Texas OLmen to get 50k each

[RioDog]

Well, at least I still make more than a UT O lineman... for now.

 

[RSTuthill]

We are not far away before Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile will be putting logos on uniforms like the equipment makers do now. Not to worry, they will be (relatively) small and tasteful.

 

[CL82]

Except the schools aren't the ones paying for their revenue generation. It's fans and alums. This has nothing to do with "market value". This is ego driven.

Fans and alumni = boosters. So basically the NCAA has abandoned enforcement on that issue.

 

[Get a Job]

Tuition also generates money for schools. They should have to pay their own way and give up the scholarship.

A person in my industry was equipment manager for 4 years at Florida. Worked 85 hours a week doing that along with doing their own class work and going to classes and paid their own way through college. Athletes already receive well over $60k/yr factoring in tuition,room, board, all the free gear, meals, books, school supplies, laptop,the list goes on. Yes they deserve to profit off their likeness but at this point they should learn a real life lesson and also pay their own way if they are receiving all those extra benefits

How would what you are proposing work? Most college football players won't earn much or anything in NIL, so I assume you don't want them to give up their scholarships. How is it decided who is required to give it up, then? As you said above, the $50k these linemen are receiving doesn't even cover their expenses for attending and living at school, so the line must be even higher than $50k. At that point, you are talking about such a small number of students that it would seem ridiculous to worry about it.

Furthermore, why should a person be prohibited from accepting benefits that are legally provided to them in exchange for the recipient doing something legal. If a guy convinces a school to provide education, room, board, food, and swag in exchange for playing football, good for him. If the same guy is also able to get an offer from someone else for NIL, also good for him. I grant you the morals and legalities in the second scenario can get murky pretty quickly, but in no case does it make sense to me to ever take away a players scholarship just because he got some other benefit somewhere else. Should every athlete from a wealthy family have their scholarship revoked?

I can't believe this "ThEy ShOuLd PaY ThEiR oWn Way!!" meme is even treated with any amount of respect. It is impractical, irrational, and, although I can't put my finger on it, I think it speaks to a moral or at least logical flaw in the proponents of the idea.

 

[ScottVib]

Really it's the NCAA trying to hold onto relevance. The prospect of the G-League or a competitor providing that HS to pro-transition in the revenue sports, particularly with their golden goose, D1 Basketball, more or less forced their hand to adopt this or face acceleration in the transition of the top athletes fleeing the college ranks for their pre-pro prep.

There will be some correction in this at some point, where boosters are going to be less interested in dropping their own wealth to fund the 2nd and 3rd string players, even at the major schools, because while saying I fund Texas football might have some cache, it's not the same as saying I'm paying our first string or our Heisman trophy candidate, etc. It will naturally start to flow players in search of additional playing time and the addition name, image and likeness opportunity that comes with it.

People figuring out just what they can get away with is still going on, it'll get worse the next couple of years before it stabilizes. Where it'll be a real difference maker is in the non-football/men's basketball sports. If you go to a school that has outsized popularity for a non-traditional revenue sport (think UConn Women's Basketball; BC Hockey; etc) then those players will have much more NIL opportunity than other schools and it'll be more likely to funnel talent to those schools.

 

[Dizzy21]

We are not far away before Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile will be putting logos on uniforms like the equipment makers do now. Not to worry, they will be (relatively) small and tasteful.

Most schools do not allow their brand to be associated with whatever promo the college kids are doing. Not sure how it is at Texas, but UConn will not allow Paige to wear a UConn uniform or anything like that in her sponsorships.

 

[Dizzy21]

Really it's the NCAA trying to hold onto relevance. The prospect of the G-League or a competitor providing that HS to pro-transition in the revenue sports, particularly with their golden goose, D1 Basketball, more or less forced their hand to adopt this or face acceleration in the transition of the top athletes fleeing the college ranks for their pre-pro prep.

There will be some correction in this at some point, where boosters are going to be less interested in dropping their own wealth to fund the 2nd and 3rd string players, even at the major schools, because while saying I fund Texas football might have some cache, it's not the same as saying I'm paying our first string or our Heisman trophy candidate, etc. It will naturally start to flow players in search of additional playing time and the addition name, image and likeness opportunity that comes with it.

People figuring out just what they can get away with is still going on, it'll get worse the next couple of years before it stabilizes. Where it'll be a real difference maker is in the non-football/men's basketball sports. If you go to a school that has outsized popularity for a non-traditional revenue sport (think UConn Women's Basketball; BC Hockey; etc) then those players will have much more NIL opportunity than other schools and it'll be more likely to funnel talent to those schools.

How is this the NCAA trying to hold on to relevance when they were the people fighting against this?

 

[RSTuthill]

Most schools do not allow their brand to be associated with whatever promo the college kids are doing. Not sure how it is at Texas, but UConn will not allow Paige to wear a UConn uniform or anything like that in her sponsorships.

Thx, I understand that. I was speaking to the trend of increasing commercialization is all.

 

[DoctorWho85]

I don't really see a problem with this. They are part of team that earns millions of dollars in TV revenue every year. They work hard even in the off season. They deserve it.

