Just imagine what’ll happen if they start paying players!

Why, the rich conferences will get all the best ones, unlike now… uh, wait.

50 Comments

Filed under Recruiting, The NCAA

50 responses to “Just imagine what’ll happen if they start paying players!

  1. Derek

    If you’re talking about conference wide stipends those stats will only get worse but programs like Houston and Central Florida can still emerge today from anonymity like Miami and FSU did decades ago.

    If you’re talking about legitimizing third party “endorsement deals” or “miscellaneous compensation deals, i.e., no work jobs” then you’ll distort the player market beyond all recognition and there will be maybe 6-8 programs in the country that think they have a chance in hell at competing and you’ll lose a bunch who will decide that they just ain’t playing.

    Scholarship limits won’t even be relevant any longer. Why? Your benefactor(s) will pick up that pesky tuition tab.

    If “fair” is “dead” then that would do it.

    Like

    • … and there will be maybe 6-8 programs in the country that think they have a chance in hell at competing…

      In the CFP’s five years, we’ve seen a total of nine teams make the semi-finals, so you’re not exactly talking about a huge amount of shrinkage there, assuming you’re right. But if you’re consumed with worry over that, never fear. Playoff expansion is coming.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Derek

        Playoff expansion plus unfettered comp would equal a lot of first and second round “byes.”

        Michigan State and Washington have zero chance of a return trip under this scenario. Notre Dame won’t play. They’d be the pied piper out the door with a bunch right behind them.

        Alabama, Auburn, OSU, LSU are your only sure bets to happily go down that road.

        Like

        • You are mighty confident in predicting the eight-team format there. Almost every projection I’ve seen the CFP will include five spots for the P5 conference champs, a couple of wild card spots and some means of letting a qualified mid-major hit the field.

          Your idea that ND “won’t play” is laughable. That’s one well-endowed institution.

          Like

          • Derek

            What prediction on expansion?? I’m saying you can’t fill it under a model with unfettered 3rd party money. Also, I’m not for expansion. BCS was better. Bowl system better than even a 4 team playoffs.

            Second, I’m not talking about institutional money. I’m talking about third party money. I’ve made that abundantly clear.

            A set, conference wide compensation model is one thing.

            Letting kids sign contracts with the local Chevy dealer, the local haberdashery, the local restaurants, the local whatever… is a vastly different model with vastly different outcomes. I don’t see ND and a host of others going for that shit. I think they’d prefer to take their ball and go home.

            Like

            • Tony Barnfart

              I’m with Derek. And I’m not even being snarky when I believe that NOBODY can predict the depth of reprehensible chicanery (and unforeseen consequences) the citizens of the state of Alabama will resort to when no longer tethered to a rule. Auburn had grey-haired members of the Alabama GOP endow a Pentecostal church to get Cam Newton when there WERE rules. The people of Alabama will absolutely do something that reasonable human beings would never consider–and haven’t even fathomed as a new possibility—but all of a sudden becomes permissible.

              Like

        • In any event, the point here is that rich schools are already spending tons more to get the top talent. The idea that redirecting some of those funds from things like lockers and waterfalls to players is going to result in some sort of apocalyptic change seems a stretch. But feel free to go there.

          Like

          • I imagine those Texas players with the $10,000 lockers would have been happier to see that money in their pocket. Of course, in the infamous words of Colin Cowherd, it would have just gone to weed and kicks.

            Like

    • FlyingPeakDawg

      Uga, Bama, Auburn, UT, FL, SC, LSU, TAMU
      Clemson, Miami, FSU
      tOSU, Michigan, NEB, Wisky
      Texas, OU
      USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington
      Notre Dame, Houston

      That’s just the easy list, plus anyone who can solicit their own billionaire donors (think OSU who maybe I should have already included above).

      These are the elite Power 5 teams and they will continue to be elite under the current systems because of a $$$ advantage and would be no different under a different economic model that let’s players benefit from their own marketing rights.

      I would guess that personal player marketing rights are no where near as valuable as many guess / fear. The TV money stays with the schools (which is why I think they will secretly endorse this move quickly despite the current NCAA position) and the schools will fiercely protect their own branding rights. Jake Fromm will do that Ford truck dealership commercial in Macon, but he won’t be able to wear his UGA jersey or probably hold a sign that says “Go Dawgs” as I believe the University holds the license on that phrase (at least that is what Titleist claims when I try to have that printed on personalized golf balls). If I’m the truck dealer, Jake out of uniform is not as valuable as, say Kirby, so I’m not paying a lot. Now, if the dealer is asked to pony-up a ton of cash / overpay to lure the next QB prospect to Athens, then that’s just bringing that underhanded practice to light…which is a good thing. More transparency will probably lower the cost over time as everyone will now more or less see what the other guy is bidding. The AALU scandal probably shows these sleezebags are overpaying to get kids to the top schools already.

