Some of this makes questionable sense in terms of real market value. It smells of boosters putting up money to buy players and calling it NIL.
Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread
- Status
So, doesn’t this logic lead us to believe that the blue bloods have always had the most money to spend, and now they can do it legally, so they’ll be able to spend even more and therefore be even bluer bloods??
I mean, yeah, I accepted a track scholarship in the early 80s because the coach supplied us with pot. He was a terrible coach though, and so were his teams.
I think good coaches/coaching still has value. Which is why I like to believe - however naively - that BU is a good coach, whether money is involved or not.
Though, honestly, all this money talk is really souring my love for college sports. Not that I don’t think players should be compensated. I think NIL is a result of the lack of integrity by the NCAA. But.... maybe it’s going to go the way of cable TV. I don’t know..... I’m honestly just kind of sad and torn about all of it. Bummed.
I’m pretty sure that is exactly what NIL is…
sacraig
- The desert
Of course good coaching still matters. That's why Memphis routinely buys a good team and fails to do anything with it. It's why Arizona had so much talent with a lot of tournament flops under Miller. But talent can still cover up aspects of bad coaching.
I thought it was supposed to be players earning a share of revenue generated via product endorsements, merchandising, personal appearances, etc. That sort of thing. Hence the name: Name, Image & Likeness. If they are getting paid by boosters to play basketball; that is not NIL.
So you’re agreeing that John Wooden didn’t just win 10 national championships because he had boosters who bought the best teams (he was also a really good coach)?
Roster construction matters too. KU did not have the best talent in ff, but they had a nice mix of good to very good talent and probably the best in game coach in college ball.
Ah. This is what I was thinking too. How silly of us.
At least it is legitimized so the laws of a free market should take affect in a few years. Overpaying in the beginning is expected, whether booster money or otherwise.
Lol wishful thinking. There’s never been such thing as “level playing field” and there will never be, with or without NIL.
Last edited:
I agree. So it seems NIL isn’t really benefiting college athletes, but still just benefiting the “best” teams (ie teams with the best donor base). Which doesn’t seem to be what the intent was. So (not directed at you), how does this benefit the average student athlete? Or is that ever what it was about.
I guess my point is: NIL was maybe a good first step, but it needs some serious revision/oversight in order to not just legitimize what has been wrong with college athletics all along?
That's my assumption. The pendulum will swing alot in these early years but it'll hit a general equilibrium sooner or later. Some big names will transfer and get paid but underperform, others will pay off, some talent will take less to stay put. But eventually it'll rationalize.
Yep. If it becomes simply pay for play you’re going to see all kinds of issues crop up and New Rules. There was this goose that laid a golden egg …
The average student athlete does not perform at the level to where millions of people want to watch them play and buy their merchandise. NIL gave the top athletes, and several others, a chance to cash in on what they provide to universities.
I honestly hope this is true. And not just another ‘trickle-down-economics’ scam. Which is probably why I’m so negative. Please don’t let my negative mind be right, my friends!!!
I believe this is true. Which runs counter to my, admittedly, idealistic notion that ALL student athletes who contribute to money’s made by universities should be compensated. I mean, if a practice player makes a star player that much better, is that not of some value?? Again, not arguing with you. Just my idealism wanting what’s right for..... everyone.
Especially the non money sports.
Also Josh Whitman basically said what the outcome will be of this. "There will be a rebuilding of conferences."
There will be pushback from the schools who cant buy the top 75 athlete per year.
So IMO there will be another Mini-NBA conference by 2030, and that's where the top schools will strive to be. In the name of fairness all other schools will to back to pre-NIL
Sure. Irrelevant to the initial point that NIL would dictate playing time
I don't think you were keeping up. There was a notion at one point along the lines of what you're talking about. That is absolutely NOT what has come about.
Players are now free agents able to sell their name image and likeness to whomever they want. There's really no sharing involved although it seems like Illinois is trying to incorporate an element of that. But U of I can't stop a player from inking their own deal
This has always been about boosters over paying. Few athletes in America are worth 400k in marketing and certainly not Pack.
I'm not convinced we're playing the game competitively.
Joel Goodson
- respect my decision™
ugh, can you take this money stuff to the NIL thread, please?
I had to check at one point if I hadn’t clicked on NIL thread
And there you have it. Nothing changes in terms of cheating. Just a new way to get your guys.
There are 330 Div 1 programs, Illinois is in a Power Conference and historically top 15 program. Do you really want an even playing field?
- Status