NIL Recruiting News Megathread

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

3 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

People are finally getting it. 

That’s awesome to hear! Hopefully y’all’s work gets easier and easier and the money continues to flow 

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

 

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

 

 

[Not a Sock 2,308]

Man looking at the shit show going on in Gainesville makes me realize how fucked we would have been if NIL and the transfer portal happened just a few years earlier. Imagine that NIL and the transfer portal go live in 2015 and the people in charge of leading Texas through that change are Greg Fenves, Steve Patterson, and fucking Chuckles.

[tejas60 3,514]

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

 

 

[closetojumping 62,010]

33 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Are you aspiring towards LTtxfan range with the spammy X posts lately, BO&W? Please don't.

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

1 minute ago, closetojumping said:

Are you aspiring towards LTtxfan range with the spammy X posts lately, BO&W? Please don't.

Is this not "NIL Recruiting News Megathread" material? Or should I put it it in the transfer thread where it was posted after I posted it here by another user? Perhaps you should go to that thread and quote that user who posted in that thread as well.

[closetojumping 62,010]

Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

Is this not "NIL Recruiting News Megathread" material? Or should I put it it in the transfer thread where it was posted after I posted it here by another user? Perhaps you should go to that thread and quote that user who posted in that thread as well.

I didn't say anything about your first X post on this very page of this very thread. I guess you really, really wanted to make sure we all saw it.

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

2 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I didn't say anything about your first X post on this very page of this very thread. I guess you really, really wanted to make sure we all saw it.

I didn't x-post this? This is the only thread I posted this on as it was relevant to the meta thread title. 

[Askew 362]

11 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I didn't say anything about your first X post on this very page of this very thread. I guess you really, really wanted to make sure we all saw it.

 

7 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I didn't x-post this? This is the only thread I posted this on as it was relevant to the meta thread title. 

Off topic, but this is an example of why Elon Musk is an idiot. 

[Bodacious Bevo 3,572]

Spoilered text from the tweet. Poster is a UF booster so probably some bias

Spoiler

Often been reported that Rashada's UF NIL contract allowed either side to terminate it at ANY time for ANY reason. This is probably why it's not plead as a simple "breach of contract" case. VERY important distinction. Instead, it looks like a "tortious interference of contract" case, which means the underlying claim is that Rashada was "defrauded" out of his $9 million Miami NIL contract by people at UF who never had any intention of honoring a UF deal. This seems ridiculous to claim and impossible to prove, since clearly UF wanted Rashada to play for UF. Especially, if alleged, Rashada was given $150k to help get out of the Miami deal. What, UF people gave him $150k just to trick him out of his Miami deal but NOT to play for UF? Nonsense, he was not "defrauded" out of the Miami deal -- his family chose that path. Moral of the story is to never walk away from life-changing money for green(d)er pastures. The Rashada family clearly should have had an attorney advising them at the time and reviewing all contracts. No lawyer would have let them voluntarily leave a binding $9 million deal to sign one that could be terminated at will at any time. That's not a contract... it's a worthless piece of paper. UF exercised their option to terminate the deal BEFORE he signed a letter of intent, so he was free to sign elsewhere and get any deal he could... including Miami and the same $9 million deal... although one could understand why Ruiz may have not wanted any part of him by then. It sounds like the UF deal was terminated due to misunderstandings over compensation and exactly where it would come from. "Misunderstanding" is a LONG way from fraud.

 

[statsman 5,355]

21 minutes ago, Bodacious Bevo said:

Spoilered text from the tweet. Poster is a UF booster so probably some bias

  Hide contents

Often been reported that Rashada's UF NIL contract allowed either side to terminate it at ANY time for ANY reason. This is probably why it's not plead as a simple "breach of contract" case. VERY important distinction. Instead, it looks like a "tortious interference of contract" case, which means the underlying claim is that Rashada was "defrauded" out of his $9 million Miami NIL contract by people at UF who never had any intention of honoring a UF deal. This seems ridiculous to claim and impossible to prove, since clearly UF wanted Rashada to play for UF. Especially, if alleged, Rashada was given $150k to help get out of the Miami deal. What, UF people gave him $150k just to trick him out of his Miami deal but NOT to play for UF? Nonsense, he was not "defrauded" out of the Miami deal -- his family chose that path. Moral of the story is to never walk away from life-changing money for green(d)er pastures. The Rashada family clearly should have had an attorney advising them at the time and reviewing all contracts. No lawyer would have let them voluntarily leave a binding $9 million deal to sign one that could be terminated at will at any time. That's not a contract... it's a worthless piece of paper. UF exercised their option to terminate the deal BEFORE he signed a letter of intent, so he was free to sign elsewhere and get any deal he could... including Miami and the same $9 million deal... although one could understand why Ruiz may have not wanted any part of him by then. It sounds like the UF deal was terminated due to misunderstandings over compensation and exactly where it would come from. "Misunderstanding" is a LONG way from fraud.

