Tampering

[OCESIP]

A reality of NIL - as well as the portal to some degree - for me is this. I used to follow recruiting closely. I hoped top players, good players, good students, good people, wanted to attend my university. My connection with my alma mater created a bind between me and those players and I cheered for their success, within the boundaries of sport, and without. I knew almost all would never be NFL or NBA players, but I hoped for them to achieve whatever it was in life they desired.

Under the new paradigm, the relationship between me and these players has become transactional. Of course there are some players who are still student/athletes, and I hope they are wise enough to take advantage of the opportunities afforded them while they are at SU. But for most, I sense it’s a revolving door of kids who establish no bond with my school beyond a few dollars in their pockets. They play or they don’t play. They stay or they don’t stay. Far more are looking for money, far fewer will achieve anything that is life changing.

Most no longer represent my alma mater beyond that of a mercenary in athletic footwear.

Excellent post. There are still athletes who play for a school because, to some extent, they have an affinity for the school itself. The real abuse of the NIL concept is when it is used as a recruiting tool for the highly sought after kids. The pay for play concept has been legitimized and is now an accepted part of the process. Given that fact of life the NCAA has to step aside, let the free market do it's thing, and let college sports become more like a real "business model" it has always been trending towards.

Not my personal preference, but it's the reality for better or worse.

 

[Scooch]

I agree. All of this kvetching about the poor athlete is really selfish claptrap. 18 year olds can go to war, work on oil rigs, become police and firefighters, but oh no, they might make a mistake transferring colleges. Worse case: life lesson.
Many of these guys are only in college to chase professional money, and would not have gotten into a college but for the hope by the schools that they will help add to the bottom line.

It is pretty funny that people express such concern for the consequences of decisions for 19 year old college football and basketball players... but don't care at all about the consequences of decisions for the 15 and 16 year old athletes who play tennis, gymnastics, figure skating, etc.

I mean, it's almost patronizing.

 

[Scooch]

A reality of NIL - as well as the portal to some degree - for me is this. I used to follow recruiting closely. I hoped top players, good players, good students, good people, wanted to attend my university. My connection with my alma mater created a bind between me and those players and I cheered for their success, within the boundaries of sport, and without. I knew almost all would never be NFL or NBA players, but I hoped for them to achieve whatever it was in life they desired.

Under the new paradigm, the relationship between me and these players has become transactional. Of course there are some players who are still student/athletes, and I hope they are wise enough to take advantage of the opportunities afforded them while they are at SU. But for most, I sense it’s a revolving door of kids who establish no bond with my school beyond a few dollars in their pockets. They play or they don’t play. They stay or they don’t stay. Far more are looking for money, far fewer will achieve anything that is life changing.

Most no longer represent my alma mater beyond that of a mercenary in athletic footwear.

I get this sentiment. However, it's worth calibrating the scale of portal behavior. How many football "high profile" players exited SU via the portal this offseason? 3? 4?

A few others "low profile" players also did, but there's always been a behavior of transferring for various reasons (homesickness, bad fit, lack of playing time, etc).

I just think it's worth stepping back to note that not "everyone" is portaling every year. So far it's been a few guys in, and a few guys out. The vast majority of our players stayed.

 

[elimunelson]

I get this sentiment. However, it's worth calibrating the scale of portal behavior. How many football "high profile" players exited SU via the portal this offseason? 3? 4?

A few others "low profile" players also did, but there's always been a behavior of transferring for various reasons (homesickness, bad fit, lack of playing time, etc).

I just think it's worth stepping back to note that not "everyone" is portaling every year. So far it's been a few guys in, and a few guys out. The vast majority of our players stayed.

I think both sentiments are right.

I do think the transactional nature of NIL/Portal impact every single player because it's something you have to think about now that you have pushed forward the quasi professional aspect of playing in college. At one point there was a breather of sorts for these players to accept a red shirt, accept sitting and learning and then be ready to produce. The downside was really minimal. If you were truly unhappy there was consequences of leaving/transferring (sitting out a year).

