Should there be a NIL salary cap?

[HuskyHawk]

The large majority of athletic programs run at a deficit in the tens of $millions. The revenue generated by a select few sports is not even close to the full story. For most programs, revenue generating sports only partially offset the costs of running other sports.

And the coaches were never expected to be volunteers. They’re professionals and schools wisely invest in them to generate revenue & successfully coach students/teams.

College sports is supposed to be amateur athletics - not a professional sports league. There was nothing wrong with that and it benefitted the athletes most of all.

Unlimited NIL threatens the existence of it & I think the NCAA should put guardrails on it for eligibility. For those that think it’s unfair, find a pro sports league that’ll pay the athletes straight out of high school. That’s not what college sports is.

Nobody is paying them to play! Do you agree they can get a job at McDonald's and be a college athlete at the same time? If so, can they also get a job doing a commercial for Dunkin Donuts? Pitching Gatorade on their Instagram or TikTok? Maybe selling Instagram or TikTok ads for fitness attire they like? That's what this is.

By the way, this same issue arose for Olympic athletes, when they were required to be "amateurs". It's one thing to pay them to play the sport, that's pro vs amateur. It's another thing to pay them for their fame, that should not impact amateur status. That's especially true now, when kids like Cooper Flagg are famous without any association with a college team. Paige was as well.

 

[Kowalski]

Nobody is paying them to play! Do you agree they can get a job at McDonald's and be a college athlete at the same time? If so, can they also get a job doing a commercial for Dunkin Donuts? Pitching Gatorade on their Instagram or TikTok? Maybe selling Instagram or TikTok ads for fitness attire they like? That's what this is.

By the way, this same issue arose for Olympic athletes, when they were required to be "amateurs". It's one thing to pay them to play the sport, that's pro vs amateur. It's another thing to pay them for their fame, that should not impact amateur status. That's especially true now, when kids like Cooper Flagg are famous without any association with a college team. Paige was as well.

I’m sorry. NIL is being used to pay players to play. Isn’t that was Mora was talking about? - you can’t compete if you don’t have the money to do that?

No, I don’t have a problem with athletes getting a job or getting paid for a commercial. But it’s problematic when it’s abused as a back door way to pay for recruits.

This thread is about whether there should be limits. I thing having guardrails around it for eligibility is necessary.

 

[McLovin]

The large majority of athletic programs run at a deficit in the tens of $millions. The revenue generated by a select few sports is not even close to the full story. For most programs, revenue generating sports only partially offset the costs of running other sports.

And the coaches were never expected to be volunteers. They’re professionals and schools wisely invest in them to generate revenue & successfully coach students/teams.

College sports is supposed to be amateur athletics - not a professional sports league. There was nothing wrong with that and it benefitted the athletes most of all.

Unlimited NIL threatens the existence of it & I think the NCAA should put guardrails on it for eligibility. For those that think it’s unfair, find a pro sports league that’ll pay the athletes straight out of high school. That’s not what college sports is.

If Rutgers can’t figure out how to turn a profit with a $50 million per year TV contract, that’s on them.

The reason most don’t “turn a profit” is because they are public institutions whose nature is to spend every penny (and often more) that they bring in.

If the TV contracts went away tomorrow, all of these universities would be massively scaling back their athletic departments and cutting programs.

The athletes who are allowing these universities to reap the rewards of massive TV contracts should be entitled to get a cut of the money that’s sloshing around college athletics.

I’d generally agree it would be good if the NCAA put guardrails in place to prevent portal tampering / pay to play, but we all know that even if they did they wouldn’t enforce it. Or if they did it would be programs like UConn that bear the brunt of the punishments.

Schools like Kansas and Duke had been paying recruits for years before it was legal and the NCAA turned a blind eye. I don’t see how attempting to “regulate” NIL will be any thing more than a facade.

Kids finally being able to get paid for the value they provide the universities, the NCAA and the media partners is a great thing that shouldn’t be restricted when the “amateur” ship sailed long ago.

The last couple of seasons we have seen the most parity in recent memory in college sports. That’s a good thing, not a bad thing IMO. And a lot of that was driven by NIL and the portal (and covid years).

 

[HuskyHawk]

I’m sorry. NIL is being used to pay players to play. Isn’t that was Mora was talking about? - you can’t compete if you don’t have the money to do that?

No, I don’t have a problem with athletes getting a job or getting paid for a commercial. But it’s problematic when it’s abused as a back door way to pay for recruits.

This thread is about whether there should be limits. I thing having guardrails around it for eligibility is necessary.

No. They can’t pay them to play. What boosters can do is promise them endorsement deals, often at more than fair value, to induce them to go to that school. You can put guardrails on that, maybe, if you can figure out how without limiting the legitimate deals.

 

[87Xfer]

Should it be "a NIL salary cap" or "an NIL salary cap"? I still get confused...