NIL, Big 10 Expansion, and General Musings Q&A
Figured with all that is going on in college sports, I could stop by to help answer any board questions. For the folks who do not know me-- I have been around the board for a little while popping up when I have knowledge on specific subjects, or other general knowledge. I'm not an insider, and I don't claim to have inside info about the team. My knowledge comes from a long time working in the industry and is from people all over: agents, coaches, current/former players, and support staff. So it is mostly an amalgamation of all of that info and not just one specific thing that I am hearing.
- My knowledge of the team is more on a few specific players. So I don't know who's been getting reps, nor do I know any super secret breakout players.
- I imagine I will be getting the most questions on NIL, but I've posted extensively on this in the past, so I may refer to go back to some of my answers from last summer to avoid putting the same thing out there.
- One big takeaway from all things NIL is that the current system is untenable. What is happening right now will not be the way it operates going forward. I can promise you that-- the structure is going to change.
- NIL in general is great in getting kids money that deserve it, but there's a negative trickle down effect and without any regulations it has made teenagers ripe for exploitation.
- Big 10 and other college expansion is one big game of telephone. A few people know and those people certainly aren't telling anyone. USC and UCLA both didn't even know the other was applying to the Big 10 until a few weeks ago. So this idea that people have intimate knowledge of the landscape is whimsical. That being said there are people who know a few things about a few programs. Just be leery of someone who claims to know what the Big10 is thinking.
I'm happy to do my best to answer any questions throughout the day today. Feel free to leave them below and I will get to them when I have some breaks.
We're also pretty much the only country in the world that operates under a salary cap arrangement in its major sports. Not seeing we shoud emulate this, but European soccer fits the exact opposite of the model you're advocating and seems to be doing...fine?
I'm not too versed in that model, but from what I know doesn't all of the development fall on the teams themselves? So it would be like the NY Giants had their own youth team. And also aren't there like a million clubs? Development is spread out across the world in a way it wouldn't work in the US.
Yes, the pro teams seem to have their own in-house youth clubs.
I follow it a tiny bit, and people definitely seem to have issues with the number of oligarchs with shady backgrounds buying up clubs as playthings, too.
I don't think it's an awesome model to follow, but I could see us going that way more than the more egalitarian way I think some people are expecting CFB will go.
I don't know, but OSU, UT, A&M, Miami, Bama... have all figured this out, so why can't we?
Same reason as always. Football factories are willing to do whatever it takes to compete, regardless of any "rules" that might be in place. This is not the Michigan way.
Thankfully we should have a pretty good season this year anyway, and presumably that will buy us some time for the new B16 to set up some universal guidelines around NIL.
If you're a Big Ten purist, 2024 and seasons beyond aren't really going to be recognizable college football. So let's just gear up for these last two years, which hopefully will include two more victories against OSU.
If this blows up in MSU's face and is an abject disaster what did they really crater? Oh no, the stadium filled with Rocket Mortgage signs and trash blowing through the field isn't filled? If Michigan does that and it craters it's the biggest story in College Football and we're the laughingstock back to the Rich Rod/Hoke era. I just don't think the juice is worth the squeeze at this moment.
We ARE a football factory and have been for 100 years.
We need to stop pretending we are an Ivy League team. It fools almost nobody and annoys the hell out of the rest of us.
Why do you think they've "figured it out"? Because their classes are ranked highly?
I think the counterpoint is that no one has figured it out:
- we don't know even know exactly what any of those teams are really doing because none of the deals are public - it's all rumors
- we don't know how existing players will gel with highly paid freshmen, or in general how highly paid freshmen will perform
- we don't know if the $millions will be available again at the same levels for 4+ years in a row
- even if *someone* addressed the above, who is the central authority making the decisions about who gets what?
I disagree because I think you can have your cake and eat it, too, here:
- Guarantee every player that signs with U-M gets $100K per year (or whatever minimum amount). That way, recruits will know that they're going to get at least something (quite a bit, really).