 

I have no legal knowledge to base an opinion of the validity of this argument on, but as a regular dumbass fan, I have to question the strategy of Florida’s collective arguing that the recruit should have known better than to trust the collective to honor a contract that they don’t have to. Going forward. 

[immamac 41,718]

2 hours ago, Not a Sock said:

Man looking at the shit show going on in Gainesville makes me realize how fucked we would have been if NIL and the transfer portal happened just a few years earlier. Imagine that NIL and the transfer portal go live in 2015 and the people in charge of leading Texas through that change are Greg Fenves, Steve Patterson, and fucking Chuckles.

Considering the same people would have likely been the same people running shit it probably would have gone pretty well. 

[BigHorn'13 3,346]

On 5/19/2024 at 8:05 PM, closetojumping said:

Texas is not fully there, and not everything can or will be run through TOF, but we’re as far out there on the forefront as anyone could hope. 

Can you elaborate on this? Is it just the need for more corporate involvement? Or do the other collectives (like Burnt Ends) need more donors?

[immamac 41,718]

48 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

Can you elaborate on this? Is it just the need for more corporate involvement? Or do the other collectives (like Burnt Ends) need more donors?

There's a healthy conduit of direct deals being done now outside of just the collectives as the whole concept matures and becomes more standard/boilerplate. 

There still needs to be a lot of activity, but it's not just pure passion funding now. The big small ball donor base still doesn't exist yet and may never need to exist if they go on salary. 

[Soliver465 396]

Is there anything like Burnt Ends at other schools?  A position group funded by a message board community?

Edited May 21 by Soliver465

[GJ Winne 166]

11 minutes ago, Soliver465 said:

Is there anything like Burnt Ends at other schools?  A position group funded by a message board community?

We have a message board collective at TXST, but it isn't position specific.  Have 22 players getting paid today.

 

[immamac 41,718]

17 minutes ago, Soliver465 said:

Is there anything like Burnt Ends at other schools?  A position group funded by a message board community?

No and nowhere even close to the scale we are doing it at. And no one doing it going into the 4th year. 

[WBT 20,253]

3 hours ago, Soliver465 said:

Is there anything like Burnt Ends at other schools?  A position group funded by a message board community?

[BornAndRaised 12,201]

 

 

[NTVTXN 1,429]

Sorry for the cross post, I thought it might fit better here. 
And I do have a legitimate question for those of you who are well versed in all things NIL…

What does this do, if anything, to NILas we know it today?

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-players

 

[bwub60 147]

53 minutes ago, NTVTXN said:

Sorry for the cross post, I thought it might fit better here. 
And I do have a legitimate question for those of you who are well versed in all things NIL…

What does this do, if anything, to NILas we know it today?

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-players

 

Means the schools can pay players and Collectives and sponsors are still gonna pay players. Good news for us imo

[BornAndRaised 12,201]

2 hours ago, bwub60 said:

Means the schools can pay players and Collectives and sponsors are still gonna pay players. Good news for us imo

Not to be contrarian, but the things I've read about this settlement is that what your describing can't happen. I would also be interested in one of our resident NIL experts to weigh in as well. From what I've read, its 20m in total for every student athlete at the university, but that it's capped and they can't receive any additional compensation past that. While it's still good for us, I'd appreciate any additional clarity.

[Park Gothic 4,891]

3 hours ago, NTVTXN said:

Sorry for the cross post, I thought it might fit better here. 
And I do have a legitimate question for those of you who are well versed in all things NIL…

What does this do, if anything, to NILas we know it today?

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-players

 

[Victor Lazlo 1,741]

The agreement may cap payments at $20,000,000 from the school, but nobody can stop Collectives or companies from paying NIL to the athletes.

