Rhody15 wrote: ↑11 months ago
rhodyblue12 wrote: ↑11 months ago
I really wish some credible sports writer would do an article on the impact of NIL on college basketball. And not just spin NIL as 'getting reimbursement for use of likeness', but for what it really is. They need to chronicle the bidding wars for basketball recruits and expose this information to the public. Players and salaries. ESPN is just a PR front for the P6 schools. Maybe The Athletic will take it on.
Even if I were rich beyond measure, I would not spend $150,000 to hire a basketball player for my school. We are now hiring a staff of players, the term 'recruiting' can now be used in the same context as it is with commercial companies.
I think I will start a new venture - I'm thinking an Indeed web site for college sports. Universities can post job openings and players can post resumes.
Don't think the 150K has been confirmed, just people throwing around a number.
I can't see Ware getting 150K as he's been a stiff his whole career while Dickinson getting little over 100K at Kansas.
Correct - a lot of this is just throwing out numbers - nothing is ever that close in reality.
Basically you get kids/family members/managers acting like they think they're worth x and will openly say they're going to get x as an offer to try and drive the pricing up.
This is so new that there's no "market" yet. There's on3 which tries to place a valuation on a player's head, but nothing is actually rooted in the market reality.
The other problem that will start to creep up is that the really inflated numbers - the numbers the big NIL boosters are giving to kids, are not sustainable. They're going to dry up fast, for multiple reasons:
A) This isn't tax deductible. Unlike your traditional program donation is.
B) The ROI is short term and minimal, comparatively. Sure - you can get a player, but there's no guarantee that player gets you to a final four or even the tourney in some cases. You can't use that money to get a player to stay longer than 1 year - meaning that you could throw away a couple hundred thousand for one player for one year, you don't perform to your expectations, the player can choose to leave, and then what did you get?
Traditional program support gives you long term infrastrucutre and support, in return you usually get priority tickets, access, etc. With NIL money on a single recruit - it's significantly harder to get a return there, especially if they player you spent that money on goes elsewhere.
C) It's not sustainable because of that. The big donors are going to get tired of spending money that they can't write off and they don't see a long term benefit of. On top of that - where does this leave athletics departments that need donations to keep functioning and competing - because you're probably drawing from the same well.
Mainly though, most of what you hear a player saying they're worth or making is completely fabricated. Flex culture and all that, people love to brag about what they're getting more than they actually like getting the money.
