NIL is a SHAM.

Submitted by RadOWon on April 12th, 2024 at 3:36 PM

I keep wondering how the two entities that have been profiting billions of dollars a year, the TV networks and the Universities, have somehow slithered out of being part of the monetization of college athletes? It has somehow fallen solely on outside support and donations from fans and donors, how TF did that happen? 

ESPN, FOX, NBC etc ALL  profiting BILLIONS of dollars  a year off the backs of college athletes for 50-60 years. All the major universities, receiving hundreds of millions of dollars over a few years, building their athletic and educational infrastructure off the backs of college athletes who until recently would be kicked off the team if someone bought them a cheeseburger. 

How have these two entities escaped even being part of, if not completely responsible for the monetization of college athletes? Why are we all sheep, not questioning this and accepting this as the new normal because now the athletes are at least making some money, even thought the two biggest profiteers get off scot-free?

Are they paid actors who should be compensated as such. How much do actors on sitcoms and other TV series get paid from the networks? Why are they different? 

Just a thought, call me crazy.

Amazinblu

April 12th, 2024 at 3:46 PM ^

It’s a long story - involving amateurism and avoiding improper benefits - as you probably know.

what really disappoints me is - that neither Michigan nor the B1G have put together a straw man proposal that would address sharing of media revenues in a manner that would address ALL sports and fit within Title IX requirements.   The key is - to think through this so legal challenges would be overcome.

My point is - men and women, ALL sports - I’m supportive of media revenue sharing with student athletes.  However, I also believe there needs to be some form of commitment from the student athlete to the university.

ChiBlueBoy

April 12th, 2024 at 4:06 PM ^

So you want this to: 

  • compensate appropriately athletes in revenue sports from university and media sources
  • also compensate non-revenue sports
  • comply with Title IX
  • build in a binding commitment from students to the universities, and
  • overcome all likely legal challenges.

There may be a plan out there that does all this, but it's with someone a lot smarter than me, and I think about legal compliance for a living.

RadOWon

April 12th, 2024 at 4:34 PM ^

I hate to say this but I almost feel like it will need to start with players unions, either entirely or separately. People love to hate on unions, even in Michigan but I believe every pro sports league has one that represents it's members. Also, if people are still denying these are professional athletes, it's a bit naive from my perspective. 

I think we need to completely scrub the previous belief system and start from scratch to rebuild it.  

Amazinblu

April 12th, 2024 at 10:45 PM ^

I didn’t say this would be an easy solution - obviously, it’s not.  However, the path to “something which addresses this” - must start somewhere.  It would be great to see Michigan / B1G attempt to do something about it, since - this issue isn’t going away.

A small note, if I may.  I do not suggest University resources fund this - just the media agreements.

ALL sports - perhaps a “base plus” model where each student athlete receives “$X” as a base and variable or “plus” based on a model or algorithm.

The commitment from the student athlete would be for a period of time - perhaps two years.  And, this might be a sliding scale - one year commitment results in “X”, a two year commitment equals 1.5 X, etc.

Overcoming legal challenges IS the hurdle - which will incorporate Title IX.
Again, it’s no5 easy - but, Michigan has a lot I’d smart people in a variety of academic specialties.

Amazinblu

April 13th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^

Thank you for the clarification.   Many schools athletic departments have “stand alone” budgets - and, I am / was unsure if the media agreement is with the Athletic Department or University.

I am not implying the University endowment should be involved or contribute to student athlete compensation.

TruBluMich

April 12th, 2024 at 9:22 PM ^

The federal government could step in and push the NCAA and, more importantly, conferences into action without needing direct negotiation. They could force the NCAA's hand and pay players from Army, Navy, and Air Force for playing football.

There's absolutely no way the NCAA would target the service academies—at least, I hope they're not that clueless. But they tend to prove me wrong time and time again. Plus, this approach sidesteps the entire Title IX debate since service academies are exempt from it.

As for other universities, players could simply sign contracts with their conferences, allowing them to receive NIL money from the conference. Sure, there'd be more details to work out, and the SEC would probably figure out a way to exploit it, but what we've got now is a mess, and this idea tackles all the excuses I've heard against or why they can't pay players.

Note: I'm no legal expert, so there's a chance what I'm saying is impossible. But from what I've researched, none of it seems to be explicitly forbidden.

SagNasty

April 12th, 2024 at 3:54 PM ^

Was this possibly triggered from the email today about the event at the spring game? 

$125 a person to be able to take a picture with the trophies. 

Hail-Storm

April 15th, 2024 at 10:20 AM ^

I hadn't seen that, but what a way to alienate fans of lesser means. The Stanley Cup was brought to Plymouth Cultural Center for kids and families to get a picture with free.  I love the culture around the Stanley Cup and how it travels with players. 

Seeing the University (public) charge so much seems crazy.  I'm hoping it is just now, and there will be other opportunities for fans to get pictures with it for free. 

LSAClassOf2000

April 12th, 2024 at 3:55 PM ^

I keep wondering how the two entities that have been profiting billions of dollars a year, the TV networks and the Universities, have somehow slithered out of being part of the monetization of college athletes? It has somehow fallen solely on outside support and donations from fans and donors, how TF did that happen? 

Well, I think the way to put that burden back on the schools - where it should be if this is to continue, IMHO - is to do something which may be somewhat unpopular in some circles and make them fully vested university employees (you get some level of mutual commitment in the process, I would say - minimum contract terms a la pro sports? There are ways to do this, I think) with benefits which include some structured deals regarding NIL and, in theory, make fan funding unnecessary since the marketing component would then be a function of the position through some means. If that means a school has to use their TV cut as the de facto hiring budget, then fine, if you ask me. I am fine with NIL but burdening fans with the expenses, even in part, is unacceptable to me. 