Thats what the original lawsuit was about. Not the NCAA, nor anyone else, can stop the athletes from profiting off of their NIL. Or put limits on it.

Thats the way I understand it. Good for us.

Edited May 24 by Victor Lazlo
Left a few zeros out

[bwub60 147]

9 minutes ago, BornAndRaised said:

Not to be contrarian, but the things I've read about this settlement is that what your describing can't happen. I would also be interested in one of our resident NIL experts to weigh in as well. From what I've read, its 20m in total for every student athlete at the university, but that it's capped and they can't receive any additional compensation past that. While it's still good for us, I'd appreciate any additional clarity.

I could very well be wrong

[TheBryMan81 2,470]

6 hours ago, BornAndRaised said:

Not to be contrarian, but the things I've read about this settlement is that what your describing can't happen. I would also be interested in one of our resident NIL experts to weigh in as well. From what I've read, its 20m in total for every student athlete at the university, but that it's capped and they can't receive any additional compensation past that. While it's still good for us, I'd appreciate any additional clarity.

If I have a local business in Austin, and I want to pay Gunnar Helm $1 million to be in a commercial, I can't see any way where the NCAA can come in and say "Well, hold on, this cap has been reached, he can't get paid for your commercial".

Maybe payments direct from the school get capped, but they can't and shouldn't regulate what an athlete might get paid for appearances, commercials, signing autographs, etc. Collectives would fall under this category and therefore shouldn't be subject to any cap

[statsman 5,355]

This seems to help the smaller schools, that were hurting in NIL resources? Now they have a $20M budget to pay, out of AD revenue. 
 
It seems that is $20M less to pay elsewhere (coaches, facilities, travel, equipment), but the shameless poor will just pay that deficit out of regular resources. A bad look; the private schools won’t care. 

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

11 minutes ago, statsman said:

This seems to help the smaller schools, that were hurting in NIL resources? Now they have a $20M budget to pay, out of AD revenue. 
 
It seems that is $20M less to pay elsewhere (coaches, facilities, travel, equipment), but the shameless poor will just pay that deficit out of regular resources. A bad look; the private schools won’t care. 

Most athletic programs barely break even. So where will these small schools happen to find 20m?

Edited May 24 by BurntOrange&White

[statsman 5,355]

52 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Most athletic programs barely break even. So where will these small schools happen to find 20m?

As I posted- “regular resources”. That is regular university funding. Think tuition, state funding (if public) and endowments. 
 
Most universities (not UT, which is the exception) subsidize athletics to seven figures (going from memory, when I looked years ago). It usually gets tsk-tsked by independent observers (the universities don’t care). This move will take that number to eight figures, annually. 
 
It’s not a surprise. NIL went from genuine marketing pay to outright “pay for play” a couple of years faster than I thought. I wondered when the universities with less athletic revenues, desperate to compete, would start paying players out of general funds. 

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

As I posted- “regular resources”. That is regular university funding. Think tuition, state funding (if public) and endowments. 
 
Most universities (not UT, which is the exception) subsidize athletics to seven figures (going from memory, when I looked years ago). It usually gets tsk-tsked by independent observers (the universities don’t care). This move will take that number to eight figures, annually. 
 
It’s not a surprise. NIL went from genuine marketing pay to outright “pay for play” a couple of years faster than I thought. I wondered when the universities with less athletic revenues, desperate to compete, would start paying players out of general funds. 

Revenue sharing isn't NIL though....you're going to need both to remain competitive. Why would Player A go to School B that is only offering revenue sharing when school C has revenue sharing + NIL deals? This is only going to make the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 

[statsman 5,355]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Revenue sharing isn't NIL though....you're going to need both to remain competitive. Why would Player A go to School B that is only offering revenue sharing when school C has revenue sharing + NIL deals? This is only going to make the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 

I agree. There are a lot more Oklahoma State-type programs (that will now pay $20M per year to their athletes, on top of what small NIL they have) than Texas-type programs, though. This gives them a lifeline. 
 
This won’t be an easy transition. UT can afford this without going into regular university funding. ITEP and UTSA can’t. How does the BoR handle this? 