- Keep the incentive thing they're currently touting for guys who are already on the team.
I feel like adding #1 would allay the concerns of kids who want to make sure they're getting paid up-front. This would allay that concern while also not creating the locker-room dynamic that's being discussed here.
Totally agree with this. It's possible to take the approach that Michigan is taking while also giving players at least something up front. And who knows if they actually are getting anything.
$100K is probably too much. But even if you could guarantee $15K - which is $1,250 per month for every scholarship player. That's enough to go from broke college student to having some spending money. Then if you have success on the field, you're really bringing in the big dollars.
That would seemingly not ruffle any feathers in the locker room while still giving players something up front.
Sorry to poop in your cooler, but $100k under the table would've gotten you a low/mid 4-star a couple of years ago. The way the market is now, I'm not sure that gets anyone to sign-up. Michigan in a way is doing that by pointing to what Blake Corum made last year, but you'd need many multiples of $100k to have that effect you are looking for. Again as I said in a previous post, the cost of the brick just went up.
I agree 100% with this approach - both in the goal and likely impact on the market - and am working hard to bring it to fruition very shortly. This complements existing star player NIL efforts and makes those efforts even more impactful.
The framework for doing so in a legitimate, repeatable and scalable way requires a new approach. Every booster or NIL collective that has done this - at much smaller scale - is under NCAA microscope because it is a sham transaction with no underlying value for service.
Also who's even doing the negotiating? Who is rep'ing the school. You have all of these shady 'agents' for the HS'ers but who are they negotiating with on the other end? The schools are not supposed to be directly involved...but then its the school that is trying to manage the roster. You have collectives that are kind of middle men but tilted in the direction of the schools, but not under the schools control. The collectives have an agenda that in many cases is not going to be in 100% alignment with the school. The agents have a agenda that may not be 100% aligned with the best interests of the player.
Its a recipe for disaster...
And all the people bitching about UM's NIL approach don't have any answers except fire the (some elses) money cannon and do what A&M is doing....but there is no way what A&M is doing sustainable in an era of free and easy transfers. There are going to be ALOT of Quinn Ewers collecting checks as a Freshman at one school and transferring to another without even playing a down. The richest kids on the team are not going to have the patience to wait their turn when their next payday is dependent upon making a name for themselves right away. I imagine half way through the season a portion of the lockerroom will tune out and start preparing for their next move by listening to other programs and 'agents'.
Not to mention that these are supposed to be students, with classes and eligibility to consider...not professionals.
If things don't change and structure isnt put in place then throw out the the idea of amateurism and much of what makes them students.
Nightmare.
Two options:
1) Here's $9 Million dollars today. We would like you to play here for the next three years and you could earn more if you do well.
2) At some point in year 1 if you do really well, you'll get $1M. By year 2, you will get $3M, By year 3, you will get $6M. And if you stay for a fourth year, you could get $8M.
If you want to argue straight dollars, Option 2 is a far better option. If you need money now, are worried about getting injured, or want to invest that money to get a better return over those three years, Option 1 is a far better option.
I get why Harbaugh, Warde, and the current players love option 2, but it feels a bit like Karl Malone arguing for the rookie salary cap so the older players can keep more of the money. He got his money in the end, but didn't make many friends other than all the old guys who were retiring soon.
The Michigan way may work out better long term, but it will significantly reduce the pool of people willing to consider it.
You see this in the pro ranks with the "prove it" contracts. Low on the front end with high incentives.
Same with some coaching contracts as well.
Well said, and agree on what you said. But what if I told you that option 1 is no longer an option in 12 months? Would that change your thoughts? That's the discussions that Alabama, Clemson, UGA, etc are having right now. If we offer that up (over what they already offered guys a few years ago :P) you're looking at an insane number. Bama ain't offering up $8 million to a QB who threw in an underwear Olympics in front of Trent Dilfer at the Elite 11, when they have the Heisman winning QB on their roster.