      Like

      • “Personal player marketing rights are nowhere near as valuable as many guess.”

        I would differ with that. If their marketing rights are that valuable, why did Katie Ledecky stop swimming at Stanford to go pro? Because she couldn’t sign an endorsement deal. She is still in Palo Alto to train and attend school, but the scholarship alone wasn’t sufficient compensation.

        Jake Fromm’s appearance in a commercial for Athens Ford isn’t going to be a deal like Ledecky’s (her worth is related to her gold medals she won before she stepped foot in Palo Alto). Is the use of a Raptor worth an appearance in a commercial or to make some personal appearances at the dealership? Probably even if he can’t wear Georgia gear in the appearance.

        Like

      • Derek

        You’re missing the forest for the trees.

        If saban wants Matt Stafford out of HS, how the fuck valuable is he to bammers with cash in their pockets?

        If you think this would result in market economics you’re wrong. It would be about throwing as much cash at as many five stars as you can and knowing it will all sort out on the field. Few busts. Few hits. Who care so long as we sign them all?

        Do you think the Big 8 in the 1980’s was market economics? Fuck no! It was rich guys from SMU trying to beat their UT alum friends in football.

        You put it in the open and legitimize it and it will be nuts.

        Remember a banner booster from Memphis paid a hs coach 150k for a DT….over 20 years ago. Stop acting like this is Adam Smith shit. It ain’t.

        Like

        • Do you think the Big 8 in the 1980’s was market economics? Fuck no! It was rich guys from SMU trying to beat their UT alum friends in football.

          How is this any different than any other labor market where buyers of the labor are free to offer sellers with a high-demand / low-supply skillset whatever they want?

          Just say you don’t like players being paid instead of making up economic theory to fit your feelings about the subject.

          Like

          • Derek

            I have said that too. You can actually say both.

            It’s only different because it’s supposed to be a competitive sport.

            Do you want google playing yahoo? I get that the market picked google, but it’s no longer worth watching that contest is it?

            Sports leagues are not traditional businesses. They require all teams a certain level of success to maintain fan interest. It’s an all for one one for all sorta setting. You tilt the playing field to the point no one thinks they have a chance and interest is lost.

            There is a reason why AAAAAA HS teams don’t play A teams. If you let the big schools distort it even more, by whatever means, there’s even less reason for it.

            Like

            • Sports leagues are not traditional businesses. They require all teams a certain level of success to maintain fan interest. It’s an all for one one for all sorta setting. You tilt the playing field to the point no one thinks they have a chance and interest is lost.

              What game have you been watching the last 50 years? Here are your teams that have won multiple national titles since 1969 – Nebraska, Oklahoma, Clemson, Miami, Alabama, Notre Dame, USC, Texas, FSU, LSU, Florida, Penn State, and Ohio State. To put into perspective, those 13 teams are only 10% of the FBS. Starting with the 1969 season – there have only been six seasons where one of those teams did not win the national title. That’s 88% of the national titles since 1970!

              CFB at the highest level has never been about competitive parity and never will be. Just because the boosters of those schools could pay above the table won’t tilt the playing field anymore than it already is.

              Like

              • Derek

                Making the discrepancy worse will no doubt help.

                People of West African descent dominate the sprints in the Olympics. Why not allow them the use of steroids if they want to?

                You think it will change anything?

                Like

        • Do you think the Big 8 in the 1980’s was market economics? Fuck no! It was rich guys from SMU trying to beat their UT alum friends in football.

          You put it in the open and legitimize it and it will be nuts.

          Remember a banner booster from Memphis paid a hs coach 150k for a DT….over 20 years ago. Stop acting like this is Adam Smith shit. It ain’t.

          You’d think a guy who’s an “Adam Smith shit” economics expert would recognize that things cost more on the black market because of added risk. Eh, but what do I know?

          Like

          • Derek

            So you’re saying that Cam Newton would go for under 180k in a free market?

            Dude? Really? You cannot be serious. That’s beneath you.

            Like

            • So you’re saying things don’t cost more on the black market because of increased risk? Interesting.

              Like

              • Derek

                I’m saying that you’re simplifying to fit your narrative and doing it without intellectual discipline. It’s called “confirmation bias.”