[immamac 41,718]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Revenue sharing isn't NIL though....you're going to need both to remain competitive. Why would Player A go to School B that is only offering revenue sharing when school C has revenue sharing + NIL deals? This is only going to make the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 

Because NIL isn't pay for play like it is now with a mechanism to provide for pay for play that is more natural and akin to literally every other sport that does pay for play. It's called revenue sharing and the university is now the "collective". 

Collectives will be relegated to actual NIL activity management doing brand endorsement style things that are additive compensation (still major component) of the overall compensation model. 

Some people (like Bijan) will get max contracts and dwarf it with NIL on top. 

Others will be key contributors but have little to no brand value (Jake Majors) and they will get mainly compensated (same numbers) from the university instead of the NIL pool that is actual NIL. 

The dollar amounts don't really change and the source of funds doesn't change either. It's just the clarification for what is pay for play and what is pay for name image and likeness (not skill or results on field) 

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

3 minutes ago, statsman said:

I agree. There are a lot more Oklahoma State-type programs (that will now pay $20M per year to their athletes, on top of what small NIL they have) than Texas-type programs, though. This gives them a lifeline. 
 
This won’t be an easy transition. UT can afford this without going into regular university funding. ITEP and UTSA can’t. How does the BoR handle this? 

I'm not sure how factual these numbers are but this is interesting in terms of the Title IX discussion. 

 

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/the-university-of-texas-at-austin/student-life/sports/#:~:text=The University of Texas at Austin Sports-Related Financial Aid,a lot of college costs.

 

If using that 691 number and you split the revenue sharing max as estimated to be $20m it comes out to $28-29k ea and I assume that would be on a yearly basis. 

Edited May 24 by BurntOrange&White

[statsman 5,355]

29 minutes ago, immamac said:

 

The dollar amounts don't really change and the source of funds doesn't change either. 

This is the only part I disagree with. Your statement is true for Texas and the handful of schools in a similar financial position. 
 
For the other 100 FBS schools, that can’t scrape together $10M per year for football through a collective, this is a godsend. Now, they get to tap into university funding, instead of soliciting donors (although that will still happen for NIL). All they have to do is weather political criticism for state and national funding paying for football players (which they have always had to do, to a much lesser extent). 
 
Spelling it out- let’s take UH as an example. Suppose their annual AD spending exactly matches all their revenue. Do you have any doubt that, now that it is allowed, they will budget $20M for athletes’ pay? I don’t. Where will the money come from, if revenue doesn’t increase? I believe it will come from the school. Does anyone believe that UH’s AD would say, “We’d like to spend the $20M for our athletes, but we don’t have the money, so we won’t. We’ll just let those players go to TCU and Baylor.”? I don’t. 

Edited May 24 by statsman

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

This is the only part I disagree with. Your statement is true for Texas and the handful of schools in a similar financial position. 
 
For the other 100 FBS schools, that can’t scrape together $10M per year for football through a collective, this is a godsend. Now, they get to tap into university funding, instead of soliciting donors (although that will still happen for NIL). All they have to do is weather political criticism for state and national funding paying for football players (which they have always had to do, to a much lesser extent). 
 
Spelling it out- let’s take UH as an example. Suppose their annual AD spending exactly matches all their revenue. Do you have any doubt that, now that it is allowed, they will budget $20M for athletes’ pay? I don’t. Where will the money come from, if revenue doesn’t increase? I believe it will come from the school. Does anyone believe that UH’s AD would say, “We’d like to spend the $20M for our athletes, but we don’t have the money, so we won’t.”? I don’t. 

This is where PE steps in and we see dismantling of ADs that won't be able to repay the PE loans.....

 

[immamac 41,718]

19 minutes ago, statsman said:

This is the only part I disagree with. Your statement is true for Texas and the handful of schools in a similar financial position. 
 
For the other 100 FBS schools, that can’t scrape together $10M per year for football through a collective, this is a godsend. Now, they get to tap into university funding, instead of soliciting donors (although that will still happen for NIL). All they have to do is weather political criticism for state and national funding paying for football players (which they have always had to do, to a much lesser extent). 
 
Spelling it out- let’s take UH as an example. Suppose their annual AD spending exactly matches all their revenue. Do you have any doubt that, now that it is allowed, they will budget $20M for athletes’ pay? I don’t. Where will the money come from, if revenue doesn’t increase? I believe it will come from the school. Does anyone believe that UH’s AD would say, “We’d like to spend the $20M for our athletes, but we don’t have the money, so we won’t. We’ll just let those players go to TCU and Baylor.”? I don’t. 

