Future NIL

[ZooCougar]

If you are speaking against NIL on a board that recruits and players probably read from time to time then please just delete your account.

 

[uconndogs]

No virtue-signaling or intent to change minds here. Just my two cents.

Actually really enjoying this discussion. I appreciate UConndog's position and am sympathetic to it. I agree that this forum is a legitimate place to have this discussion (maybe a separate thread, but whatever). My take is this; UConndog's point about giving dollars to other deserving recipients at a university is well-taken. I wish NIL didn't exist so choosing between different places to give wasn't necessary, but UC70's point is also well-taken; This is the current reality. I also still believe that student athletics, as grotesque as the money side has become, continues to provide direct and indirect benefits to institutions and their stakeholders. I also believe that there is a significant number of folks who would not send any money in the direction of a university (I understand that the collective is NOT the University; just speaking in broad terms) except as a contribution to support athletics.

Full disclosure: Have just made my first contribution to BBfG. I contribute to the general fund at the university where I am on the faculty. Could I give more to my school if I didn't give to BBfG? Sure. I think both are worthwhile.

Very good and thoughtful post. Thanks.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[uconnbill]

I have given now trying to get the wife to let me send a Christmas present to the NIL. I think we all would like $3 million in the NIL fund

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The only flaw in “the more NIL money next year” means we get better is everybody is saying the same thing… do there will be NIL competitive inflation not necessarily more buying power.

I'm not sure this can be characterized as a flaw, it is basically the reality of the situation.

 

[Jetskies]

please don't shoot me - this is not a shot at UConn.

I just find the current crowdsourcing nature of NIL funding to be a bit weird.
Universities are/were supposedly making money off the kids' labor, hence this revolution - why are they not paying the kids?
I paid for my ticket, hot dogs, parking passes, ESPN+ streaming, cable bill, etc. They made & kept the conference money & ticket/concession money. But private donors are still on the hook for paying the kids...........?

Is this NIL collective thing just a temporary bridge to the final model, where the Uni's themselves are cutting checks to the kids? Just feels like a charade right now.

 

[Patman]

please don't shoot me - this is not a shot at UConn.

I just find the current crowdsourcing nature of NIL funding to be a bit weird.
Universities are/were supposedly making money off the kids' labor, hence this revolution - why are they not paying the kids?
I paid for my ticket, hot dogs, parking passes, ESPN+ streaming, cable bill, etc. They made & kept the conference money & ticket/concession money. But private donors are still on the hook for paying the kids...........?

Is this NIL collective thing just a temporary bridge to the final model, where the Uni's themselves are cutting checks to the kids? Just feels like a charade right now.

because they don't want to. It is simple as that. They don't want to and so far have legally avoided doing so.

 

[gioff2323]

I’m guessing a good deal of 25 NIL will go to retention.

 

[Jetskies]

because they don't want to. It is simple as that. They don't want to and so far have legally avoided doing so.

so calling it NIL is the legal loophole to avoid having to force the universities to foot the bill? because "technically" NIL is not pay for play, but secondary income based on the N.I.L. of the player... which is a joke...?

I always wondered why it was called NIL if it wasn't sponsors paying for it. the collective thing doesnt sit well with me. I don't peronally need to benefit from a Lineman's or QB's N,I, or L (ie the way a sponsor would). But the school is encouraging me to pay for it, via collective?

i think i'm putting it together.

 

[uconnbill]

please don't shoot me - this is not a shot at UConn.

I just find the current crowdsourcing nature of NIL funding to be a bit weird.
Universities are/were supposedly making money off the kids' labor, hence this revolution - why are they not paying the kids?
I paid for my ticket, hot dogs, parking passes, ESPN+ streaming, cable bill, etc. They made & kept the conference money & ticket/concession money. But private donors are still on the hook for paying the kids...........?

Is this NIL collective thing just a temporary bridge to the final model, where the Uni's themselves are cutting checks to the kids? Just feels like a charade right now.

Do you not see how other schools are doing. A number are taking tickets, others are adding to students fees while others are doing just this.

 

[Patman]

so calling it NIL is the legal loophole to avoid having to force the universities to foot the bill? because "technically" NIL is not pay for play, but secondary income based on the N.I.L. of the player... which is a joke...?