I think the damage done to the natural progression of an athlete's maturity has been pushed forward in a frankensteinian fashion. Not every college athlete is Lebron ready to hit the pro ranks immediately and be productive/professional.

I truly hate it all because for an extra few bucks and unlimited optionality, these players may end up having a worst experience. And those who do nothing may ultimately be forever second guessing the optionality as well.

 

[All4SU]

I think both sentiments are right.

I do think the transactional nature of NIL/Portal impact every single player because it's something you have to think about now that you have pushed forward the quasi professional aspect of playing in college. At one point there was a breather of sorts for these players to accept a red shirt, accept sitting and learning and then be ready to produce. The downside was really minimal. If you were truly unhappy there was consequences of leaving/transferring (sitting out a year).

I think the damage done to the natural progression of an athlete's maturity has been pushed forward in a frankensteinian fashion. Not every college athlete is Lebron ready to hit the pro ranks immediately and be productive/professional.

I truly hate it all because for an extra few bucks and unlimited optionality, these players may end up having a worst experience. And those who do nothing may ultimately be forever second guessing the optionality as well.

For me, it’s really about the 99% of players who never make professional sports. Are they getting a quality education? Have their lives changed for the good based on their ability to earn a scholarship through their athletic ability. If not, well, that’s the great shame. Not whether kids have a few beans in their pockets for a few months.

 

[Scooch]

I'll take you guys at your word that you're concerned about the negative impact on players. Honestly though, the vast majority of people who express "concern" are ultimately just bummed about the negative impact on the team they root for.

Personally, I always felt rules about sitting out a year were needlessly punitive and done solely to prevent players from leaving, not to protect them from making a potentially bad choice. The latter of which I find to be quite disingenuous and patronizing.

I'm certain that for every player who gutted out a bad year or two, persevered due to the former rule, and ended up having a good experience, you can find a player who was trapped in a lousy situation that never improved and ruined a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Introducing NIL at the same time as the portal has made for an incredibly chaotic confluence of events. But to me, allowing immediate transfers with no penalty has always been the right and just thing to do.

 

[Hoo's That]

The big question that remains unanswered in all this is "Exactly who is doing the poaching?" Hafley said it was "teams". He didn't say whether it was boosters and/or coaches. It's against NCAA rules for a coach to contact a player who is not in The Portal. It is not against the rules for boosters to do so (and wave NIL money as an incentive). If it can be shown that the coach told the boosters to make the contacts, that would be against the rules. Good luck in proving that, though.

 

[All4SU]

Come on..when everybody is that age...they are looking to get paid and get laid. As it relates to tampering...I think that it was always going on. Before coaches had to call friends of friends whereas now it's out in the open and straightforward. I know that it is no consolation in the short term but look at how the Florida situation turned out. The word is out that their 'offer' was bogus. That kid can't be/won't be the only one stiffed. It may take a five or so years but things will eventually settle down.

What can schools like SU do? Well, while recruiting may have always been this way, but it seems that it is a lot like an MLB draft. They have 40 rounds..sign 2/3rds...and maybe three make the big leagues in 5 years. If five or more make it..it was considered a pretty good draft. In college football...you'll sign 15 to 20 kids...and at least half will transfer within three years. But guess what, so will everybody else's class. A school like SU should funnel resources into group of 'team advisers' that do nothing but scout other teams and compile a database of potential transfers.

IMO, that's why guys like Saban are starting to cry. Yes, they get talent. But a big reason they win so much is their depth. Lose a 5 star to injury? Plug another one in. Well, a lot of that depth is going to get siphoned off. In the past...a 4th stringer might not transfer because he was still getting a decent bag o cash...even if he wasn't starting/just special teams. Now, he can get the same bag and play somewhere else.

It is neither out in the open nor straightforward now.

 

[Newhouser]

I don't like where this is going and what it implies so I'm going to add this. Colleges and universities, SU included, have made it easier for prospective students to get in by lowering admission standards. There are quite a number of high school grads that aren't prepared to do university level work that's not on a curve.