No one gives a fuck about UH TCU or Baylor. I'm tired of the charade of people giving a shit about them or that being the reason for college football being so awesome. The TCU Georgia NCG was dog shit. TCU drew nothing from a pure $ perspective. Eyeballs were down local spend wasn't as strong as 2 big brand teams etc etc. That's not to say it's not a great story for duggan and his team of 6th year full grown men lucking their way to the playoff after an inexplicable loss in the CCG still getting in, but come on people don't wanna watch Louisville vs Florida State ever again. It was the worst game ever. 

The other 100 FBS schools are there for schedule sharpening and cannon fodder anyway. The reality is the playoff will be dominated by B1G and SEC and no one else will be relevant. Especially after ACC collapse. You will have natural tiering within those conferences for the have and have nots or big pushes some years when they think they have something. There's a reason pro sports don't have more than 30 something teams in the leagues. It is the sweet spot for everything. 

15 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

This is where PE steps in and we see dismantling of ADs that won't be able to repay the PE loans.....

 

PE is definitely interested in the pure deal flow/cash flow and if they can take points off of it that's what they are interested in. 

[texifornia 56,015]

17 minutes ago, immamac said:

No one gives a fuck about UH TCU or Baylor. I'm tired of the charade of people giving a shit about them or that being the reason for college football being so awesome. The TCU Georgia NCG was dog shit. TCU drew nothing from a pure $ perspective. Eyeballs were down local spend wasn't as strong as 2 big brand teams etc etc. That's not to say it's not a great story for duggan and his team of 6th year full grown men lucking their way to the playoff after an inexplicable loss in the CCG still getting in, but come on people don't wanna watch Louisville vs Florida State ever again. It was the worst game ever. 

The other 100 FBS schools are there for schedule sharpening and cannon fodder anyway. The reality is the playoff will be dominated by B1G and SEC and no one else will be relevant. Especially after ACC collapse. You will have natural tiering within those conferences for the have and have nots or big pushes some years when they think they have something. There's a reason pro sports don't have more than 30 something teams in the leagues. It is the sweet spot for everything. 

PE is definitely interested in the pure deal flow/cash flow and if they can take points off of it that's what they are interested in. 

Wait, do you want college football to be a 30 team junior NFL? Because fuck that noise.

[Mittens 8,027]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

This seems to help the smaller schools, that were hurting in NIL resources? Now they have a $20M budget to pay, out of AD revenue. 

Where the fuck do you think smaller schools are going to come up with an extra $20M?  

[JOSEYWALES66 1,780]

40 minutes ago, immamac said:

 

PE is definitely interested in the pure deal flow/cash flow and if they can take points off of it that's what they are interested in. 

How does PE make money in this deal?  That part has me confused.

[Nigel Tufnel 196]

41 minutes ago, immamac said:

No one gives a fuck about UH TCU or Baylor. I'm tired of the charade of people giving a shit about them or that being the reason for college football being so awesome. The TCU Georgia NCG was dog shit. TCU drew nothing from a pure $ perspective. Eyeballs were down local spend wasn't as strong as 2 big brand teams etc etc. That's not to say it's not a great story for duggan and his team of 6th year full grown men lucking their way to the playoff after an inexplicable loss in the CCG still getting in, but come on people don't wanna watch Louisville vs Florida State ever again. It was the worst game ever. 

The other 100 FBS schools are there for schedule sharpening and cannon fodder anyway. The reality is the playoff will be dominated by B1G and SEC and no one else will be relevant. Especially after ACC collapse. You will have natural tiering within those conferences for the have and have nots or big pushes some years when they think they have something. There's a reason pro sports don't have more than 30 something teams in the leagues. It is the sweet spot for everything. 

PE is definitely interested in the pure deal flow/cash flow and if they can take points off of it that's what they are interested in. 

We have been talking about this for several years now, but is this is the first step toward college athletics (mostly revenue generating sports) being “clubs” whereby the brand and facilities are being licensed out and the school collects a large royalty without having to manage athlete payroll, etc.?

[BigHorn'13 3,346]

29 minutes ago, texifornia said:

Wait, do you want college football to be a 30 team junior NFL? Because fuck that noise.