                The reason drugs cost more where they are illegal is not only because of risk but also because supply is impacted.

                Here, supply of players does not change. The buyers in the black market aren’t necessarily the deepest pockets but are the least risk averse. People with far more money sit it out because it’s illegal. Open it up and the market changes.

                We really don’t need to get into any theory anyway.

                My point remains. Cecil puts his son up in a public auction and the bidding goes way the fuck higher than 180k.

                Your drug analogy fails miserably.

                Like

              • mp

                I think it’s actually a little murky in this case, actually. The Supply (a player willing to get illicit payments) and Demand (boosters willing to risk ineligibility for the player, probation for their team, and disassociation as a booster from their beloved programs) both operate with risk. If Cam’s dad had been able to call Phil Knight and all the other fat cats and tell him that Cam was available for the right price, that would have gotten a much nicer roof on the church that just dealing with the cow colleges of Auburn & MSU. Now, if EVERY player were available, the top players at the positions of need will always get paid plenty as more schools bid for them, the middle tier will likey slot in some more moderate range, and there may likely be a bottom tier can maybe be had for just scholarship + stipend from the G5 schools (just like there is a class of league minimum players in the NFL or MLB). It all just works like any other free agency.

                Like

        • FlyingPeakDawg

          You keep coming back to the fear that Bama would buy all the best players. Why do you think all those other teams’ boosters would let that happen? In fact, Bama’s advantage in recruiting now is Saban, facilities and recent history of championships. Money can neutralize that advantage. Or the money will be neutralized (everybody bids the same) and the top kids defer back to playing for Saban and Bama…right where we started, but now kids are earning cash for their own image and likeness. Who got harmed?

          BTW..your examples where schools and boosters violated the rules is exactly the example of where the lack of an open market creates distortions.

          Like the Senator says…if you want to stick with the argument that the appeal / romance of CFB will be ruined, fine. I tend to agree and even suggest we’re already well beyond the tipping point.

          Like

          • Derek

            Because they’re stupider. They revolve their lives around football more than others do.

            This is like telling me you can’t go into an all you can eat pizza joint and not pick out who is cutting into the businesses margins and who isn’t.

            Bama is the 400 lb guy whose been there for 6 hours. You can tell. And you should know this before you open the doors. It’s called common damn sense.

            If you think everyone is 5’10 and 160 and eats 3 slices and leaves, well I’m sorry, you’re a fucking idiot.

            Like

            • Gaskilldawg

              Every person in Alabama can mortgage his or her single wide to raise money for paying players for endorsements but they can only pay 85 at a time, just as now. So no, I am not worried that Alabama and Auburn will get all of the top 100 every year.

              Like

        • CB

          Right because all of the sudden coaches will lose the ability to evaluate players, and will just throw money at any direction Radi Nabulsi points them toward. Plus there are all these mythical Bama billionaires just waiting in the wings LOL. Like, they’re just on standby waiting to pounce or what is your thesis on their current whereabouts? Oh, and you forgot to mention the mandatory draft of high schoolers that will definitely have to be implemented if players are paid.

          Don’t doubt Derek guys, he knows what he’s talking about. He was a non scholarship athlete for a semester.

          Like

          • Derek

            It’s called “expertise!”

            The schools ain’t the ones spending dipshit.

            Yes, Saban would circulate a list of exactly who he wanted. This would include who he wanted to play and who he wanted to keep from playing for another team. Bear did that when the scholly limits were higher.

            And yes, there’s plenty of money in Alabama alums pockets. Plenty.

            Like

            • CB

              Right, schools are the ones spending now though right? No donors involved in the current system. Good to know. Another genius insight.

              Now scholly limits will be increased? Wow, another incredible analysis. Obviously Saban would never sign players to keep them from other schools just to bury them on the depth chart under the current system.

              Derek you are the true doomsday prophet. An absolute gem 💎 of knowledge.

              Like

        • mp

          Yes, the Big 8 in the 1980s was market economics. A black market is a market, just a lot less efficient, and Adam Smith was addressing all those kinds. If the boosters already have been paying kids, then what’s the difference? Bring it in out of the shadows. If it seems nuts that the rich boosters from UT see that it costs another $100k to get a kid to flip from A&M to UT, that’s your right to say it’s nuts. I think it’s nuts what people spend their money on, too. But, at least the kid in this case, gets to set the price.

          Like

          • Derek

            In that case a casino that serves meth and lets the mafia do on site lending is a market too.

            Which in some ways is fine with me. However, we’re going to need a lot more fucking security devices if we’re going to live in such a world.