Denard's Pro Career

April 12th, 2024 at 4:30 PM ^

I agree with this. One thing that has always struck me as particularly ridiculous is that many of the big-time college football programs (think us, LSU, Texas, etc.) have MUCH nicer facilities than many NFL teams. (For example, the Bengals just became the last team in the NFL to build an indoor practice field, and it's just one of those inflatable white bubble domes.) This facility brinksmanship happens because universities are technically non-profit organizations, so they are required to spend all the money they're making off these kids. Why not take some of this facility money and use it to salary your players? There would be downsides (as with all solutions), but at least for the SEC and B1G (in other words, the only college football that's going to matter in 10 years) this should be workable.

JonnyHintz

April 12th, 2024 at 4:49 PM ^

When schools are building these state-of-the-art facilities, it’s typically done on the backs of major donors. Al Glick paid for 1/3 of Michigan’s practice facility on his own, with other donors chipping in for the rest. The scoreboard upgrades were on track to be funded entirely by private donations, though I don’t know if they ended up achieving the goal or not. 

RadOWon

April 12th, 2024 at 5:13 PM ^

I get that and I get that the TV revenue goes to support many other sports and educational programs but if they dont have the players then the money is gone. The old "you get a free education" argument is obsolete. When these players are generating billions of dollars a year for TV networks and universities and not receiving a penny from these entities, something is wrong. I'd much prefer the TV networks pay the players accordingly. 

JonnyHintz

April 12th, 2024 at 7:57 PM ^

I don’t really see what that has to do with claiming that if schools can afford these upgrades, they can afford to pay the players instead when the schools aren’t actually the ones footing the bill for the upgrades to begin with. Michigan isn’t spending $40 million of the university’s money to upgrade the scoreboards, they’re getting donors to foot the bill. 

But you’re never going to get the TV networks paying players until the players form a union and become contracted employees. Even then, it won’t be TV networks paying. It will be the schools paying from what they’re paid by the networks.

grumbler

April 13th, 2024 at 12:40 PM ^

The problem with making them employees is that the universities cannot run professional sports teams - such teams do not fit within the educational and research missions of the schools, and those missions are the only reasons why schools are tax-exempt.  The schools cannot force employees to be students unless being a student is a direct necessity to the job function (like it is for grad research and teaching assistants).

The arguments about athletes being worth millions "in a free market" and being paid thousands also doesn't make any sense.  If they were worth that much, then there would be lots of entities besides the universities bidding for their services.  That's how value is measured - by what someone is willing to pay.  The fact is that it is the uniforms that draw the eyeballs, not who is wearing them (though schools with better teams do make more on the margin than those with less-successful teams, the 4-8 Spartans still made 80% of the revenue of the 15-0 Wolverines).

The solution seems simple to me:  transition the wannabe professional athletes into a professional league, and leave college sports to the student-athletes.  Use existing employment law to force the NFL to abandon its restraint-of-trade rules on draft eligibility.  Have schools reuse to cooperate on privacy grounds in the NFL's attempts to determine eligibility of players.  This would force the NFL teams to afford players the opportunity to play as professionals when coming out of high school (or even before high school graduation).

Sure, that would drain away most of the best current college prospects, but that would be all to the good.  Those that go to school would do so because they want to go to school, not because that's the only way to get to the NFL.  They could be compensated for the time that they have to put into preparing to play in college, but this would not be at the level of the pro players.  Some TV money would be drained from the college game to pay for the new entry-level NFL league, but that would be just an added bonus.  College sports is choking to death on TV money.

RadOWon

April 12th, 2024 at 5:40 PM ^

Ha, nah but I think my concept is a bit more radical because JH wanted the NCAA to bare the brunt of the cost. I think the networks profiting billions without compensating a single actor/athlete/employee are who needs to pony up. 

 

-ESPN generated more than $16 billion in revenue and $2.9 billion in operating profit in Disney's fiscal year 2022- and that's JUST ESPN. 

RadOWon

April 12th, 2024 at 11:58 PM ^

I agree, the NCAA is particularly vile because they are in place only to ensure that the universities are able to continue to shirk the responsibility of paying the players, aka maintain the status quo. They do this under the guise of being a not for profit entity, when in fact the NCAA member institutions are are profiting grotesquely, to the point of allowing them to fund entire athletic departments. All this from the efforts of one group of unpaid players/actors/employees.

TheJuiceman

April 12th, 2024 at 4:19 PM ^

*Grabs tin foil hat from under the table and places it on head, but with a tilt, like Jay-Z.  

The NCAA has allowed things to spiral because it's their only means of exerting pressure. Letting shit run wild until fans have had enough of these "spoiled athletes", while Universities tire of contantly losing talent they've  invested in, is their survival strategy. 

They figure the schools and fans will eventually come crawling back, and order will be restored. 

To answer your question, the day the Universities pay, which imo is only a matter of time, will be the day the NCAA as we know it, dies. It's that simple. 

Hensons Mobile…

April 12th, 2024 at 4:33 PM ^

There's no plan or scheme from the NCAA. They are just letting the current carry them.

Charlie Baker seems pretty willing to try to find a place in the new reality. If I were him, I'd deregulate even further. The continued value of the NCAA would be:

  • Enforce rules around academic standards for athletes.
  • Enforce rules around practice hours and coaching limits.
  • Run tournaments.

I would allow schools to pay players directly and wash my hands of that issue. Let the schools and athletes sort out the legalities.