Since past threads have gotten way off-track and/or closed due to unneeded hostilities, here is hope for a more civil debate on the merits of NIL – both in it’s true intent and it’s current reality.
NIL - Yay or Nay
- Thread starter Jeremy
- Start date
Yes on its intention, no on its current reality. A player should benefit fully from their name, image and likeness (as in, be offered opportunities that also provide benefit to the payer beyond simply getting them on the team).
I know I’m in a minority on this and I may evolve/change my opinion over time. I’d rather see athletes get a stipend for not being able to make time for a job rather than make college sports a model that is unpaid for 99% and compensated for the 1%.
Disclaimer…
To me, college athletes should be unpaid amateurs (read the “with that said” section below for a condition on that before booing). If direct compensation for playing the game is desired, there should be minor-league or other options outside the college route. Yes, too much money is made “by the system”, but that is different from athletes not getting “anything” off their work. AND, NIL doesn’t change that for almost every athlete.
College is expensive and far too many people can’t afford to go and/or have to go $100K to $200K in debt to do so, while athletes get a full ride, housing, food, tutoring, expensive apparel, etc. If they need more than that, which is understandable, there should be options outside the college route or a different solution, such as;
With that said…
Because NIL would never be a “fair” compensation for 99% of athletes, only a select few, I could get behind some sort of universal basic income since they don’t have time for normal jobs. Instead of athletic departments taking in $50-150 million/year (yes I know costs need subtracted but pay the coaches less and stop renovating stadiums every 5 years), athletes could be able to get a yearly stipend/salary at normal college student minimum wage through the AD’s income/budget. The amount should be fixed regardless of sport, athlete, or school.
I’m not even going to talk about the issues with how NIL is actually being used.
Disclaimer…
To me, college athletes should be unpaid amateurs (read the “with that said” section below for a condition on that before booing). If direct compensation for playing the game is desired, there should be minor-league or other options outside the college route. Yes, too much money is made “by the system”, but that is different from athletes not getting “anything” off their work. AND, NIL doesn’t change that for almost every athlete.
College is expensive and far too many people can’t afford to go and/or have to go $100K to $200K in debt to do so, while athletes get a full ride, housing, food, tutoring, expensive apparel, etc. If they need more than that, which is understandable, there should be options outside the college route or a different solution, such as;
With that said…
Because NIL would never be a “fair” compensation for 99% of athletes, only a select few, I could get behind some sort of universal basic income since they don’t have time for normal jobs. Instead of athletic departments taking in $50-150 million/year (yes I know costs need subtracted but pay the coaches less and stop renovating stadiums every 5 years), athletes could be able to get a yearly stipend/salary at normal college student minimum wage through the AD’s income/budget. The amount should be fixed regardless of sport, athlete, or school.
I’m not even going to talk about the issues with how NIL is actually being used.
I don’t care if collegiate athletes get paid. I don’t think that it should be crowd sourced like a GoFundMe.
Stream of consciousness.....
I'm a bit uncomfortable with aspects of NIL.
It's putting player and school against each other for donations. We have a finite budget. Do we donate to ISU or a fund that pays players?
I'm very uncomfortable with the unregulated wild west situation. Fraudsters and a-holes will fall from the sky to take advantage of some players. Excessive fees, at best, to downright fraud will happen to these kids. Do they have the support and knowledge to navigate this environment?
I guess the second thought has always been there, but now that dirty side is in the open.
The players are basically professional now which takes some of the old charm away from the game. What was a shared experience is now a gun for hire.
Did NIL need to happen? Yes. Long overdue. But is it impacting the game in a positive way? Is it impacting the players in a positive way? The community? The answer needs to be "yes", but I'm not sure we're there.
I like my money so I'm not giving any to them, but I'm for them being able to make money from whatever sources they can.
I think that having a player or three on a team paid handsomely while others are getting little to nothing could end up being a cancer to team chemistry, which in a strange way may benefit teams that don't compete in that arena.
Yes it was a while ago but the AD found us summer jobs that paid pretty decent.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
I'm Yes on its intention, and while I acknowledge the frustration and anger people have with the way it has played out, I fully believe that until these athletes are legally considered employees, which they absolutely are, their ability to make money from their NIL rights should not be limited.
We live in a relatively free market, and I don't believe college athletics deserves special treatment that isn't afforded to other industries.
We live in a relatively free market, and I don't believe college athletics deserves special treatment that isn't afforded to other industries.
If I'm a coach of a blue blood I'm still pretty nervous for how to manage this type of situation.
And there will be players who will choose places with more stability in the program.
That’s where I get conflicted on this. I don’t disagree with anything you just said….. however, I guess I’m too much of a traditionalist on college sports and what it represents to me. It’s odd because I’m a modernist on almost everything else.
I think I struggle with the idea that 99% of athletes aren’t going to be afforded the NIL deals and therefore you get 1-2 guys that benefit financially from the whole team’s effort and hard work. It would be like everybody in my company working hard and not getting paid while the CEO makes a million dollars. I’m not a socialist in any way, but that seems to go against the concept.
I do think athletes are penalized by not being able to make a fair wage due to time restrictions. I also believe that people should be able to benefit from their efforts. But I think there are better ways to do it while still maintaining a level playing field that differentiates amateur and professional sports.
That’s a choice they make though. It would kind of be like me blaming my kid for not being to able to get a different higher paying job with more travel and time requirements, because I need the flexibility of my current job to do what I need to do for my child. I made the choice to have a child, just like collegiate athletes choose to play sports at the expense of their time to make money.
I'm fine with the idea of NIL as it was intended. However, I thought college athletes were already fairly compensated without NIL. Why? Because everyone and their mother would give anything to be a D1 college athlete.
True NIL would only effect the tiny % of D1 college athletes that are famous enough to actually get endorsement deals.
The only thing I like about the current NIL system, is it potentially cleans up the sport of college athletics a little bit. Everything should now be out in the open which takes away some of the "sleeziness".
True NIL would only effect the tiny % of D1 college athletes that are famous enough to actually get endorsement deals.
The only thing I like about the current NIL system, is it potentially cleans up the sport of college athletics a little bit. Everything should now be out in the open which takes away some of the "sleeziness".
And plenty of kids on scholarships somewhat make that decision anyway. It might not be so cut and dried but when a student has a scholarship with a GPA requirement to maintain it, working a job may not be feasible either for many.
I voted yes on intent, no on current reality.
I don't see myself every donating to an NIL fund or collective fund. If I owned a company and could use a sponsor that would help my business I could see using it, but I am not going to donate my money to these funds/the players just for the heck of it. I would so much rather give my limited "giving" money to charities and other causes.
I don't see myself every donating to an NIL fund or collective fund. If I owned a company and could use a sponsor that would help my business I could see using it, but I am not going to donate my money to these funds/the players just for the heck of it. I would so much rather give my limited "giving" money to charities and other causes.
That's a constant thought in my mind as well. They are electing to make the commitment knowing that only a few are going to make money in the future on it. If they don't value the education benefit, they could just as easily skip college and start making money in the real world.