|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
Editor [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43432
Joined: 12/12/12
|
TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 8:00 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [6871]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9154
Joined: 7/11/03
|
Keep doing it right Dabo!***
Feb 5, 2022, 8:20 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8514]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 11467
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 8:30 AM
|
|
Dabo's comment that only 2% of players will ever play in the NFL is why we do not need to get bent out of shape about NIL. Our nation is a free and capitalistic one and a player in any sport should be able to receive compensation for their NIL and that is now allowed. As in any other part of the ecomomy, free enterprise will take care of the situation. Be patient and give this 3 or 4 years before you have a foot hanging over the cliff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5465]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4966
Joined: 10/21/15
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 8:39 AM
|
|
Your statement makes no sense at all. NIL money can be paid to anyone, not just those going to the NFL. It clearly will have an impact, and already has, in shifting the balance of where top tier players enroll. If 2% of athletes make the pros, and Texas A&M continues to pull in more of those 2%ers, it leaves fewer for everyone else.
Yes, it’s free enterprise. But it’s not a level playing field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4180]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3114
Joined: 4/15/05
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 8:49 AM
|
|
But it makes it so much sweeter……when we beat them when it counts!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13031]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22351
Joined: 4/24/04
|
I don't believe that was the point he was making
Feb 5, 2022, 8:51 AM
[ in reply to Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting ] |
|
His point was that only 2% of players make it to the NFL and NIL is now a way for the other 98% to get some compensation from their football careers before they move on to another profession.
I don't like the current wild west implementation of NIL that we currently have, but i do not think that NIL, in general, is a bad thing. It needs some regulation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48005]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14848
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: I don't believe that was the point he was making
Feb 5, 2022, 9:07 AM
|
|
Agree, definitely needs regulation and oversight. Neff was correct, we have been too passive about it and subjective whether it hurt us in recruiting or not. I'd actually feel better if it did vs being another reason. No disputing the facts that aTm bought a team. As did Texas.
Should we "lead" with it, absolutely not. Should it be a part of recruiting, absolutely. Clemson may not be able to compete dollar wise but we sure should be the leader in innovation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [-99]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 3740
Joined: 9/5/20
|
No. You are missing the point.
Feb 5, 2022, 12:10 PM
[ in reply to I don't believe that was the point he was making ] |
|
Since less than 2 percent make the NFL the creation of NIL makes recruiting that 2 percent even more difficult. And it gives big rich programs huge advantages, even the ones that don't win on he field!
Anyone that thinks NIL is no big deal is woefully clueless and out of touch.
The next few years are going to be volatile until NIL and the portal sort themselves out. Anything new creates chaos and disruption early on, especially when there is no regulation.
And people are also wrong thinking college athletics are a free market or capitalist. College athletics are the exact opposite of a free market.
The SCOTUS and Kavanaugh proved they are clueless economically with their ruling and opinion.
In a free market there are options. Tons of opportunity. Competition. Employees/labor have tons of options. If only 2 percent go to the NFL that's a very limited monopoly. Actually there is nothing to compare it to in capitalism. Most college age kids have two options, football scholarship or get an entry level job or deal drugs or start a small business. After college there is the NFL or real life. There are no options other than the NFL because there is no a free market. The NFK is like being an astronaut. An extremely skilled position with high barriers of entry and a very limited finite number of jobs.
Even in monopolies and oligarchies labor have options. For example, a guy rejected by the Air Force can still find dozens of options to earn a living flying. Most paying more than the Air Force. After retiring from the Air Force pilots have tons of options. That is capitalism, that is a free market. You can buy a plane and start your own business, That is a free market.
If NIL is not effecting our recruiting then we aren't recruiting kids highly coveted by other top programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3619]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3472
Joined: 12/1/19
|
Re: No. You are missing the point.
Feb 5, 2022, 4:26 PM
|
|
Well, the portal isn’t a focus either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7043]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9628
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: I don't believe that was the point - all have missed it
Feb 5, 2022, 9:17 PM
[ in reply to I don't believe that was the point he was making ] |
|
Very late post here (~ 9:10 PM), but as of this hour there seems to be confusion among the TNet posters about what G.Neff meant. I'll do my best to interpret what he meant, and to offer comments about what he didn't say.
This is another long post; it's Saturday night so I hope you've got better ways to spend your time.
