NIL - Texas style

GBP4EVER said:
But now schools are seeming more willing to work with student direct to help NIL deals
Click to expand...
Willing ? How? In states where they are amending laws to allow coaches to be involved with collectives yes but that’s not close to the majority of schools. And let me say this for the 1,324 time. Schools do not arrange NIL deals. Collectives do. It’s not one on one with student athletes
 
GBP4EVER said:
Media treatst it different
Click to expand...
Who gives a rats ass what the media writes. Maybe they should do some research and point out how the NCAA never enforced its own rules for decades. How money changed hands for decades between boosters and recruits. I’ve pointed out examples in this thread
 
Please! Coaches and schools won't be involved in NIL deals directly. But tell me that when they plan on visiting with a kid that they won't let it be known through the grapevine to NIL donors how much they want the kid. Maybe a simple statement like, "We think this kid is a 10 point fit for our program," being the highest, and indicating the donors should go all out finding a deal, or deals, for him.

The more you pretend there's separation between the schools/coaches and the athletes, the more the waters will be muddied. Laws don't mean a damned thing, except it might push the best athletes to schools in states where the law is less restrictive. Eventually the strangle hold on being able to recruit will force those states to loosen their laws so their teams can be competitive. I can hardly wait to see how a Puritan standard added to this whole thing by legislators will work. I'll laugh my rear end off.

The best way to view this whole thing is think the worst, and hope for the best, even though that sure as hell is never going to happen.
 
TW said:
Please! Coaches and schools won't be involved in NIL deals directly. But tell me that when they plan on visiting with a kid that they won't let it be known through the grapevine to NIL donors how much they want the kid. Maybe a simple statement like, "We think this kid is a 10 point fit for our program," being the highest, and indicating the donors should go all out finding a deal, or deals, for him.

The more you pretend there's separation between the schools/coaches and the athletes, the more the waters will be muddied. Laws don't mean a damned thing, except it might push the best athletes to schools in states where the law is less restrictive. Eventually the strangle hold on being able to recruit will force those states to loosen their laws so their teams can be competitive. I can hardly wait to see how a Puritan standard added to this whole thing by legislators will work. I'll laugh my rear end off.

The best way to view this whole thing is think the worst, and hope for the best, even though that sure as hell is never going to happen.
Click to expand...
Multiple states have already amended laws because their legislation is more restrictive than NCAA guidelines and also allowing coaches to work with collectives. And if you don’t think back door deals have been happening for decades, well living in a cave must have been enjoyable ( that’s not directed at you TW, just a general statement).

To this point NIL has not impacted recruiting classes in either football or basketball. It has not shifted the balance of power in any conference.

The real gorilla that the NCAA created is the transfer portal and nobody wants to have that discussion. That’s been in effect since 2018 well before NIL was created. It’s done more harm than good. 4-5,star kids are not in the portal it’s 3 star or less kids thinking the grass is greener and over 1,300 kids are not in school right now.
 
NIL hasn't shifted power "yet." It's going to. Texas has been a lesser opponent for several years now, as Baylor, and Oklahoma boosters were doing more in "helping" kids decide where it would be best for them in school. It may not have seemed like it was happening, but let me tell you that from my perspective, talking to people involved in the recruiting cycle down here, it had an effect.

Now, with the new booster programs being developed around the Texas program, their fortunes are going to change. It may take 4 years to get there, but it will change dramatically.

In all honesty, I think it will be a slow change, and schools like Wisconsin, who will try to stay as pure as possible, will end up falling out of the discussions when it comes to rankings, and decent bowl games. It's all going to be a matter of deep pockets that are constantly being refilled, that will make the decisions.
 
TW said:
NIL hasn't shifted power "yet." It's going to. Texas has been a lesser opponent for several years now, as Baylor, and Oklahoma boosters were doing more in "helping" kids decide where it would be best for them in school. It may not have seemed like it was happening, but let me tell you that from my perspective, talking to people involved in the recruiting cycle down here, it had an effect.

Now, with the new booster programs being developed around the Texas program, their fortunes are going to change. It may take 4 years to get there, but it will change dramatically.

In all honesty, I think it will be a slow change, and schools like Wisconsin, who will try to stay as pure as possible, will end up falling out of the discussions when it comes to rankings, and decent bowl games. It's all going to be a matter of deep pockets that are constantly being refilled, that will make the decisions.
Click to expand...
If it takes 4 years even 3 in this environment then the issue is much deeper than NIL at an institution. Florida is actually similar to Texas. New coaches, multiple NIL collectives, well heeled boosters and fertile recruiting grounds.

Once Sark gets into the SEC let’s see then how this plays out. Multiple 8-4 seasons even 9-3 won’t sit well in Austin, same in Gainesville with Napier. Then there is going to become a tipping point and a decision many boosters are going to have to make. Pay / buyout coaches, invest in facilities and make collectives do their thing. And yes the choice of how much to give to the university and the collectives discussion is already a thing. Boosters became rich and wealthy making smart business decisions and investing for results. NIL and collectives is a nice toy now to guys like Ruiz. At some point they are going to have make some choices. It’s not some endless pile of cash. I have had discussions with agencies that advise collectives and while there are rouge boosters out there (always have been) its a learning curve for everyone. They don’t have a feel how / if the NCAA enforces it’s “guidance” will play out. The anti trust issue is real. The general consensus is that the P5 schools will break away in the next 3-5 years, adopt their own guardrails / guidelines and “clean up” the system.

Georgia, Florida, Texas, FSU , OSU, Michigan, USC, A&M, Clemson, Alabama are not going to become also rans just like Baylor , TCU , Wisconsin, Mississippi or UCLA going to become powerhouses.
 
FlaPack said:
Willing ? How? In states where they are amending laws to allow coaches to be involved with collectives yes but that’s not close to the majority of schools. And let me say this for the 1,324 time. Schools do not arrange NIL deals. Collectives do. It’s not one on one with student athletes
Click to expand...
Seems we are at point states will change NIL laws to allow schools whatever they want to do
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top