            If the kids are already being paid then why do they need to be paid? What interest is furthered exactly?

            Like

            • The same interest that’s being furthered by you receiving fair market compensation.

              Like

              • Derek

                Since it’s a black market aren’t they getting just a little bit extra?

                Let’s try for some intellectual consistency here…

                As far as my market worth, I sure would like it to be dependent upon some rich assholes ego.

                Like

                • mp

                  Many are unwilling to break NCAA’s bullshit rules, so the market isn’t fair. I don’t blame those who don’t want to risk being ineligible and case aside. It can cripple their career. The money is there to be had, but they aren’t able to access it.

                  Like

                • Derek

                  What deflection?

                  You are the one having it both ways:

                  they need fair comp

                  black market increases said comp.

                  It seems to me that either you have to admit that the black market does not result in more money in these kids pockets OR you have to take the position that you are for them getting less than they are now.

                  Of course, the answer is that the black market thing above was complete and total bs.

                  We kinda know what the black market was. Means was bought for 200k in 1997 dollars. Cam was put up for 180K in 2010.

                  Let’s just all admit that those numbers are going way the fuck up even if Means was a bust. Why? Cam got a natty!

                  A 6’5″ 260 lb QB who can run in the transfer portal is going to be worth an excess of 7 figures for a single year.

                  Oh, and they will all ALL enter the transfer portal because, why not? Time to renegotiate!!

                  Like

  2. HirsuteDawg

    for a FatCat it would be cheaper than owning a pro team and a lot more fun

    Like

  3. mp

    Speaking of recruiting, any recruitniks able to offer any comfort on the fact that UGA still only has 5 commitments for 2020 (granted that the 5 are all high quality)? Falling behind Bama’s 14 commits in a big way.

    Like

    • Derek

      Similar differences existed last spring. It corrected itself by mid-summer.

      As I recall miami was No. 1 nationally in recruiting at this time last year. Didn’t quite work out that way.

      Like

      • mp

        Fair enough, but I’m seeing a lot of Clemson leans in the crystal ball rankings…don’t think they’re going away any time soon unlike Miami.

        Like

    • Trbodawg

      In recruiting, as in life, it’s not where you start, it’s where you finish 🙂

      Like

  4. Huntindawg

    I am resigned to the fact that P5 college football has very few true student athletes. Might as well pay them since they aren’t in school for the education anyway. (A little overstatement, but the exceptions probably prove the rule.)

    Here’s what I think: Have a draft for P5. If it’s a professional league, run it like a professional league. Undrafted players are free agents. Maybe they are the ones that get a scholarship and actually use it for the purpose intended.

    Like

    • Derek

      Or apply the first rule of holes. Stop digging. Try filling the hole in a bit.

      Just play with students. It’ll be fine. If people cared how good they are at football they’d have watched the AAF,

      Put Auburn jerseys on one side and Bama jerseys on the other and Legion Field would have been sold out.

      Like

      • “Just play with students. It’ll be fine.”

        Do you mean change all varsity collegiate athletics to the equivalent of club teams? If so, that ship sailed long ago and isn’t coming back.

        Like

        • Derek

          Not “club” which are basically unaffiliated and unofficial, but largely drawn from the same pool of students, yes.

          Let’s play with students who are also good at football.

          All the fan wants is a level playing field. If we needed a Tom Brady in order to be interested enough to watch, we’d be NFL fans.

          If the quality of the player or play were that important to us we’d all be falcons fans.

          The falcons would beat UGA by five tds in the first half. Who gives a damn? Does that make you want to watch Atlanta at Cincinnati anymore?

          Like

          • I wouldn’t have a problem with that if every university in the Power 5 had the same admissions standards.

            The NCAA clearinghouse is supposed to have that responsibility to make sure that a freshman meets the requirements to be eligible to compete and to level the playing field.

            The real question is whether a scholarship athlete has any desire to be there for the academic opportunity.

            Like

            • Derek

              Wouldn’t take raising them a hell of a lot to clear out all the “why do I have to go to class? No one is paying to watch me read,” crowd. Besides I can’t imagine what would happen in southern states if all of a sudden a vast proportion of its domestic production of football players couldn’t gain entry to State U. They might like educate them or something! Imagine that! Taking education seriously. Who’d have imagined it possible?

              The community, the kids and the state would be under pressure to achieve in the classroom rather than passing these kids along because they’re big and fast.

              Like

          • Gaskilldawg

            That’s why Harvard versus Yale is called “The Big Game.”

            Like