[Genuine Realist]

Before that parade of those horrible straw men really gets going, let's slow down a little. Take a deep breath and reset to zero.



1. That star qb might hold out for a better NIL before the championship game? Indeed he might. So might an NFL quarterback. Or an NBA star. Or an MLB starting pitcher. But they never seem to do that, do they? Put it down to basic human instinct, keeping promises - but also to a sense that to betray the fanbase in that fashion is to kill the goose that laid the golden egg - the devotion of the fanbase. But if you are going to speculate on an act of legalized extortion that has not occurred in more than a century, it is much LESS likely with an NIL performer than a professional athlete because . . . 



2.  . . .  unlike professional salaries, which rest on a dependable cash flow from ticket sales, media rights and the like, NIL revenue depends solely on the willingness of a group of fans to purchase memorabilia or endorsed products from an athlete who brought them good memories. That's it. The school keeps the ticket and media revenue, and it doesn't pay players. So a deal maker can only rely on the good will of that fan base.



Which is why my hunch about that eight-million-dollar contract for a 17 year old qb candidate is that it is so much press agent malarkey - a blue sky projection dressed up as a guarantee. You really think anyone is going to guarantee that much money to a player who may never set foot on the field for Tennessee, due to injury or losing out to a better player? The only way you can profit is by gross sales in excess of the guarantee, plus cost, and that is completely up in the air at this point in time. The negative about NIL is the same as the positive - it depends on the enthusiasm of the fanbase. That only takes you so far.



3. Reading the entire article about the FSU defensive back, it's apparent he's a very confused kid, maybe experiencing a break of some sort, whom I wish well. The NIL issue is basically a speculation.



I don't wish to minimize the seriousness of the challenge. Right now, the Kentucky fanbase, the BBN, as it is called, is rallying around Oscar Tshiebwe, the unanimous NCAA player of the year. There are rumors of a line of sportswear, and of course endorsements. Tshiebwe is a terrific college player, but something of an NBA tweener, protected as a second round draft choice. The NIL money might easily exceed the NBA prospects, meaning he's better off to complete his eligibility. It's also the case that the BBN, which has to be experienced to be believed. supports all Kentucky players. An incoming freshman probably can expect a cash flow. But we are talking about tens of thousands of dollars in that case, not pie-in-the-sky superstar numbers.

I think your analysis of what drives NIL is flawed. You are approaching it like a "rational" business would, looking for a return on money invested. Some NIL are undoubtedly that, but IMHO most are either based on a business that wants to make a big "splash" in the form of a large NIL payout, or alums bribing players to attend school X. Neither of these groups really care about how effective the player is in "selling" anything. It is all hype. As a result, the arguments about "fan base" are irrelevant. There is no loyalty to the fans, it is just a relationship between a player and an investor who has almost no leverage once the contract is signed. If no fan ever buys anything based on a players NIL, it doesn't matter. The contract is still valid and must be paid. The contract could be written with all kinds of "escape" clauses, but 1) players will probably be smart enough to not accept them, and 2) since actually selling product isn't the goal, no reason to do so. Do I think any rational individual would pay 8 million to any college player under any circumstances for a NIL contract? No, because I think the ROI will be negative. Do I think there are guys out there who will do that kind of thing? Yes, I do. Eventually, as things shake out and people get burned on these investments that kind of thing will become less common. But it won't go away.

I think most SEC fans buy memorabilia in sizable quantities, which is what generates the revenue. Think of autograph shows. Of course, the opportunity doesn't exist until there is something to remember, which is why the potential for an untried schlarship athlete is limited. 

And while there will be boosters, if you believe that there is a whole universe of individuals willing to advance 7 figure sums on untried 17 year olds, with no hope of return, I have to disagree. You will undoubtedly see premiums paid, and appearance fees - 'come to my son's birthday party' - but not to the point of your speculation. Even in the Bad Old Days, there was some rationality.

My point, however, was different. The answer to whatever difficulties you do perceive is not to go back to a system in which kids are cut off from legitimate commercial opportunities (and these are legitimate). It's to abandon amateurism altogether, so that pro franchises and sponsor groups can make direct investments in an athlete's professional potential. You restrict the NCAA to issues of academic probity, transfer rules, and the like. 

You create an environment in which an 18-year-old can advance his life on all fronts, where no choice is required, and where poor kids can actually do something for dependents while finding out something about themselves and the world, which is what ideally happens in college. There is no downside.

