[BillBradley]

There's always a fair amount of paternalism in these sorts of threads but this one really takes the cake.

Our departed basketball player is worth $300,000 if that's what someone decides to pay him for his services. Is Steph Curry worth $215 million? He is if the free market says he is. Is that bribery or corruption? It's no more of a bribe than my boss bribing me to get out of bed this morning with a pay check when I didn't feel like working.

It is true that the entire world of "amateur" college athletics is being turned on its head. It's long overdue. The entire industry has been operating in a fantasy land for decades while openly flouting antitrust and employment law.

Regarding the entirtely separate topic of gambling, teenagers have long been playing professional soccer in European stadiums with gambling advertisements flashed all over the place. College athletes are more than capable of understanding the difference between receiving a pay check for their services and receiving a sum of money to affect the integrity of competition. And if they don't, the sportsbooks have access to a vast array of resources to sniff out irregular betting patterns faster than most people can fathom.

Well said, Matt……

+1 !

It's my belief that the people who are claiming that NIL is going to bring the world to an end will never accept how bad the old system was. The "pure" days of the student-athlete playing their sport for the scholarship of an education ended many decades ago. Stanford was, and still is, an edge case in the world of college sports.

This whole "some NIL deals are bribery and the people doing it are bad and corrupt" sentiment...my goodness. It's just people exploiting loopholes, which happens everywhere on the planet, in every system ever designed, even at Stanford. The system will evolve, there will be improved regulation over time - types of deals, improved visibility and reporting, etc. just like all other systems. I think there's a big overreaction to what's going on. The fact that Harrison Ingraham is actually getting paid $300K should by itself tell you something about how action needed to be taken to compensate athletes. And newsflash - those numbers are only going to go up. University of Colorado applications have grown by 40% since the hiring of Coach Prime (he was on Fallon the other night and that was said). Is there really any question about the value of big time athletics to these institutions?

Last thing I wanted to share - this notion of "the transfer portal, NIL, superconferences, etc" are killing college sports. Yeah, no. I've talked to many college students and recent grads who are basketball fans. No one cares about the massive roster overhauls as it relates to their enjoyment of the game as a fan. In fact, they are now MORE interested in the offseason moves ("did you hear who we got?"). March Madness viewership is up this year, not down. Lots of churn going on for sure, but I highly doubt we'll be seeing the demise of college sports anytime soon.

[BillBradley]

There's always a fair amount of paternalism in these sorts of threads but this one really takes the cake.

Our departed basketball player is worth $300,000 if that's what someone decides to pay him for his services. Is Steph Curry worth $215 million? He is if the free market says he is. Is that bribery or corruption? It's no more of a bribe than my boss bribing me to get out of bed this morning with a pay check when I didn't feel like working.

It is true that the entire world of "amateur" college athletics is being turned on its head. It's long overdue. The entire industry has been operating in a fantasy land for decades while openly flouting antitrust and employment law.

Regarding the entirtely separate topic of gambling, teenagers have long been playing professional soccer in European stadiums with gambling advertisements flashed all over the place. College athletes are more than capable of understanding the difference between receiving a pay check for their services and receiving a sum of money to affect the integrity of competition. And if they don't, the sportsbooks have access to a vast array of resources to sniff out irregular betting patterns faster than most people can fathom.

Well said, Matt……

+1 !

It's my belief that the people who are claiming that NIL is going to bring the world to an end will never accept how bad the old system was. The "pure" days of the student-athlete playing their sport for the scholarship of an education ended many decades ago. Stanford was, and still is, an edge case in the world of college sports.

This whole "some NIL deals are bribery and the people doing it are bad and corrupt" sentiment...my goodness. It's just people exploiting loopholes, which happens everywhere on the planet, in every system ever designed, even at Stanford. The system will evolve, there will be improved regulation over time - types of deals, improved visibility and reporting, etc. just like all other systems. I think there's a big overreaction to what's going on. The fact that Harrison Ingraham is actually getting paid $300K should by itself tell you something about how action needed to be taken to compensate athletes. And newsflash - those numbers are only going to go up. University of Colorado applications have grown by 40% since the hiring of Coach Prime (he was on Fallon the other night and that was said). Is there really any question about the value of big time athletics to these institutions?

Last thing I wanted to share - this notion of "the transfer portal, NIL, superconferences, etc" are killing college sports. Yeah, no. I've talked to many college students and recent grads who are basketball fans. No one cares about the massive roster overhauls as it relates to their enjoyment of the game as a fan. In fact, they are now MORE interested in the offseason moves ("did you hear who we got?"). March Madness viewership is up this year, not down. Lots of churn going on for sure, but I highly doubt we'll be seeing the demise of college sports anytime soon.