That doesn't end with high school grads - some of the recent college grads that enter the work force are also woefully unprepared for all aspects of the job other than feeling underpaid and under utilized. The cost of education in this country for the product that gets delivered is criminal.

 

[elimunelson]

I'll take you guys at your word that you're concerned about the negative impact on players. Honestly though, the vast majority of people who express "concern" are ultimately just bummed about the negative impact on the team they root for.

Personally, I always felt rules about sitting out a year were needlessly punitive and done solely to prevent players from leaving, not to protect them from making a potentially bad choice. The latter of which I find to be quite disingenuous and patronizing.

I'm certain that for every player who gutted out a bad year or two, persevered due to the former rule, and ended up having a good experience, you can find a player who was trapped in a lousy situation that never improved and ruined a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Introducing NIL at the same time as the portal has made for an incredibly chaotic confluence of events. But to me, allowing immediate transfers with no penalty has always been the right and just thing to do.

all fair points and I can't counter any of it really. I'm a bad talk radio host I guess

I do think a school providing a full scholarship to an athlete should come with some strings. To remove every single string and allow for 1 year contracts now (even pro sports have strings attached to rookie deals) is creating chaos. More so than the NIL IMO. Both hitting at the same time, loony tunes

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I'll take you guys at your word that you're concerned about the negative impact on players. Honestly though, the vast majority of people who express "concern" are ultimately just bummed about the negative impact on the team they root for.

Personally, I always felt rules about sitting out a year were needlessly punitive and done solely to prevent players from leaving, not to protect them from making a potentially bad choice. The latter of which I find to be quite disingenuous and patronizing.

I'm certain that for every player who gutted out a bad year or two, persevered due to the former rule, and ended up having a good experience, you can find a player who was trapped in a lousy situation that never improved and ruined a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Introducing NIL at the same time as the portal has made for an incredibly chaotic confluence of events. But to me, allowing immediate transfers with no penalty has always been the right and just thing to do.

I agree with all of this. Well said.

 

[NYCCuse826]

It is pretty funny that people express such concern for the consequences of decisions for 19 year old college football and basketball players... but don't care at all about the consequences of decisions for the 15 and 16 year old athletes who play tennis, gymnastics, figure skating, etc.

I mean, it's almost patronizing.

Once you start digging into what causes these comments, threads would get locked and suspensions are issued.

 

[Scooch]

That doesn't end with high school grads - some of the recent college grads that enter the work force are also woefully unprepared for all aspects of the job other than feeling underpaid and under utilized. The cost of education in this country for the product that gets delivered is criminal.

It depends. I'm fortunate to work for a high-profile company that attracts excellent entry-level employees. The young adults I work with that are just out of college totally blow my mind. They are FARRRR more polished, ambitious, mature and worldly than my peers who entered the work force 25 years ago.

Do they also have a bit more entitlement? Sure. But in many respects that's not always bad. They demand appropriate pay (want to talk about criminal, I'll offer you the $18,500 annual salary I got in my first job in 1995. Try to live on that in NYC.). They demand more development and training opportunities, because they care about advancing their career. And they know that a corporation isn't loyal to them (they'll be first out the door in many layoff situations), so why be loyal to the corporation.

I know it's fashionable to bash "kids these days". I just find it to be weaksauce. Your mileage may vary, as they say.

 

[Doc5120]

I just don't see how that conference could generate any revenue of substance to justify being a FBS league. Central Arkansas and Tarleton State? Really?

How could you forget about Utah Tech?!

 

[kirbivore]

Coaches need to either start outing the other coaches that are doing it or just be quiet. These half measures of coming out but not dropping names isn’t helping matters.

And that’s not directed at your post Bees, I’m just saying I wish these guys would out those who are doing it.

 

[kirbivore]

I agree with this. For years there's been a general sentiment that you shouldn't criticize a "kid" because he's a student athlete. Well, now some of these "kids" are being paid quite handsomely, so it's not unreasonable for the fan expectation to change.

you want to get paid (which I agree they should) you get treated like a pro. No free lunch.