[Genuine Realist]

Before that parade of those horrible straw men really gets going, let's slow down a little. Take a deep breath and reset to zero.



1. That star qb might hold out for a better NIL before the championship game? Indeed he might. So might an NFL quarterback. Or an NBA star. Or an MLB starting pitcher. But they never seem to do that, do they? Put it down to basic human instinct, keeping promises - but also to a sense that to betray the fanbase in that fashion is to kill the goose that laid the golden egg - the devotion of the fanbase. But if you are going to speculate on an act of legalized extortion that has not occurred in more than a century, it is much LESS likely with an NIL performer than a professional athlete because . . . 



2.  . . .  unlike professional salaries, which rest on a dependable cash flow from ticket sales, media rights and the like, NIL revenue depends solely on the willingness of a group of fans to purchase memorabilia or endorsed products from an athlete who brought them good memories. That's it. The school keeps the ticket and media revenue, and it doesn't pay players. So a deal maker can only rely on the good will of that fan base.



Which is why my hunch about that eight-million-dollar contract for a 17 year old qb candidate is that it is so much press agent malarkey - a blue sky projection dressed up as a guarantee. You really think anyone is going to guarantee that much money to a player who may never set foot on the field for Tennessee, due to injury or losing out to a better player? The only way you can profit is by gross sales in excess of the guarantee, plus cost, and that is completely up in the air at this point in time. The negative about NIL is the same as the positive - it depends on the enthusiasm of the fanbase. That only takes you so far.



3. Reading the entire article about the FSU defensive back, it's apparent he's a very confused kid, maybe experiencing a break of some sort, whom I wish well. The NIL issue is basically a speculation.



I don't wish to minimize the seriousness of the challenge. Right now, the Kentucky fanbase, the BBN, as it is called, is rallying around Oscar Tshiebwe, the unanimous NCAA player of the year. There are rumors of a line of sportswear, and of course endorsements. Tshiebwe is a terrific college player, but something of an NBA tweener, protected as a second round draft choice. The NIL money might easily exceed the NBA prospects, meaning he's better off to complete his eligibility. It's also the case that the BBN, which has to be experienced to be believed. supports all Kentucky players. An incoming freshman probably can expect a cash flow. But we are talking about tens of thousands of dollars in that case, not pie-in-the-sky superstar numbers.

I think your analysis of what drives NIL is flawed. You are approaching it like a "rational" business would, looking for a return on money invested. Some NIL are undoubtedly that, but IMHO most are either based on a business that wants to make a big "splash" in the form of a large NIL payout, or alums bribing players to attend school X. Neither of these groups really care about how effective the player is in "selling" anything. It is all hype. As a result, the arguments about "fan base" are irrelevant. There is no loyalty to the fans, it is just a relationship between a player and an investor who has almost no leverage once the contract is signed. If no fan ever buys anything based on a players NIL, it doesn't matter. The contract is still valid and must be paid. The contract could be written with all kinds of "escape" clauses, but 1) players will probably be smart enough to not accept them, and 2) since actually selling product isn't the goal, no reason to do so. Do I think any rational individual would pay 8 million to any college player under any circumstances for a NIL contract? No, because I think the ROI will be negative. Do I think there are guys out there who will do that kind of thing? Yes, I do. Eventually, as things shake out and people get burned on these investments that kind of thing will become less common. But it won't go away.

I think most SEC fans buy memorabilia in sizable quantities, which is what generates the revenue. Think of autograph shows. Of course, the opportunity doesn't exist until there is something to remember, which is why the potential for an untried schlarship athlete is limited. 

And while there will be boosters, if you believe that there is a whole universe of individuals willing to advance 7 figure sums on untried 17 year olds, with no hope of return, I have to disagree. You will undoubtedly see premiums paid, and appearance fees - 'come to my son's birthday party' - but not to the point of your speculation. Even in the Bad Old Days, there was some rationality.

My point, however, was different. The answer to whatever difficulties you do perceive is not to go back to a system in which kids are cut off from legitimate commercial opportunities (and these are legitimate). It's to abandon amateurism altogether, so that pro franchises and sponsor groups can make direct investments in an athlete's professional potential. You restrict the NCAA to issues of academic probity, transfer rules, and the like. 

You create an environment in which an 18-year-old can advance his life on all fronts, where no choice is required, and where poor kids can actually do something for dependents while finding out something about themselves and the world, which is what ideally happens in college. There is no downside.