Oddly, some of the “pro NIL people” are the ones screaming the loudest now.

I agree with your analysis mostly, but this part just misses the point. I don't believe in NIL and paying players because I thought it would make our team better. I believe in it because it's the right thing to do. Sure a free 300k education is great, but when you make the school hundreds of millions of dollars via media rights, merchandise, etc etc, you deserve to get a big part of it. It's the right thing to do. Has it hurt Syracuse basketball? Absolutely. But please don't act like we're idiots for wanting NIL and paying the players-- some of us are capable of having values larger than the success of our favorite college sports team.

Now, I think in some ways, the current situation is the "worst" of both worlds and it may get better in the near future. Right now, because the NCAA is still trying to resist the professionalization of players and because schools can't pay players directly, everything is operating on handshake agreements and both players and schools are vulnerable to being taken advantage of. This is also bad for college sports at large as a business, IMO, as 100% free agency every year leads to massive player movement in a way that makes it hard for fans to get attached to players. Long term, it could lead to a decrease in the revenue that players and schools share.

The answer, IMO, is to formalize schools paying the players-- ie making them "professionals" in every sense of the word. This would allow schools to sign players to contracts with all of the binding language that implies. Schools could sign players to 4 year guaranteed contracts that would prevent the player from moving on, but would also assure the player of getting paid, regardless of injury or poor performance. Players could choose to sign 1 year deals and bet on themselves, or take the security of long term deals. Will Syracuse still be at a disadvantage compared to the richest schools? Absolutely, but at least if they can win at scouting and development, they will reap the benefit of it.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

He's not a douche.

Improving your NET is what good and relatively good teams need to do now.

That means running up the score and embarrassing teams that can't stop you.

It's no longer a sign of being a douche... it's ensuring your team is in an optimal spot with NET when the NCAA tournament seeding and bubblewatch starts.

He can be a douche for other reasons.

 

[kingtidge]

He can be a douche for other reasons.

Everyone has their buttons... I don't consider him to be a Bruce Pearl , however.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

I agree with your analysis mostly, but this part just misses the point. I don't believe in NIL and paying players because I thought it would make our team better. I believe in it because it's the right thing to do. Sure a free 300k education is great, but when you make the school hundreds of millions of dollars via media rights, merchandise, etc etc, you deserve to get a big part of it. It's the right thing to do. Has it hurt Syracuse basketball? Absolutely. But please don't act like we're idiots for wanting NIL and paying the players-- some of us are capable of having values larger than the success of our favorite college sports team.

Now, I think in some ways, the current situation is the "worst" of both worlds and it may get better in the near future. Right now, because the NCAA is still trying to resist the professionalization of players and because schools can't pay players directly, everything is operating on handshake agreements and both players and schools are vulnerable to being taken advantage of. This is also bad for college sports at large as a business, IMO, as 100% free agency every year leads to massive player movement in a way that makes it hard for fans to get attached to players. Long term, it could lead to a decrease in the revenue that players and schools share.

The answer, IMO, is to formalize schools paying the players-- ie making them "professionals" in every sense of the word. This would allow schools to sign players to contracts with all of the binding language that implies. Schools could sign players to 4 year guaranteed contracts that would prevent the player from moving on, but would also assure the player of getting paid, regardless of injury or poor performance. Players could choose to sign 1 year deals and bet on themselves, or take the security of long term deals. Will Syracuse still be at a disadvantage compared to the richest schools? Absolutely, but at least if they can win at scouting and development, they will reap the benefit of it.

I believe this post misses the point.

Even if you believe a scholarship+opportunity+exposure/promotion and training to develop your professional prospects are not enough, and aren’t what everyone else goes to college for… even if that’s not enough, and even if schools are making millions from some of their sports programs… that doesn’t rationalize alums and fans sending in money to buy an SUV for a high school recruit or a player from another school.

People who were against NIL weren’t opposed to players not being compensated for their names on merchandise. They/we were against the perversion of college athletics and putting ‘salaries’ and contracts outside the scope of the framework of collegiate athletics. And this is the result. It’s not at all about a player not being able to capitalize on his ‘fame.’ It’s not about denying him opportunities to be compensated for promotional work. Because companies paying them for promotional work is barely a blip on the monitor. Private citizens—either in giant chunks from the wealthy, or in crowdsourced bites—are giving college players Lamborghinis.

We can disagree about whether that’s the “right thing to do,” but what doesn’t match up is the WHO part. The schools may make money from certain programs, but the schools cannot pay the players. So, what was resolved there? Schools continue to make the money, but don‘t Have to share it. Instead, the cost is passed to the fans. Who are already paying the tv contracts/cable/streaming subscriptions, the merchandise, and the higher prices for the products.

Not the right thing to do for the schools. Because it’s now a mercenary system and fans get less invested in their teams and players Because we have them for much less time. And each year, we should recognize that every one of our players is just as likely to be poached. But, hey, that’s possibly just my/our perspective, because we aren’t on the top rung of the poachers…. There are some SEC fans who are plenty jazzed about how this is all working out. And maybe that’s ‘fair’ in a way. It’s their turn. But, they aren’t getting their turn for the best reasons.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Everyone has their buttons... I don't consider him to be a Bruce Pearl , however.

I was just expressing a concept. I don’t watch other teams and don’t know anything about him, but from what I saw yearerday, he has a team of players who looked incredibly arrogant, who played with a ‘dirtiness’ I don’t often see. And as I said somewhere else, when that thing happened with Freeman and their player who looked like the poster child for Roofies, it was instigated by their guy and after the review, Red pulled Freeman out and I swear Barnes ran a play for their guy. Rewarding him. Maybe it was incidental that it worked out that way, but it felt intentional.