I think he's saying that it will be a market correction of sorts, mostly due to the money some schools (like us) have compared to others. 

[texifornia 56,015]

4 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

I think he's saying that it will be a market correction of sorts, mostly due to the money some schools (like us) have compared to others. 

I understand that the income inequality will lead to even sharper haves and have-nots, but it sounds like he supports a cfb Super League structure, which, ew.

[BigHorn'13 3,346]

7 minutes ago, texifornia said:

I understand that the income inequality will lead to even sharper haves and have-nots, but it sounds like he supports a cfb Super League structure, which, ew.

I don't disagree that games like tcu vs uga and fsu vs ul sucked. But I also don't disagree that college football will naturally shift towards a 30 team super league with the way everything is setting up. Just have to accept the evolution of it...

[LCHorn 2,559]

1 minute ago, BigHorn'13 said:

I don't disagree that games like tcu vs uga and fsu vs ul sucked. But I also don't disagree that college football will naturally shift towards a 30 team super league with the way everything is setting up. Just have to accept the evolution of it...

It might end up there but in the interim we’re going to see a TON of experimentation and that’s going to make college football overall a lot of fun.  
 

You’re going to see low revenue schools try out all kinds of strategic program building methods.  Maybe it’s hiring a Deion type at a small school and cutting costs elsewhere, maybe it’s only targeting kids that would go to a service academy.  Maybe it’s running really specialized offensive/defensive schemes that de-emphasize athleticism for soundness and BYU style 24 year old men.  All of it is poised to have cinderellas pop up annually.  

[HateYouAndMyself 828]

This change is going to be bad for Texas initially. Our advantage in NIL is not going to come anywhere close to making up for the shortfall we will face comparative to teams that specialize their funding in specific sports. Football will be fine and likely maintain its edge but our other sports are a bit fucked. 

Imagine how Vanderbilt will approach the revenue sharing. What are their options? Put 10M towards a football team with no players worth paying and no hopes of winning either way? Or do they go put 15M towards baseball and a build a super team filled with a dozen future first round picks? Even if they still do put a few million towards football, basketball and women's athletics to take care of the few high quality kids they have the lion share of that funding is going to the one sport in which they can actually compete. There are plenty of other baseball focused programs out there that can do the same. Even non power conference programs that only have 10-12M total to disperse can double the realistic budget Texas will have for baseball as we struggle to try and take care of all the major sports at once. Texas is not going to become one of the poors but we aren't going to be anywhere close to that top tier of baseball spender. 

Same deal with basketball. Texas might at most put how much towards basketball? 3-4 million tops? Yes we can supplement that with NIL and we have had tremendous support for the basketball program recently but it isn't going to make up the gap between ourselves and those who make that sport their top priority. I'm not even talking the blue bloods that kick our ass in recruiting and the portal anyway. A school like Indiana for example can easily justify and afford to put 10-12M a year of that 21M cap into just basketball. Even if we can double our direct school budget for the sport with NIL it isn't going to give us an edge any longer. Not when you have a couple dozen mid tier programs putting that same amount into the pot due to direct school funding and prioritization. In the long run Texas will have much healthier athletic program but in the short term you are going to have a bunch of new bidders suddenly able to compete at the same level as you for mercenary recruits and portal talent. 

Even football will not go unscathed. Lets say we put a few million into basketball, a bit into baseball and the obligatory million or two into women's athletics that optics will require. Sure we might still be left with ~15M going towards football but there are programs like OU that will probably put basically the entire 21M just into football. We literally watched them pillage their women's athletics NIL fund in order to get Williams secured a few weeks ago. Football will still in great financial shape for us but this change is going to cut into our edge we have over teams that just currently can not compete with us due to a lack of NIL funding. They will just sacrifice other sports to try to close the gap. 

TLDR Football at Texas will be fine but sports like basketball and baseball are absolutely fucked once this revenue sharing begins and a lot of teams just decide to focus on one specific sport other than football. In the long run I fully expect some stricter guidelines in place as to how that revenue gets distributed, to make sure most of it goes to football (who actually generates the damn revenue) but until that happens it is going to be absolutely wild watching certain teams be bold and just specialize into a single sport to try and buy titles while the window of opportunity exists. 

 

[texifornia 56,015]

1 minute ago, LCHorn said:

It might end up there but in the interim we’re going to see a TON of experimentation and that’s going to make college football overall a lot of fun.  
 