 

[uconndogs]

I don't begrudge the kids the money, but this will transform college athletics. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Once in full competitive mode these types of NIL programs will be used as a recruiting enticements and the prices will go up. Some programs will spare no expense in attracting top recruits and I have to believe that quickly gets to seven figure money for top recruits. I see a number of problems with that. First, it will bifurcate college athletics because only a limited number of programs will be able to arrange those types of incentives. Second, not many kids will be ready to handle this type of money. It will bring out the sharks and it's easy to see a lot of kids being taken advantage.

 

[phillionaire]

good for them get the bag while you can

 

[uconnfan68]

That’s an odd way of saying “no”.

Except you don't know any more than I do...

 

[Slick]

Well, at least I still make more than a UT O lineman... for now.

This is just one non profit paying them. Once the car dealers and the oil companys come in and make their own deals these offensive Lineman make make 200k per year.

 

[Slick]

I don't begrudge the kids the money, but this will transform college athletics. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Once in full competitive mode these types of NIL programs will be used as a recruiting enticements and the prices will go up. Some programs will spare no expense in attracting top recruits and I have to believe that quickly gets to seven figure money for top recruits. I see a number of problems with that. First, it will bifurcate college athletics because only a limited number of programs will be able to arrange those types of incentives. Second, not many kids will be ready to handle this type of money. It will bring out the sharks and it's easy to see a lot of kids being taken advantage.

Nick Saban once said the players should not make more then 40K per year in compensation. Immediately Auburn said they would pay them 80K per year.

 

[giddyup]

How would what you are proposing work? Most college football players won't earn much or anything in NIL, so I assume you don't want them to give up their scholarships. How is it decided who is required to give it up, then? As you said above, the $50k these linemen are receiving doesn't even cover their expenses for attending and living at school, so the line must be even higher than $50k. At that point, you are talking about such a small number of students that it would seem ridiculous to worry about it.

Furthermore, why should a person be prohibited from accepting benefits that are legally provided to them in exchange for the recipient doing something legal. If a guy convinces a school to provide education, room, board, food, and swag in exchange for playing football, good for him. If the same guy is also able to get an offer from someone else for NIL, also good for him. I grant you the morals and legalities in the second scenario can get murky pretty quickly, but in no case does it make sense to me to ever take away a players scholarship just because he got some other benefit somewhere else. Should every athlete from a wealthy family have their scholarship revoked?

I can't believe this "ThEy ShOuLd PaY ThEiR oWn Way!!" meme is even treated with any amount of respect. It is impractical, irrational, and, although I can't put my finger on it, I think it speaks to a moral or at least logical flaw in the proponents of the idea.

The rest of the student populace gets the luxury of paying based on their or their parents income and repaying their borrowings for 20 years. It’s perfectly rationale, and precisely practical since every other schmuck needs to fill out a FASB disclosure. You really don’t know what you’re talking about.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Except you don't know any more than I do...

Agreed. We both know these are payments from an outside entity and not from the athletic department budget.

 

[WestHartHusk]

good for them get the bag while you can

Didn’t you hear, it’s for charity.

 

[uconnfan68]

Agreed. We both know these are payments from an outside entity and not from the athletic department budget.

I don’t even care, but I’m not that naive.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I don’t even care, but I’m not that naive.

It’s not nativity, it’s just being wrong. It’s clearly payments from boosters well above any semblance of market value (for the “service” they’ll provide specifically within this deal) but it’s objectively not being paid for by the school.

 

[Get a Job]

The rest of the student populace gets the luxury of paying based on their or their parents income and repaying their borrowings for 20 years. It’s perfectly rationale, and precisely practical since every other schmuck needs to fill out a FASB disclosure. You really don’t know what you’re talking about.

I'd love to argue with you, but you've done such a poor job putting together a coherent thought that I don't know where to start. Let me try to start by seeing if I understand you correctly. You think that athletes who get NIL money should forfeit their scholarships because other students pay tuition based on their families' income and wealth? If so, why don't you tell me what one has to do with the other?

 

[Hamms30]

If you can get it, take it. But I'm still firmly of the opinion that if you accept payment from a NIL agreement you should have to forfeit your scholarship funded by tax payers and fellow students.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

If you can get it, take it. But I'm still firmly of the opinion that if you accept payment from a NIL agreement you should have to forfeit your scholarship funded by tax payers and fellow students.

The scholarships of Texas O-linemen are not funded by tax payers and fellow students.

 

[Hamms30]

The scholarships of Texas O-linemen are not funded by tax payers and fellow students.

which is fine. Privately funded do what you will. More of a general comment than specifically aimed at Texas, granted this thread is related to them.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

which is fine. Privately funded do what you will. More of a general comment than specifically aimed at Texas, granted this thread is related to them.

No, the point is that the Texas football program prints money. Basically any high level D1 football program will not only be self sufficient, but will be funding most of the rest of the Athletic department. Your premise of why these players should have to give up their scholarship is based on a very flawed premise.

 

[Get a Job]

If you can get it, take it. But I'm still firmly of the opinion that if you accept payment from a NIL agreement you should have to forfeit your scholarship funded by tax payers and fellow students.

No one has yet explained what a college football scholarship has to do with the player's income or assets. The scholarship was not given to them as financial aid in the first place. By your logic, rich kids should be ineligible for athletic scholarships. I swear you people have no critical thinking skills. You just hear something that "feels" right and latch on.