Jim Harbaugh on Michigan and NIL
I don't believe that I've come across this Coach Harbaugh quote here on this site. But, it perfectly illuminates the Michigan program's current NIL disposition. Although many fans vehemently disagree with the program's stance, the ongoing kerfuffle between 'Bama and A&M exposes how slippery the NIL slope truly is. In the article, the author expresses that Jim Harbaugh has been correct in his assessment of programs that "cheat".
I think players should be able to profit off of their name, image and likeness. But I don’t want to lose what Michigan is, and it’s a transformational experience, not a transactional experience. But with the NIL, it can become transactional. We’re not going to recruit players and be promising them money to come here.
https://michigan.rivals.com/news/column-love-him-or-hate-him-jim-harbaugh-was-right
I mean ok... "moral high ground" and all but if it costs you on the field I dunno what that gets ya.
Quote is also within a framework where Michigan won’t break the current rules/state law.
If paying players to come becomes legal in the state, I would expect the sentiment to evolve to “it’s a transformational experience not just a transactional experience”
Isn't MSU doing that exact same thing with their partnership with Rocket Mortgage? Rocket Mortgage is using a monthly finances to players who play MSU football and basketball, which is definitely a recruiting tool/advantage. If this is illegal in the state, how is MSU working around it?
It's not illegal. The state law doesn't really say shit.
It would be illegal if MSU as a university was (officially) actively involved in this agreement. Of course they "aren't", so it is a completely legal agreement between Rocket mortgage and the athletes.
While schools setting up these deals is not acceptable, every school is operating in a way that they can use this to their advantage without being involved on paper.
So, Jkidd, winning justifies leaving the "moral high ground?"
Sorry, but I don't think Michigan should stand for "win at all costs" or "the end justifies the means."
Sometimes, doing what it takes to win just isn't worth it.
Legally paying players like literally every other university is doing isn't worth it?
Then the school should drop to D2 or go full Ivy League if athletics aren’t going to be treated the same as those at over 100 other schools.
Why? I believe M will compete at a reasonably high a level whether they jump into the deep end of NIL or stay in the kiddie pool because Michigan has impenetrable brand value: good coaches will still come, good players will want to go to M regardless.
And that's exactly Jim and Michigan's point - making it more transactional will in fact dilute the brand value, deteriorating it's own competitive advantage that it almost lost during the RR era.
Wisconsin and Iowa and Penn State won't leapfrog Michigan's standing in the Big Ten just because of NIL.
*glances over at the Director's Cup standings*
perhaps athletics is more than just football and men's basketball...
Not to 90+% of college sports fans (including Michigan's) it's not!
Awesome to win the Director's Cup - but I'd trade 10 of those for a win in Cbus!
Awesome to win the Director's Cup - but I'd trade 10 of those for a win in Cbus!
Honest questions: Would you really? If so, why?
Uh yes, and because to 90% of Michigan fans football is what matters most, and why they became a fan in the first place and we haven't won in Columbus in 22 years.
I'd wager 90% of fans don't even know what the Directors Cup is.
But when it is explained... ? I think most Michigan fans want success across the board, not just in one sport. Yes, football holds a special place, and the OSU rivalry in particular, but still.
I don't think "if you come here you will get NIL opportunities" is morally superior to "here are the NIL opportunities we have ready for you when you get here."
I'll leave morality out of it, since I don't really see this as a fundamentally moral issue.
But I do think there is a pretty big substantive difference between the two scenarios you provide. One is saying 'if you come play here, you'll have a chance to earn money through NIL' whereas the other is saying 'here, let me give you a big pile of cash to come play here'.
The landscape has changed. Kids are going to go where the $$ are then, on to the next level for the big bucks. Sorry to see it evolve this way.
I agree that is the fundamental difference. Perhaps more accurately, one says 'if you come play here, you'll have a chance to earn money through NIL' whereas the other is saying 'here, let me give you a big pile of cash to come play here and you'll have a chance to earn more money on top of that through NIL'.
I also don't think "you will get NIL opportunities" is the same as "here kid, here's $1 million, come play for us", and I also don't think the intent of NIL is the latter (even if the NCAA isn't doing anything about it).
Parse all you wish about "moral superiority" - 1 is currently legal, the other isn't 🤷♂️
This isn't 1989. High end athletes are now given a choice between playing school and getting a real education or just don't bother them with this college degree bullshit... they want a piece of paper alright, specifically that's colored green. Pretending they are really students and want the total experience is a joke. It's laughable to think Hunter came back because of the student experience.
And make no mistake the moral high ground is being burnt to the ground and we ain't done here. In 2 or 3 years there will likely be unionization and a CBA, or there will be a system where players will be fully paid employees and be treating more as business partners with these universities. Mfan777 said it best, if you're not in you might as well be a D2 team or apply for Ivy League membership.
Pandora's box is open (not halfway either) and there's no way to close it. I am not taking sides here, it's just cold reality.
I think a CBA would make things a lot better, both practically and for reigning in the bad stuff. That’s how this thing gets structure and fairness, at least as much as there can be fairness in modern college football
Will also be a beautiful thing when the players have a seat at the table. Long way away as there isn’t any structure close to a union in place; hard to see any other type of organization being fair representatives for the players.
If you’re the only one, are you on the high ground? Or just stupid?
We're talking about paying players, not protecting Art Briles.
It seems to me the "moral high ground" in this case has been illusory for decades. The NCAA rules have had little to do with morality in college football and men's basketball. NCAA enforcement has been arbitrary, inconsistent and ineffectual. It's even worse with NIL. The state laws specific to this aren't really about morality either. They've always been about and are now about money and control.