 

[All4SU]

It depends. I'm fortunate to work for a high-profile company that attracts excellent entry-level employees. The young adults I work with that are just out of college totally blow my mind. They are FARRRR more polished, ambitious, mature and worldly than my peers who entered the work force 25 years ago.

Do they also have a bit more entitlement? Sure. But in many respects that's not always bad. They demand appropriate pay (want to talk about criminal, I'll offer you the $18,500 annual salary I got in my first job in 1995. Try to live on that in NYC.). They demand more development and training opportunities, because they care about advancing their career. And they know that a corporation isn't loyal to them (they'll be first out the door in many layoff situations), so why be loyal to the corporation.

I know it's fashionable to bash "kids these days". I just find it to be weaksauce. Your mileage may vary, as they say.

I suspect the “kids these days” discussion is simply a reflection of every other discussion these days, which is a continual great divide in all things. Everything is splitting from the middle to the extremes, leaving the middle largely abandoned.

I think of drivers on the road. An aging population is causing an entire segment of the population to drive slower. At the same time, apps like WAZE allow other drivers to cruise well above normal limits with impunity. The middle of the road driver is being phased out.

I suspect it’s the same with kids and education. A large number are more informed than ever, with a sophisticated look on the shrinking world, with a greater understanding of technology than any previous generation. At the same time, a growing segment are slipping into ignorance and passive existence. The middle is disappearing.

And just anecdotally, I’ve had more experience with the latter than the former.

 

[PhatOrange]

This Boeheim story about NIL and buying players had a couple of interesting tidbits one of which said the NIL “rules” at this point have not been fully clarified by the NCAA, though the organization that oversees college sports has said recently it intends to investigate schools that it believes are running afoul of NIL intentions.

 

[SU68]

This Boeheim story about NIL and buying players had a couple of interesting tidbits one of which said the NIL “rules” at this point have not been fully clarified by the NCAA, though the organization that oversees college sports has said recently it intends to investigate schools that it believes are running afoul of NIL intentions.

I don't see how the NCAA can investigate and assess penalties based on intentions. If it's not codified, I envision huuge (RIP Billy Fuccillo) lawsuits.

 

[PhatOrange]

I don't see how the NCAA can investigate and assess penalties based on intentions. If it's not codified, I envision huuge (RIP Billy Fuccillo) lawsuits.

I think the point here is that they’re going to eventually try and address this stuff.

 

[longtimefan]

And in the meantime. . .

 

[Willy75]

I think the point here is that they’re going to eventually try and address this stuff.

Not in our lifetimes. Forgive me fo being cynical, but I think the most that will happen is that the SEC and the BiG will (kind of) police their own members from raiding their brethren. Everything else will be the Wild West.

 

[texascpa]

I agree. All of this kvetching about the poor athlete is really selfish claptrap. 18 year olds can go to war, work on oil rigs, become police and firefighters, but oh no, they might make a mistake transferring colleges. Worse case: life lesson.
Many of these guys are only in college to chase professional money, and would not have gotten into a college but for the hope by the schools that they will help add to the bottom line.

So many kids drop out of college every year, many never go back. Most find a job/career doing something that doesn't require a college degree. It might take some time, but they do. None of my kids went to college, they all work, they all are doing fine. No one questioned their decision, not even me.

 

[tep624]

I think the point here is that they’re going to eventually try and address this stuff.

You'd think they would put these controls in place BEFORE they instituted the process. I mean, bags have been an issue since the beginning of time, with boosters involved why would NIL be any different?

 

[IthacaMatt]

My concern is that it could all backfire on the athlete. NIL dollars may be a limited resource, especially at some smaller schools, and tampering could force those school’s collectives to overcompensate to keep, exposing others to a higher likelihood for an “NIL transfer”.

Worse is that this happens and the “home” school doesn’t step up but the athlete feels they have a higher worth and portals. The tampering team doesn’t step up, never really intended to, and the athlete is stranded in the portal.

This is a big boy game and it will get dirty.

I think that, from our perspective, it makes more sense to use NIL to either retain quality players who are considering transferring, or to attract quality transfers from the portal. We aren't going to compete for the very top HS talent. It's that simple.