[Goose]

This isn't hard. If I give something to you that you want, and I try to take it back, you will be loathe to give it back to me. My dogs do this too, so it's not a behavior limited to humans, which strengthens my point and the other examples used to support it. 


Boosters have power now that they didn't have a year ago. They aren't giving it back.

So boosters are like your dog? You might have a point here if you had a way to establish that boosters actually care about the new "power" that they have and that they are capable of organizing to defend it. You have attempted to establish they care by analogy with long sought civil rights by organized groups who have persevered for years to obtain. I think you realize those are different cases. Your present argument assumes the predicate. Yes, if I care, or your dog cares, they will fight for whatever you are taking back. However, if they don't, they won't. You have just assumed the boosters actually care that much. I suspect they don't. They didn't fight for this result and pretty much liked the status quo ante. In any case, you haven't demonstrated the opposite.

You also assume the "boosters" are a united group that can effectively fight for anything. While there may be individuals in this amorphous group that care and will attempt to maintain their newly-found influence, it is unclear how many and how effective they will be. From the point of view of the conferences and the football establishment, this NIL situation may be an existential crisis. These folks have a long history of organizing to protect themselves. I give them much better odds than the boosters.

[Goose]

This isn't hard. If I give something to you that you want, and I try to take it back, you will be loathe to give it back to me. My dogs do this too, so it's not a behavior limited to humans, which strengthens my point and the other examples used to support it. 


Boosters have power now that they didn't have a year ago. They aren't giving it back.

So boosters are like your dog? You might have a point here if you had a way to establish that boosters actually care about the new "power" that they have and that they are capable of organizing to defend it. You have attempted to establish they care by analogy with long sought civil rights by organized groups who have persevered for years to obtain. I think you realize those are different cases. Your present argument assumes the predicate. Yes, if I care, or your dog cares, they will fight for whatever you are taking back. However, if they don't, they won't. You have just assumed the boosters actually care that much. I suspect they don't. They didn't fight for this result and pretty much liked the status quo ante. In any case, you haven't demonstrated the opposite.

You also assume the "boosters" are a united group that can effectively fight for anything. While there may be individuals in this amorphous group that care and will attempt to maintain their newly-found influence, it is unclear how many and how effective they will be. From the point of view of the conferences and the football establishment, this NIL situation may be an existential crisis. These folks have a long history of organizing to protect themselves. I give them much better odds than the boosters.