When it comes to college sports, I never underestimate the levels of greed and corruption people are willing to go to. If Saban thought adding a Freshman QB to the roster could help the team win (now and in the future), you better believe he, along with the financial backing system, is going to make it happen.
I've learned you don't make decisions based on factors which don't have a realistic time table tied to them. No one knows when changes to the NIL landscape will happen. It could be the end of this year, it could be never. If Michigan knows there is a specific authoritative change or action which will take place within 12 months, fine, run your program how you want regardless of what everyone else is doing. If they think something will happen because it probably should, they will be waiting a long, long, long, long time and they will fall significantly behind.
No one that's being honest with themselves would take option 2 here. Literally no one. You'd be a goddam fool to do it.
Watched something last night where Cowherd and Klatt said that the only other Big10 expansion offer would be to ND. No UW or Oregon because they're not going to expand the overall pie TV deal pie enough to make sense.
Heard anything on these two schools?
On the blog, they're considered a no brainer to add, but Eugene/Portland market probably isn't going to move the needle like LA does.
I'm out of my depth on who the Big 10 is targeting. And that's why I say to be careful to trust people because there's so much out there right now. Just don't take anything as gospel, but I'm always hesitant of someone putting a top 4 list of who the Big 10 is targeting.
My opinion is that the Big 10 should focus back on the East Coast and let USC/UCLA be your standalones in the west. Oregon to me would be a terrible addition. It's impossible to fly to as it's remote, and in my opinion the only way they would get into the Big 10 is if they agree to take a smaller piece of the pie. Washington I would have some time for as it's in a big city and it feels like it would fit in from a brand perspective.
The Big 10 doesn't have to add anyone-- they will be selective. But if it were me my first two calls are to ND and Clemson.
Has been discussed elsewhere but Clemson is probably a non-starter. Aside from different academic/cultural fit and being yet another isolated outpost... they might not move the needle enough in terms of viewership (especially outside of football). They have obviously had a good football team the last few years, but is that likely to be the case 10-20 years from now? USC & Texas looked to be on unstoppable *football* trajectories back in the mid 2000s and then floundered. Fortunately they still had value based on their large audience and success in other sports. Not sure Clemson has much else besides baseball... which isn't exactly a major college revenue driver.
They are probably the best chance outside of GT and FL St. I would prefer those 2 over anyone else in the ACC.
NC is a great market, but you aren't just getting NC OR Duke, or either of them would be a slam dunk. Together I don't think they are worth it. Wake Forest is nothing, and unless NC State is bigger there than I think, I can't imagine they bring the TV sets.
VA also has no point, as we have a presence in the DMV with Maryland, which is where everyone in VA lives that matters for subs.
Clemson does have a long history, even if they have only truly been relevant recently and back in the 80s. It might get you most of the Carolinas in TV.
Honestly, if I'm the Big 10 I'm standing pat unless ND needs a dance partner.
Clemson is a pretty good academic university.
Clemson is a non-AAU school that is terrible academically. That isn't happening. Not a chance. And they would be a better fit in the SEC.
Respect your views a ton but personally I would call ND and Stanford. They are already rivals and both are obviously strong academically. Plus plus they both have large stadiums even if Stanford doesn’t sell out very often.
ND and Miami would be my two picks
Georgia and Texas would be real coups...at multiple levels. Now that is dreaming!
What if it's some combo of ND, Stanford, UNC, Clemson? Clemson and UNC gets you Atlanta/Charlotte markets and that would basically give you the top 7 TV markets and easily the biggest draws. UNC basketball and Clemson football give you something that UW or Oregon cannot.
Someone posted this elsewhere I think.. but it's not really about the television market anymore. With all the streaming services the way they are it's more about viewership interest than location.
If a ton of people wanna watch Oregon football it doesn't matter where they are located, they'll tune in. Seems like the floodgates for 4 super conferences, or less, have opened so let's take UW and Oregon too! Should make for some more compelling match-ups going forward at the very least.
