GW Hoops

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



5/12/2022 10:19 am  #1


Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Must read from Kevin Blackistone Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/05/12/nil-rules-ncaa/

 

6/11/2022 6:21 am  #2


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Heard a radio show that had a lawyer that now specializes in helping athletes with NIL deals (said he has over 200 clients).  The numbers were staggering.  He said the going rate for a NIL contract for a top QB or LB prospect is $1-$2 million per year which they are offered from multiple collectives to get to attend their respective school. The avg starter  on a top football team is in the $100,000 + range.  He said most schools in the P5 have huge cash reserves in their Collective.  It was football related but easy to see how it would translate to a 4-5 star basketball recruit.
The money is staggering

 

6/11/2022 10:11 am  #3


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

I certainly don’t understand what this NIL stuff is all about—but it seems to me ,with my limited knowledge,
that unless we have alum with deep pockets willing to spend some cash,it’s time for GW to seriously think about moving to the Patriot league and tighten its academic standards.It would be nice to be in the top 40 
schools in US News.It should be meaningless-but it’s not.Right now we have “good” but not great academic 
reputation and lousy sports.Not very exciting.I’m falling asleep.l

 

6/11/2022 12:05 pm  #4


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

GW69 wrote:

I certainly don’t understand what this NIL stuff is all about—but it seems to me ,with my limited knowledge,
that unless we have alum with deep pockets willing to spend some cash,it’s time for GW to seriously think about moving to the Patriot league and tighten its academic standards.It would be nice to be in the top 40 
schools in US News.It should be meaningless-but it’s not.Right now we have “good” but not great academic 
reputation and lousy sports.Not very exciting.I’m falling asleep.l

No need to go to the Patriot League. What matters is how we stack up with our conference schools, not how we stack up against NC State and Oklahoma. Peer schools in the conference like Richmond, Davidson, and Loyola Chicago are able to compete nationally without huge NIL collectives because their alumni are so invested in the school’s success both academically and athletically. Without an adjustment in our culture it won’t matter what conference we are in. 

 

6/11/2022 1:23 pm  #5


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Sounds right.

 

6/11/2022 4:23 pm  #6


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Part of me says this shouldn't make much of a difference.   The kids that are signing with the Dukes and Kansas' of the world aren't choosing them over us because of the money.   Still, I can't believe that paying kids huge sums of money, especially combined with the relaxed transfer rules, isn't going to severely hurt any competitive balance and destroy any concept that this is amateur basketball, which has always been the appeal of the game to me.   

Last edited by Long Suffering Fan (6/11/2022 4:27 pm)

 

6/11/2022 4:46 pm  #7


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

LSF nails it.
At least technically, players were students and some even talked about academics in choosing a school.
And a point of pride before we started turning over the roster a few years back--and even during it,was that GW offered good academics and a great location. And our players were,and so far are, real students.
   So far,the A-10 is not a major factor in at least the public part of this race to destroy even the lip service of college student amateurism. We're not going to have entire six-figure NIL rosters for awhile in the A-10.
  But for the haves in college sports, the floodgates have been opened. What makes this different from the GLeague,outside of better pay and working conditions for the "job"?
  Again,as LSF points out,what little pleasure you took from seeing at least supposed student amateurs compete appears to be circling the drain.
  Thanks,NCAA for this,as usual, well thought out and workable solution that benefits all schools and college athletes.

 

6/11/2022 6:06 pm  #8


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Thank you jf.   I wish there was a better solution, as the kids should arguably be compensated for the revenue they generate for others (beyond the price of admission to the games).   Lots of people make lots of money off of the efforts of the player/athletes and although it is true that they are benefiting in terms of scholarship, room and board, there was still an imbalance.  Maybe the solution would be to end age restrictions in the NBA, so coming out of HS, the kids have a choice between turning pro and making the money or going to college and getting a free education.   But  a world of paid student athletes can't end well for schools like GW,

 

6/12/2022 2:58 pm  #9


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

GW0509 nails it--we can't compete with the top schools, but can we compete with other mid-majors and within our conference? .  A kid is going to consider his opportunities to make $10, 15, 25k per year--and if you land a kid who is successful, you better be prepared to compete to keep him when other NIL collectives start dangling more money. 