I always wondered why it was called NIL if it wasn't sponsors paying for it. the collective thing doesnt sit well with me. I don't peronally need to benefit from a Lineman's or QB's N,I, or L (ie the way a sponsor would). But the school is encouraging me to pay for it, via collective?

i think i'm putting it together.

Its not a loophole, the schools aren't paying people to pay the players.

 

[bobbyinaz]

please don't shoot me - this is not a shot at UConn.

I just find the current crowdsourcing nature of NIL funding to be a bit weird.
Universities are/were supposedly making money off the kids' labor, hence this revolution - why are they not paying the kids?
I paid for my ticket, hot dogs, parking passes, ESPN+ streaming, cable bill, etc. They made & kept the conference money & ticket/concession money. But private donors are still on the hook for paying the kids...........?

Is this NIL collective thing just a temporary bridge to the final model, where the Uni's themselves are cutting checks to the kids? Just feels like a charade right now.

Starting next year they will.

As part of the House settlement schools will be able to pay $20+MM directly to the kids. This will be in addition to NIL which kids will still get.

 

[UConnJim]

please don't shoot me - this is not a shot at UConn.

I just find the current crowdsourcing nature of NIL funding to be a bit weird.
Universities are/were supposedly making money off the kids' labor, hence this revolution - why are they not paying the kids?
I paid for my ticket, hot dogs, parking passes, ESPN+ streaming, cable bill, etc. They made & kept the conference money & ticket/concession money. But private donors are still on the hook for paying the kids...........?

Is this NIL collective thing just a temporary bridge to the final model, where the Uni's themselves are cutting checks to the kids? Just feels like a charade right now.

So, here's the deal. Revenue sharing is coming for players and it will impact this year's HS/portal/roster recruiting. For football, the revenue share could be $15 million+, depending on what each school wants to do. Some schools will probably try to minimize their revenue share. Unfortunately, for a school like UConn, they have little football media revenue so there will not be much to share with the players. For an SEC school with 85 scholarships, the revenue share could average ~$175k/player if they divided it equally, but it won't be divided equally.

But, there will also be NIL raised by collectives. NIL is not just crowdsourcing donations as there are some marketing deals for some players like Paige Bueckers.

For UConn, it looks like NIL will be very important to remain competitive given the low football media revenues to share with players. Like it or not, that's the reality and why fans have to support Bleeding Blue for Good.

 

[UC70]

Wow, I’m suprised by the lack of knowledge vis a vis NIL collectives and revenue sharing with athletes on this forum. And the general knowledge of the new paradigm of college athletics. If you really care about UConn competing at the highest level (and winning) in all sports, you need to support both the NIL collectives that support UConn in addition to being a season tix holder. Being a season ticket holder is simply not enough. If you want (and expect) UConn to compete with P4 FB schools, win National Championships in BB, and maintain a natioanl profile, you have to contribute to NIL and directly to UConn athletics. Please don’t complain about beating P4 if you’re not willing to provide financial support.

 

[UC70]

So, here's the deal. Revenue sharing is coming for players and it will impact this year's HS/portal/roster recruiting. For football, the revenue share could be $15 million+, depending on what each school wants to do. Some schools will probably try to minimize their revenue share. Unfortunately, for a school like UConn, they have little football media revenue so there will not be much to share with the players. For an SEC school with 85 scholarships, the revenue share could average ~$175k/player if they divided it equally, but it won't be divided equally.

But, there will also be NIL raised by collectives. NIL is not just crowdsourcing donations as there are some marketing deals for some players like Paige Bueckers.

For UConn, it looks like NIL will be very important to remain competitive given the low football media revenues to share with players. Like it or not, that's the reality and why fans have to support Bleeding Blue for Good.

Finally, someone who really understands the new paradigm in college sports. Revenue sharing and the importance of NIL support to compete. And you’re righht - NIL is more important at UConn due to lack of conference revenue ( see P4 revenue). So it’s very simple: support NIL via Bleeding Blue for Good or don’t expect UConn FB, BB et al to compete nationally. And schools like Rutgers will pass us by. That’s the reality gentlemen.