The TV deals are still big, and the Big10 is negotiating a new deal right now, so while it's not the only metric to go by, it's still a relevant one.
I think the idea is now that UCLA/USC have moved on, that there's only one more national brand left on the board, which is ND. Oregon and Washington are very regional, as it Clemson, even with it's recent success.
This is a year-old but is far more valuable of a tool of evaluating teams:
https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-program…
It’s nice taw data, but some of that data gets skewed by what teams are on tv most often or by quality of the opponent, it might be nice to know what each team’s floor was, like in their 5 lowest rated games each season.
That list is great. It's not all the data needed, for example Rutgers brings a presence in NYC whether anyone is watching them or not; but check out the Top 20.
- Ohio State (5.19M)
- Alabama (5.09M)
- Michigan (4.18M)
- Notre Dame (3.61M)
- LSU (3.22M)
- Auburn (3.12M)
- Georgia (2.91M)
- Oklahoma (2.90M)
- Clemson (2.67M)
- Penn State (2.55M)
- Florida (2.46M)
- Wisconsin (2.27M)
- Texas (2.269M)
- Florida State (2.23M)
- Michigan State (2.20M)
- Southern Cal (1.98M)
- Texas A&M (1.851M)
- Tennessee (1.849M)
- Oklahoma State (1.64M)
- Mississippi (1.61M)
Honestly surprised Sparty is that high.
They do play Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State every year and ND often. I'm not bashing Sparty here, but if you remove those, MSU is probably like a B1G west team wrt viewership.
I am not bashing sparty either but your view makes sense. Their stadium is not full even for good games, of course except for Michigan games.
maybe im just out of the loop on this but do you have any idea (not specifics but generally) - when we hear Player X is getting a $4M offer from a school to sign as a recruit, what does that actually mean? Are they actually inking NIL deals with whatever apparatus is set up for that school that is a contractual level obligation/guarantee that they'll get that money no matter what? Upfront? Are they promising it over 2-3 years? The rumblings I've heard of past bag arrangements seemed pretty straightforward, but NIL feels like its going to be different.These are the first two classes to come in with NIL on the table. Im wondering how these agreements are structured to deal with the Quinn Ewers of the world.
This could be a whole blog post, but I'll try to be concise here:
- Reported numbers are never actual numbers. When Schefter tweets out about an NFL free agent deal he's telling you from the agent side and it's always the "best case scenario" with bonuses/non-guaranteed money. Same situation applies here.
- When a guy signs with a collective it's a marketing advance. You give us your NIL rights for X dollars. What happens there is that you essentially become an employee of the Collective. You work off your debt by doing various things for brands, auto signings, appearances, all arranged by the Collective. You can see how this all of sudden can become an issue if say a guy tears his ACL and is out for a year or two.
- From what I've seen the money is not all up front. The deals are structured for the benefit of the collective. It may be an $8 MM deal but it's $2 MM every year if every incentive is hit. Without getting into any specifics I can tell you I am shocked at how one-sided these contracts are. There's going to be a lot of kids burned by these deals.
- Ewers did not make a million dollars from OSU last year, even though that's the "reported" number
Are these collectives covering themselves against transfers? I have to think they are. No way they are putting this type of money on the line with some safeguards. I think it is dependent on signing a letter or intent? Not transfering? Buy outs? Obviously they can't stop kids from transfering since that is a NCAA rule, but they can void the contract.
Kind of has the feeling of people trying to break into music that sign really one-sided record lable contracts because they are so excited about fullfilling the dream, and they get the short end after the fact.
Yes-- I've seen clauses that state that your rights stay with the school for a specified period of time. They are not friendly to the athlete. Some even have penalties if they leave before the contract ends. So yes you can transfer, but they would still own their rights unless they paid for a buyout of the contract.
That's actually a perfect way of comparing it. You sign something that seems like a good deal at the time because something is better than nothing.
And isn't that straight up pay for play? NIL isn't supposed to be limited to a particular player being at a particular school, right? Maybe I'm wrong, but that's been my understanding.