What I wonder about long-term compared to football, is whether MBB can generate the same level of dollars and interest if the magic of underdog March  Madness runs becomes purely illusory.  Will you ever see the George Masons, St Peters, or even pre-big time Butlers make a serious run is the talent gaps between the P5+ and mid-majors grows even larger.  Indeed, it's not the Kansas/Oklahomas I worry about--it's everyone else in the P5+ (e.g., Washington State, Nebraska, Clemson, Vanderbilt, Stanford) with large collectives  who will take some talent with money available who otherwise might have gone to a mid-major.   

Last edited by Merrick (6/12/2022 3:02 pm)

 

6/13/2022 9:16 am  #10


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

I'll echo the sentiment. How we stack up against other A10 schools, and to a lesser extent, other higher echelon mid-major schools, ought to be our genuine concern.  There are two things worth noting about this.

1) To some extent, this apples to oranges dilemma has been in effect well before NIL was established.  Can GW realistically compete on the basis of facilities, coaches (if you subscribe to the theory that a better compensated coach will likely be a more successful one more often than not), recruiting budgets, and perks like charters against the public school with a thriving alumni base that prioritizes basketball (VCU), the sizable metro area school with no real sports entertainment options in the area during the college basketball season aside from NHL hockey (SLU),  or an unofficial college basketball mecca who hosts the First 4 annually, plays in a 14,000 seat arena which often sells out, and is really the only game in town for sports entertainment (Dayton)?  If I were to speculate, I'd ask whether these competitive advantages go beyond the items I mentioned.  If Will Wade routinely paid players to play for him at LSU, can one say with absolute certainty that this practice did not go on while he was with VCU?  As we've begun to see at places like Arizona, Kansas and LSU, the business of pay-for-play certainly predates NIL.  Sure, there was a point where I might have said that even if this goes on among some or many major conference schools, it just doesn't happen in the A10.  Today, I've done a 180.  There is pressure to win at virtually all levels, certainly among schools in a multibid league.  If a midmajor has the booster support to pull this off, why wouldn't they, particularly when looking to their left and right only to find their neighbors doing the same thing?

On a separate point, The Athletic had an interesting analysis on transfers last week.  They grouped the A10 with a few other conferences, referring to them as midmajor+ conferences (the better midmajors).  They identified 25 players who transferred from a midmajor+ to a high major program, and found that something like 21 or 22 of these players saw both their playing time and their scoring averages go down.  (Interestingly, their efficiency ratings often went up because they went from having the ball in their hands nearly every possession to this not being the case at the higher program.)  Nothing shocking about this except to point out that perhaps the grass isn't always greener on the other side.  It should be noted that some players may still find that their "up-transfers" were more than worthwhile given perhaps a more realistic chance at winning a national championship/advance further in the tournament or the allure of NIL money (or a greater amount of NIL money). 

 

6/13/2022 11:53 am  #11


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Taking cash payouts from under-the-table to out in the open was all that was changed by the NIL rules. Instead of creating a revenue sharing model that assured athletes their fair share of the pie, we have just a less-clandestine system of slush fund payouts to perceived stars. All that has changed is that U$C football and Loserville basketball no longer have to pretend that they are not handing out wads of cash to players. But they remain unhindered by a salary cap or a requirement to disclose finances so that all athletes get a percentage of the take.
Since GW is not in the buying recruits business, this won´t make too much of a difference. It will just widen the gap between the amoral "big boys" and the Universities that want to offer sports-- which is probably what the shoe companies, TV networks, athletic honchos and NCAA money-grubbers wanted.
 

 

6/13/2022 4:59 pm  #12


Re: Best perspective on NIL, NCAA and college athletics

Gwmayhem wrote:

On a separate point, The Athletic had an interesting analysis on transfers last week.  They grouped the A10 with a few other conferences, referring to them as midmajor+ conferences (the better midmajors).  They identified 25 players who transferred from a midmajor+ to a high major program, and found that something like 21 or 22 of these players saw both their playing time and their scoring averages go down.

Of course Jamison had to be one of the few guys that saw both playing time and scoring average increase moving up (I'm happy for him though).

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum