username03

May 16th, 2020 at 11:49 AM ^

This is pretty scary. Cassius Winston is projected to get .02% of what MSU brings in from just their football tv contract from outside sources.

hailtothevictors08

May 16th, 2020 at 1:40 PM ^

While I agree in general, the exception for me is field specific gear. 

For example, while I like LeBron, I couldn't give a shit about what car LeBron likes or what clothes he endorses for off the court wear. 

However, when it comes to specialty gear that affects performance, it is at least interesting to know what the very best use because you have to figure they wouldn't use substandard equipment and still be the best. 

Personal example: While incredibly niche, I am a skiing addict and actually follow, though can't afford, the yearly advances in skiing technology. In a sport where the ability to trim a tenth or two of a second often means a podium spot or not, top skiers are kind of forced to endorse the equipment that after testing that they think gives them the best equipment.

Don

May 17th, 2020 at 12:10 PM ^

Your exception makes sense, since the endorsers are likely to be very knowledgeable about the technical aspects of skiing equipment.

However, if my 60 years of seeing athlete endorsements* is any indication, the vast majority of endorsements by athletes are for products or services far afield from their sport. Most endorsements by athletes will be for car dealerships, real estate firms, investment firms, and misc retail establishments.

*In the early 1960s I was watching TV commercials featuring various Detroit Lions modeling hats from Louis the Hatter on the pre-game shows preceding Lions game broadcasts.

schreibee

May 16th, 2020 at 1:43 PM ^

You never owned any Jordans (or maybe hated Jordan so much you bought the Reebok Pumps, as I did, just so everybody could see where you stood?!)

Or selected the equipment of your chosen sport/pastime based on who used them that you admired or wanted to emulate?

Whether Earl Anthony, Ted Williams or Tiger Woods? Never?

That would be surprising Don!

befuggled

May 17th, 2020 at 2:04 PM ^

I was a sports fan as a kid and I had Michigan gear, Lions gear and a goddamn Michigan Panthers T-shirt when I was in high school. I wouldn’t have turned down the Kaline bat or glove or whatever, but I never had any of that stuff. I always felt the label just mean it cost more.

Some people just don’t care about that.

Other people do. I work with a guy whose a huge LeBron fan, to the point where his favorite team is whoever LeBron is playing for. I know he has the LeBron Nikes and multiple LeBron jerseys and I frankly wouldn’t be surprised if he had an entire LeBron wardrobe. 

ERdocLSA2004

May 17th, 2020 at 10:23 AM ^

A wise man once said, something is worth as much as one is willing to pay.  Good luck regulating this.  On a side note, women’s gymnastics has some high rollers.

Good luck figuring out what equipment most athletes really use.  Racquet sports, golf clubs, skiers, even basketball players use equipment that is either older or custom made to them but it is patterned/painted to look like the equipment they are being paid to market.  

Don

May 16th, 2020 at 9:47 PM ^

I don’t golf. I don’t play basketball. I bought my last baseball glove in 1978—long before your daddy dribbled down your momma’s thigh—because I liked the way it fit my hand and my wallet. The fact that it had Catfish Hunter’s name on it could not have been more irrelevant, especially since I was a Tiger fan.

highlow

May 16th, 2020 at 4:11 PM ^

I don't think it's all that. Brands care a lot about being "top of mind." e.g. Saban always has to have a Coke with him at his press conferences. I don't think that's because Coke thinks people will buy Coke because Saban likes it, but because it reminds people about Coke so the next time they're at the grocery store they'll pick up a two-liter.

Similarly "going to Disneyworld" at the super bowl, right? I don't think Disneyworld expects people to value the athlete's opinion of Disneyworld; they instead want to remind people that Disneyworld is a place they can/should visit.

bronxblue

May 16th, 2020 at 12:23 PM ^

Interesting stuff.  I do think it underestimates, for example, how much money some basketball players would make on the open market.  I'd be interested, for example, to see how they would have computed Zion's value.  

CalifExile

May 16th, 2020 at 1:09 PM ^

There are a lot of fit girls out there who aren't athletes.But, you sound like a sharp guy who's up to speed on modern culture, tell me about all the professional female athletes who are raking in the big bucks making commercials.

highlow

May 16th, 2020 at 3:18 PM ^

If you're including endorsements, I'd rather be Sharapova or a Williams twin than an average NFL player. (Simone Biles? Megan Rapinoe?) 

More generally, w/r/t endorsements, there's lots of stuff that we (middle-aged white dudes, I'm going to assume) just don't see. Just because you and I don't see them endorsing anything, doesn't mean they don't.

CalifExile

May 16th, 2020 at 5:36 PM ^

I may turn out to be way off, but my expectation is that the biggest impact of NCAA NIL reform (after the Madden type stuff) will be for star FB and BB players. A booster who owns a car company will pay the QB to appear in an ad. It will come to be an expectation at that school. Delivery companies will pay RBs, security companies will pay DBs, movers, the OL.

I think you're right that the top female stars can expect to make more than the average FB player, but the average NFL player will probably have more opportunities for endorsements than the average WNBA player.

highlow

May 16th, 2020 at 7:09 PM ^

When's the last time you've seen an ad from, like, a backup nose tackle? Literally the only NFL endorsements I can think of are from quarterbacks, #1 options, pro-bowl level players, and people with "personalities". Hell, we just saw from the Kawhi / Jordan Brand saga that merely being a top-5 player really isn't enough for the real $$$, you've gotta have a following / active "brand."'

And re: stars, your whole point at the beginning of this thread is "it's bullshit that there are a few gymnasts on this list." All we're looking at are female star athletes right now!

CalifExile

May 16th, 2020 at 9:35 PM ^

I don't have any expertise on this. I just look at where all the big money scandals are in the NCAA: FB and MBB, and guess that's where the money will flow under this new system. There are people with money who are willing to spend it to have athletes in those sports go to their school.

Gulogulo37

May 16th, 2020 at 7:21 PM ^

I don't have a subscription to The Athletic but Nicole Auerbach had a piece about this. They talk about it on the Audible podcast if you know that one. I thought like you. And yeah there will definitely be some local commercials with star players, but being an influencer on Instagram or elsewhere is where ad people expect them to make money. I think it's easier to be one than you or I or many others assume. I had a student who was an influencer. Not a supermodel but good looking. Probably just had rich parents and took all sorts of high quality photos in exotic locales. Posed with different cosmetics and lotions. And she wasn't a star athlete on a college team. Did my student make half a mil a year? I doubt it. But probably something, and with less appeal than a star gymnast.

highlow

May 16th, 2020 at 9:08 PM ^

TY for rec, great article.

https://theathletic.com/1796999/2020/05/07/college-athlete-name-image-likeness-value/

I'm still so confused by this discussion, though! Like I always thought every CFB fan understood NIL as just a legal way to pay people to come to school, not actually a way for them to monetize their image. Does anyone else think that these are going to be "no-show-jobs" rather than a serious advertising campaign? 

Blue_by_U

May 16th, 2020 at 1:19 PM ^

said it before and I'll repeat it again...the blogosphere here has their head up their ass thinking NIL is going to bring Michigan football to NCAA dominance...it's not that simple, and the pandora's box is open for business. TITLE IX will ensure the field is somehow leveled and it will drain many athletic departments...one way or another. Minor sport athletes will be part of that cut as well. It's not as simple as athlete FB gets his and everyone else...too bad. I guarantee it won't be as simple as most here think...because...NCAA.. NOTHING is simple with those idiots.

Keep in mind, while most here are rah rah football, there is a HUGE following for many women's sports, volleyball, gymnastics, etc as well. It's not as simple as Dylan McCaffrey is banking cash and that's that. Heck look at our softball program and the status Hutch has built.

Blue_by_U

May 16th, 2020 at 2:33 PM ^

local private entity gave a generous donation to upgrade press box, locker room, redo the field for the baseball program. There was some mild vested interest, as one of the sons partnered with the investor was a baseball alum and gave back to the program. 

Softball saw all the progress and said...uh where's ours? The school said, well go find a donor and we are all set. The softball program hired a team of lawyers, and within a year, the SCHOOL was ordered to provide the same opportunity and upgrades out of SCHOOL funding...just call it a hunch based on past experience. It may not be apples to apples...but when money gets involved the evil comes out in people. I'd love to think it won't happen...but NCAA.

pugboy

May 16th, 2020 at 1:20 PM ^

If so many of these players think they are worth so much, then they should go pro right out of high school.  If they do sign with a college, then half the money they make in endorsements goes to the college, and the other half can be divided amongst their teammates.

schreibee

May 16th, 2020 at 2:09 PM ^

Pug, the fact you read Mgoblog and this article specifically, shows you follow sports enough to know the NBA & NFL don't allow athletes to go their leagues straight from HS!

This year, for the 1st time in many years, they are allowing hoops players to skip the 1 year rule and play in their developmental league. 

And word is they'll be allowing them back into the draft in time for Emoni Bates.

The NFL has had none such discussions I'm aware of.

So the players can't just go pro as you suggest as of now.

And I have some ideas how we should allocate YOUR funds you might be interested in!

OSUMC Wolverine

May 16th, 2020 at 3:26 PM ^

they cannot go pro right now out of high school just as i cannot practice medicine straight out of high school.  their are dues to be paid in almost every profession. internships residencies and apprenticeships are examples where you are far more productive than what  you are reimbursed.  i hope no one is arguing a first year resident or a new apprentice electrician should be paid what a properly trained physician or electrician should be paid. 

highlow

May 16th, 2020 at 9:15 PM ^

There's a difference here; nobody would hire you as a resident straight out of high school. People definitely would hire kids to play pro basketball out of high school (see Kobe Bryant, e.g.). In many sports sub-18 year olds are routinely hired (Euro soccer, hockey, baseball, basketball outside the U.S.). 

I also don't think there's anything good about underpaying residents and am not sure why you do? You can believe both that they should not be paid as much as attendings and that they shouldn't be "far more productive than what they are reimbursed." 

OSUMC Wolverine

May 16th, 2020 at 11:31 PM ^

residents are not underpaid, nor are other persons learning on the job. what i am saying is they, the residents and other persons in training, are paying for specialized training on the job by being paid less than professional training them.  their productivity can be high because they can be specifically tasked jobs requiring skills they already possess and they have the safety net of a licensed professional overseeing their work.

 

as far as the issue of they can be hired into some professional sports straight out of high school...we are discussing the ones that did not get drafted out of.high school...the ones that needed more training in the eyes of the professional scouts.  hence the comparison to an internship residency or apprenticeship.

.

highlow

May 17th, 2020 at 10:27 AM ^

You just said they're far more productive than they're reimbursed. That's underpayment, full stop. They generate tremendous value for the hospital relative to what they're paid, and the training helps them generate value for the hospital (and stay in compliance with federal laws, natch). Besides, the government chips in via DME payments for residents. It's just very difficult to imagine that residents are anything other than a huge accounting positive for the hospital. 

You literally cannot be drafted into the NFL until 3 years after your high school class graduated. You literally cannot be drafted into the NBA until a year after your high school class graduated.