Here's what Graham Neff meant:
(1) With very few exceptions for the star college players, the NIL won't pay much over the long run. G.Neff didn't say this, but he meant that incoming HS STARS may get some NIL money (at first), but that if they don't become COLLEGE STARS then the NIL won't generate enough money ... by itself ... to justify their decision to go to college. THEREFORE the NIL is illusory as far as being a "real value" proposition to the large majority of college players.
(2) About 98% of college players won't make money as players in the professional sports arena. All college players are 'eligible' for NIL money, but that doesn't mean that all college players will be cashing in on 'honest' NIL deals (i.e., NIL deals which are not some sham scheme for funneling boosters' "pay-for-play" money to the players).
(3) Clemson will emphasize to players that, while we will help them with understanding NIL deals and will assist them to get honest NIL money, that Clemson will continue to emphasize the long term value proposition of the college experience (e.g., an education and relationships that can lead to a lifetime of valuable earnings), as opposed to short term temporary NIL money which will quickly be gone if the NIL is the player's primary interest.
Now, for what G.Neff didn't say:
If the NIL is always legitimate (which is apparently the way that Clemson will structure its NIL 'educational center'), then what G.Neff stated above will be true for all college FB programs. But if the NIL is not legitimate at some programs (and the NIL is a thin veil for boosters' pay-for-play scheme from years ago re: SMU, aTm, and U. of Oklaoma's Barry Switzer teams, Auburn boosters from the Ralph Jordan / Doug Barfield / Pat Day teams) then what Clemson is doing in the NIL won't matter.
The kids from ignorant families will be blinded by the alure of short term "NIL" money (which will seem out of this world to them), and miss the longer term value that the non-cheating programs are promoting (e.g., a solid education, along with relationships which get cultivated with HIGH QUALITY PEOPLE during the players college years will bring far more valuable than the short-term bling).
Clemson will not go the 'cheating NIL' route. If the 'cheating NIL' programs don't get caught and/or penalized severely by the NCAA or some other college athletics governing body, then Clemson will do its best to compete in a way that is best for the players (i.e., making sure that their Clemson experience sets them up for long term success) but will not resort to bribing players via 'cheating NIL' schemes. Clemson will prepare the players for long term success. Period.
Clemson football is willing to take the risk that we may end up falling behind other programs which use the NIL as a cheating scheme.
Those of who love Clemson athletics (and FB and BB in particular) must come to grips with the moral imperative vs. the entertainment / pride attributes of the G.Neff (and Dabo) philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1344]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1169
Joined: 2/3/19
|
Re: I don't believe that was the point he was making
Feb 7, 2022, 8:15 AM
[ in reply to I don't believe that was the point he was making ] |
|
Get real, we have not been getting the recruits with their hands out since Charlie Pell…..
NIL just means more money to hand out, legally! We will continue to lose those prospects.
Right now TAMU, Texas,Alabama and others have the best recruits money can buy. In the long run I doubt it works!
After a few years, you will be paying guys that don’t start, and they will NOT go to the portal or they lose their $$$.
Just watch Jimbo Fisher at TAMU and see how it works out……. I’ll take Dabo anytime. Watch Miami, FSU…..
Look what happened to the Southwest Conference, all teams got caught (except Rice) and the conference is gone.
They didn’t win many championships! We have to be Clemson!
DJ5 got big NIL money, did it help his game last year?
I’ll trust Dabo to do the best thing for Clemson…….
Go Tigers, Wreck Tech!
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [530]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 6204
Joined: 8/30/14
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 9:02 AM
|
|
I guess the keyword is "major" and how one decides to define it on a given day and the context. New AD Neff's comments on NIL were if nothing else discouraging, solely focused on nothing but compliance rhetoric. Nothing of substance to suggest a proactive approach on the legislative front or any other. (Our current NIL POLICY & talking points: down play it's significance and use Compliance as a Scapegoat for Inaction)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2248]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3227
Joined: 10/29/17
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 10:12 AM
|
|
I wasn't fond of the comments either, but wonder how much of it is "coach speak" from Dabo and Neff. Jimbo had referenced NIL earlier in recruiting, but came out late that it didn't make a difference because according to the NCAA it can't be used as a "recruiting advantage." It wasn't because that is what he really thought. It was simply CYA.