That's one of the best explanations/descriptions of how we should view NIL that I've heard. Of course the players should benefit in some way but it shouldn't be to the detriment of the program and its values. I know everyone wants to win but at what cost?
The reports are the cost will be a billion dollars a year soon.
To be fair, this could theoretically cut down on, say, guys who get a million bucks to enroll for their senior year of high school and then transfer before they ever see the field.
Relax. He said paying players.
Schools aren't paying players any more than they already were paying players. NIL isn't about that.
He never said, a bunch of our top donors can't get together, build a $50M pot and pay players from that to "endorse" random products. Which is what Texas A&M is doing.
Word selection is important and in this case, he said he's not going to pay players. Great. Bet your ass most schools won't pay players.
What they will do, is basically have an unofficial GoFundMe ready for any kid they want to come to their school.
If right now I was a billionaire, I could offer any kid I want, whatever sum of money I want to endorse MaizeBlueA2GoBlog.com - I can't tell them to go to Michigan, but I can make it so that it's unspoken as to where they need to go if they take my millions to endorse my website.
Harbaugh isn't paying the kid. Michigan isn't paying the kid. They're not paying me either.
I'm doing it all on my own.
And Harbaugh didn't say anything that would suggest he wouldn't take the 5 stars I sent his way.
Said it before but recruiting will slip from 12th in the country to 12th in the country.
and this is probably close to correct. as a guy who played in college and a dad of a boatload of kids, 3 of whom have made college choices (2 to play, 1 turning down multiple offers), there is way more to picking schools than just money. will money make an impact? of course, and yes, we are going to lose out on a number of 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' candidates. just like we do now.
bottom line: not really diving into NIL will hurt us, but i don't think it's going to cause the sky to fall.
Epic humblebrag.
i hesitated on that, but the knowledge base is/was relevant to the post so it made sense (at least to me) to include it.
So, a relevant humblebrag then?
:)
Curious to see if it lets more A&M type schools dilute the talent pool from the OSU/UGA/Bama tier. Those schools have benefitted not only from their success, questionable recruiting practices, and an ever weakened NCAA, but also from rather prolonged down periods from schools like Miami, Florida State, Florida, Texas, USC, Michigan (until recently) and many others. If you combine a resurgence of those schools with NIL spreading out talent, it really may have unexpected effects on the landscape of college football. I suspect that 5 years from now this will all sort of even out and the shiny newness will wear off NIL deals and we will see some sort of normalcy and balance return. Who knows though! Wild West, baby!
There is a difference though. With the old rules, we were good-not-great bc we had (whether real or perceived) recruiting disadvantages -- no bag men (we hope at least), academic hurdles, cold weather, geographically not in a super talent-rich area, and so on.
With the new rules, this was our shot to finally have a huge recruiting advantage on-par or better than SEC schools being dirty, Texas having Texas HS talent pool, USC being in LA, and so forth. We had the opportunity to unleash a money cannon and alumni network that can really only be matched by a few colleges (Texas and TAMU primarily). So now the loss is greater than it was before. There is a wider disconnect between how we perform in recruiting, and what our recruiting ceiling is.
How far up the recruiting rankings will NIL allow Michigan State to now ascend? They didn't pay the 5 win former coach of the Colorado Buffaloes $95 million to be #2 in the state. And if they don't pay recruits well enough, they'll just bring 15 players each year through the portal. The ground is shifting below our feet.
But isn't the portal no sit rule gonna change eventually? Or are we stuck with it? I'm asking.
But imagine if UM really got behind NIL, they could rise all the way to #12. Like, the sky's the limit.
In terms of resources and alumni network the only schools with more NIL opportunity are Texas and Texas A&M. Maybe Oregon as well. Turning a top-3 advantage into 12-ish results must be the transformative experience that Harbaugh is referring to.
Cool but is that even in his span of control? If Ross or one of those other guys contacts a kid directly out of the portal and offers him a million dollars would Jim tell him to stop?
"Transactional vs. transformational" ------ I think about A LOT of life's questions and relationships in that particular context.
And JH is right. When interactions are primarily about the $$$, it's transactional. Which is fine in some cases --- transactional relationships DO grow the bank account.
But they're less likely to grow the person.
Like this particular turn of phrase from our Coach.
This is Michigan fer godssakes!
Would Harbaugh have taken the job 7 years ago if he was offered, say, $2mil, or decided again he wasn't feeling the love? How about the other coaches? Is coaching at Michigan transactional or transformational?
This sounds like another catchphrase for some M fans to latch onto to reinforce their attitude of moral superiority.
Many of these young athletes come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and are being asked to put their bodies on the line while the universities load up on transactions for their own benefit. And I don't think 'transactional' and 'transformational' are mutually exclusive. My son actually graduated from M net-positive (ok honestly, it wasn't by a lot, but still), so it was beneficial for him both transactionally and transformationally (and dad liked it as well) and he wasn't even an athlete.
The elite athletes most programs covet want to be transformed into NFL players, and desire benefits commensurate with their contributions. I don't see how that isn't fair when the whole system around them is so transactional.
Why can’t it be both? Enrich you personally, and financially. Idk. Doesn’t seem mutually exclusive to me 💁♂️
So if I decide that going to Coachella would be good for my soul AND that I can save money by sneaking in without paying, is that okay? It enriches me personally and financially.
Suppose you have 2 friends that asked if want you to go with them. You like both friends very much. One friend has an extra ticket and already paid for the hotel near the venu. The other friend wants to purchase tickets and split a room that's 30 miles from the venue. Who would most people go with?
Dear ohioSTATE, your message under mine suggests you're replying to my comment.
But my example is about dishonesty and yours is about two honest alternatives.
As for your question, it depends on the gender of each friend, and how friendly we are.
What's dishonest about getting paid to play football well?