You’re going to see low revenue schools try out all kinds of strategic program building methods.  Maybe it’s hiring a Deion type at a small school and cutting costs elsewhere, maybe it’s only targeting kids that would go to a service academy.  Maybe it’s running really specialized offensive/defensive schemes that de-emphasize athleticism for soundness and BYU style 24 year old men.  All of it is poised to have cinderellas pop up annually.  

This I'm more than fine with - much like soccer, I find part of the fun of college sports the oddball underdogs popping up and constant new things to get interested in, compared to the corporate blandness of the NFL. Soccer at least has all the cup competitions so there's always a venue for upsets to happen. If CFB turns into a super league, there's none of that.

[BigHorn'13 3,346]

4 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

It might end up there but in the interim we’re going to see a TON of experimentation and that’s going to make college football overall a lot of fun.  
 

You’re going to see low revenue schools try out all kinds of strategic program building methods.  Maybe it’s hiring a Deion type at a small school and cutting costs elsewhere, maybe it’s only targeting kids that would go to a service academy.  Maybe it’s running really specialized offensive/defensive schemes that de-emphasize athleticism for soundness and BYU style 24 year old men.  All of it is poised to have cinderellas pop up annually.  

Oh for sure. I think that's also where something like private equity might come into play, as well, though I still don't get how PE would get the ROI.

[BurntOrange&White 38,877]

6 minutes ago, HateYouAndMyself said:

This change is going to be bad for Texas initially. Our advantage in NIL is not going to come anywhere close to making up for the shortfall we will face comparative to teams that specialize their funding in specific sports. Football will be fine and likely maintain its edge but our other sports are a bit fucked. 

Imagine how Vanderbilt will approach the revenue sharing. What are their options? Put 10M towards a football team with no players worth paying and no hopes of winning either way? Or do they go put 15M towards baseball and a build a super team filled with a dozen future first round picks? Even if they still do put a few million towards football, basketball and women's athletics to take care of the few high quality kids they have the lion share of that funding is going to the one sport in which they can actually compete. There are plenty of other baseball focused programs out there that can do the same. Even non power conference programs that only have 10-12M total to disperse can double the realistic budget Texas will have for baseball as we struggle to try and take care of all the major sports at once. Texas is not going to become one of the poors but we aren't going to be anywhere close to that top tier of baseball spender. 

Same deal with basketball. Texas might at most put how much towards basketball? 3-4 million tops? Yes we can supplement that with NIL and we have had tremendous support for the basketball program recently but it isn't going to make up the gap between ourselves and those who make that sport their top priority. I'm not even talking the blue bloods that kick our ass in recruiting and the portal anyway. A school like Indiana for example can easily justify and afford to put 10-12M a year of that 21M cap into just basketball. Even if we can double our direct school budget for the sport with NIL it isn't going to give us an edge any longer. Not when you have a couple dozen mid tier programs putting that same amount into the pot due to direct school funding and prioritization. In the long run Texas will have much healthier athletic program but in the short term you are going to have a bunch of new bidders suddenly able to compete at the same level as you for mercenary recruits and portal talent. 

Even football will not go unscathed. Lets say we put a few million into basketball, a bit into baseball and the obligatory million or two into women's athletics that optics will require. Sure we might still be left with ~15M going towards football but there are programs like OU that will probably put basically the entire 21M just into football. We literally watched them pillage their women's athletics NIL fund in order to get Williams secured a few weeks ago. Football will still in great financial shape for us but this change is going to cut into our edge we have over teams that just currently can not compete with us due to a lack of NIL funding. They will just sacrifice other sports to try to close the gap. 

TLDR Football at Texas will be fine but sports like basketball and baseball are absolutely fucked once this revenue sharing begins and a lot of teams just decide to focus on one specific sport other than football. In the long run I fully expect some stricter guidelines in place as to how that revenue gets distributed, to make sure most of it goes to football (who actually generates the damn revenue) but until that happens it is going to be absolutely wild watching certain teams be bold and just specialize into a single sport to try and buy titles while the window of opportunity exists. 

 

Football is the only sport that matters for 99% of colleges because football is what pays the bills for all other sports. If you don't have good revenue from football odds are you aren't going to have the money to invest heavily in other sports.