Yes they will tell you there's no clause in there stipulating that you have to play for that school...but cmon if you sign a deal with a UT collective, you're going to UT
Do you think the "burns" are going to hurt recruiting?
I'd imagine schools will start offering consultation on NIL contract negotiations.
To clarify, are you referencing burns as in players busting and wasting money, or Burns as in Mr. Burns and his pile of money from the Simpsons?
Players signing terrible NIL deals and being screwed if they get injured.
100% the UT collective has just screwed themselves if this kid is not a star QB. That's why I don't get the rush to publicize it in the way that they've done it. If you want to give a QB some money, fine. But why are you telling everyone in the world the terms of the deal. Cool, so you let kids know you're open for business? Dude everyone in the game knows that. It's just stupid. And it's not just UT either, it's Florida, Michigan State, Miami, Oregon, etc. Putting lambos on the field and pretending like these kids are going to drive them around campus. Let's see how that baby rides around in the potholes of EL. The whole thing is fake and a show, and there's zero substance behind it.
I can see the headline now in the Knoxville News, "$8 million Star QB rides bench as UT loses their 2nd game" The coach is going to be asked at every press conference, boosters are going to be up his ass if he's not starting. And then what happens if he busts? You're going to have the crazy fans threatening him on Twitter-- calling a bum and a loser who stole $8 MM. To me this is all insane, probably because I was just used to the old way where nobody said a damn thing about any of this.
“… nobody said a damn thing about this”
question: in general terms, what was Michigan doing in regards to paying for players? I have maintained they did little or nothing but at least some have said that is not true. Love some input on that issue.
Players have always been getting money under the table. Whether it was an agent or someone else, there definitely were players getting paid at Michigan. Now, it 100% was not school sanctioned. I can tell you stories of some of the biggest players at Michigan not having money to put gas in their tanks. Did they get free drinks or food or other perks, hell yeah. But besides their Pell Grants they weren't getting anything above walking around money.
Maybe it’s what I wanted to hear, but during my time in school that was absolutely true, and I have maintained nothing has changed at Michigan in that regard.
and thank you very much for spending so much of your day on topics and issues that are important to us Michigan fans. You are a champ to be so good-natured about it too. I apologize for a couple of folks that make snarky comments, but they are a severe minority versus the rest of us.
What should Michigan change in regards to recruiting/NIL? They can't/don't want to go full Texas A&M but there must be other things they can do. Whatever they are doing now clearly isn't working regardless of what the program/coaches say.
I've said this before NIL even came to fruition-- if I am Michigan I am throwing the full weight of the Michigan brand to have the best team in the nation to prepare Michigan men and women to be successful after college. Put your money where your mouth is-- have Stephen Ross have a fellowship with 2-5 student athletes a year where they are brand ambassadors for Equinox and they get paid to interact with the brand. We have more CEO's/Execs than almost any other school, I would tap into that.
And while you can't arrange specific deals, I would have a team that is dedicated to helping guys grow their following, set themselves up after college, and deal with how to manage NIL money.
Here's exactly what I would do:
Have the law school send 2-3 students each year and 1 faculty advisor whose job is to review contracts at any notice for any student athlete. Have them create a contract template that each student can use so they don't get screwed.
Have B-School do the same thing but focused on branding. They work with the athletes on best practices, how to monetize their social media, make connections, etc.
Hire a few folks in financial planning, social media experts, and branding. Let them work to develop individual plans for each person, regardless of how much money they will make. Help set them up for success so that the ones that go to the NFL are setup financially and know how to take care of their money and the others to get prepared to work for the best companies when they graduate.
To me it's the biggest no-brainer. If you spend all of this money on the top coaches, trainers, etc, why wouldn't you do the same in other areas? The pitch would be come to Michigan, not only will we develop you as a student athlete, we're going to GUARANTEE that you will be farther ahead than any other student athlete when you graduate.