NCAA and the NIL.

Jul 8, 2021, 12:45 PM

I am convinced that if the NCAA was concerned about NIL they could fix the problem (assuming they thought it was a problem) quickly. (More on that in just a bit.) I don't think that the NCAA - bureaucrats, presidents, AD's or coaches - think it is a problem. In fact, I think they like it. "We can rake in even more money with new TV contracts, etc. and still not have to give any of that to the players. Somebody else will pay them. We can have our piece of an even bigger pie."

How do I feel about NIL? I'm evolving. In general I am opposed to it. My philosophy for decades has been: The purpose of an athletic scholarship is to use it as a tool to earn a college degree.

But, I'm also (politically) a free-market capitalist. Why shouldn't Jordan Spieth be allowed to sign a million dollar contract with Under Armor or Titleist or Callaway while he's playing golf at Texas? Why shouldn't Zion Williamson be allowed to do the same? Those are good investments for the companies. No different than Microsoft and Apple recruiting engineers while they are still in college?

So, will this destroy college athletics or not? I used to think, "Definitely, yes." Now, I'm not as sure. I'm taking a wait-and-see approach.

Now, back to the NCAA. If the powers that be - basically the university presidents since they are the ones who really make the decisions on how the NCAA (and the conferences) operate, they could make one simple rule that would solve 95% of the problems of boosters, nefarious companies, etc. might cause.

Here is the rule: Every athletic scholarship given counts against your total for either 5 years or until the player graduates from your institution.

Player goes to NBA after one year = school has lost a scholarship for next four years.
Player goes to NFL after 3 years = school has lost a scholarship for next two years, unless he graduates in 3 years.
Player enters transfer portal and transfers after two years = school loses a scholarship for next 3 years.
Player just decides he doesn't want to compete in his sport after 1 year and drops out of school = loss of scholarship for next four years.

Coaches have to decide. How many scholarships am I willing to give up by recruiting kids who have no desire to graduate?

It definitely shrinks the number of fish in the lake. But, all the schools would still be fishing in the same lake.

I maintain the NCAA is not at all concerned with academics and graduation rates. They merely give it lip service for PR purposes.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

That is exactly what I'm saying. John Calipari has 13 ships. He signs 3 guys who stay one year and leave. For the next 4 years after that those 3 count on his 15. If he does it again, he's down to 9 ships. Etc. Let Coack K decide, "I have a choice. I can recruit Zion and possibly win a national championship, but if I do I lose a scholarship for the next 4 years. Is it worth it?"

That is the only way you can get coaches to recruit kids who want to earn a college degree, not just play a sport for a year or two.

(Speaking now of the generic you, not you specifically.) You have to change your mind set. Is the purpose of college athletics to be the minor leagues for the NFL and NBA? If it is, you hate the idea. If you want to recruit kids who have no intention of getting a college education, then you hate the idea.

But, if you think the primary purpose of a college is to educate people, even athletes, then the idea is at least worth discussing.

NCAA and the NIL.

Re: NCAA and the NIL.

Re: NCAA and the NIL.

not at all concerned with academics

Say What???

Re: Say What???

Re: NCAA and the NIL.

TigerBoard POTD