Dabo and Neff would be naive to think that NIL will not be a major part of the recruiting landscape going forward and I don't take them for that. This is like, "We approach SC State the same way we do Notre Dame." It's what they are suppose to say. The programs like Clemson that deal in the lighter grays, fell a little behind on NIL, waiting to see what would be allowed. Now that the NCAA has ignored nearly everything, we will adjust and I think be just fine. That doesn't mean that we will be able to compete in NIL with the TAMU's of the world, but we'll do well enough to continue to pull in major recruiting classes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [541]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 560
Joined: 5/19/12
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 9:29 AM
|
|
He used the word "major" and that is good. At least he didn't say ZERO like Jumbo did, pretending we were all completely stupid. It is a factor and always has been, it is just now a little bit more above board than it was and I agree with the previous comment that we will have to wait 3 or 4 year for it to settle down. Right now it is a HUGE factor for many athletes in terms of where they go and that is being exploited in places across the country. Why did Caleb Williams take so long to decide? Does anybody really think he wasn't going to USC all along?
It will level out once the ROI is determined by the folks offering the deals and that will take a while. Yes, there will always be "rich" alums who will fork out BUT that will only go so far and last so long. To the best of my knowledge, those deals are NOT tax deductions and these may in time LOWER contributions to schools and booster organizations (e.g. IPTAY) in the long run. Do you think Clemson would rather me give my million to a QB that might last 3 years if we are lucky or give it to IPTAY for the long term benefit of all?
Just like the portal - I don't really like it but we have to learn to use both. Sounds like Dabo may know a little more than we do about what is coming out of NIL for us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [547]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 422
Joined: 3/18/11
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 10:41 AM
|
|
I weary of this whole complicated mess. I’m too old (74) to adjust and adapt to the “new” way. Just the thought of that buzzard Jimbo Fissure licking his chops and thumbing his nose at the rest of CFB, not caring in the slightest how and why they win, sickens and disheartens me. At least, back in the old days programs had to maintain an appearance of respectability while they they bought players. Now, much like today’s government, they don’t even pretend while they break the rules. Rather, the attitude is “OK we’re screwing you. You know it, we know it, and there’s not a d*mn thing you can do about it.”
If I weren’t such a Clemson addict I’d walk away from college sports like I walked away from all of professional team sports two years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64867]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33141
Joined: 12/3/03
|
Honestly, I wish Dabo would just quit talking about NIL.
Feb 5, 2022, 10:24 AM
|
|
Every time he says ANYTHING remotely touching that subject, the ESECPN talking heads go on a rant against him and Clemson, spinning it into Anti-Clemson rhetoric.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5072]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2249
Joined: 6/8/06
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 11:09 AM
|
|
I think Clemson is involved with NIL more than we know. Dabo knows what needs to be done. He knows what happened in recruiting this year and I think he will make adjustments. He's not going to get in a bidding war for every 5 star player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17504]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14113
Joined: 10/24/10
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 11:53 AM
|
|
Will coaches and AD be stating in 3-4 years that Clemson did not clearly understand the implications of NIL if the playoff/championship years are behind us?
2022 performance on the field will be bigger than ever in terms of program growth/stability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8857
Joined: 5/30/01
|
Re: TNET: Swinney says NIL hasn't played a major role in Clemson's recruiting
Feb 5, 2022, 2:31 PM
|
|
Haha. So, we’re taking a “passive” approach to NIL? Great. I’m sure that strategy will pay huge dividends for us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27348]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31815
Joined: 8/19/03
|
I understand what Dabo is saying and I agree with him ...
Feb 7, 2022, 11:34 AM
|
|
But ... money talks. I think that coaches will have to find a way to utilize the new NIL ruling to provide payment to all the scholarship players. Amateur sports are a thing of the past. SAD
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1724]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 3421
Joined: 2/7/07
|
NIL not a major role at CU, but a role for those beating us
Feb 7, 2022, 6:22 PM
|
|
TAMU oil money helped bring in the #1 class. I'm pretty sure we lost recruits (including at least one to UGA) because our competitors offered better NIL deals.
I hate the NIL thing. It has allowed rich alumni (either individually or in cooperative groups) to legally buy recruits. I read about one group (at Miami?) that pays every player on the team for "NIL" rights. In the long run, the schools with the most booster-money will dominate. I could imagine a Stanford/Google billionaire alumnus buying a team full of 5-stars for a half-million dollars each. Petty cash for a billionaire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
