Not much, says Paul Myerberg.
There is the question of how programs located in states with NIL legislation on the books may have a distinct recruiting advantage over the rest of the NCAA. All things being equal, a prospective student-athlete may choose one program over another based on the ability to draw compensation, creating a temporarily uneven recruiting landscape.
That advantage may continue for two types of schools. One is the school able to present the best program for maximizing an athlete’s NIL rights. The second is the specific program with the largest national footprint — Alabama football, Duke men’s basketball, UConn women’s basketball and others.
It would seem logical that these national powers would have the financial wherewithal to present student-athletes with the most in-depth NIL assistance, giving these programs a leg up on their peers in recruiting. Not that this would change much: Those schools dominate the recruiting landscape as it is.
P5 schools are already budgeting for NIL support.
These companies provide a window into what NIL legislation may cost major universities willing to make a heavy investment: Opendorse, which was co-founded by a former Nebraska linebacker, has partnered with the Cornhuskers’ athletics department on a deal worth $250,000 annually.
Recent news from Washington gives further insight into the expenses associated with meeting the demands of NIL. The Huskies’ projected budget for the 2022 fiscal year includes a $1.75 million placeholder for NIL legislation and the potential fallout from NCAA v. Alston.
Is Georgia? Well, I’d bet money Kirby’s been on that particular mother for a while now. As far the rest of the athletic department goes, your guess is as good as mine.
************************************************************************
UPDATE: Interesting perspective here ($$):
I strongly suspect the promised money to recruits will spike in the first few years, and as businesses don’t get return on their investment, that money flows much more freely to established upperclassmen eventually. This is about advertising. If you put Kennedy Chandler or Brandon Huntley-Hatfield or even a guy like Brock Vandagriff on a billboard right now, would that resonate? I’d say it’s way too soon for that. The average fan isn’t going to recognize those faces or names. But when they do something and become household names, that’s where the real investment lies and where the most money will be up for grabs. Recruits will probably be able to make some money on social media (sell your recruiting updates on Patreon, fellas), but I really believe NIL as a recruiting tool in terms of actual cash and not “Look what’s possible if you come here” isn’t going to be as big of a deal as some think.
I think that’s more the case for football then men’s basketball, but I do think there’s a lot of truth there. If I were a business person who had five figures to sink into a college athlete, paying it to someone established on the college level seems to be a more rational choice than to pay it to an unproven recruit.
Now, I also recognize that there are going to be irrational actors out there, but even for them, there’s got to be a limit as to how many times they’ll be willing to invest in a crapshoot that has a decent chance of not paying off immediately. Of course, YMMV.
Get The Picture 
In 2017, if I’m Athens BMW, I’m placing my bet on Jacob Eason not Jake Fromm. That would be a poor decision in hindsight, but at the time, Eason was the big man on campus.
There are going to be the idiots who think they can buy a team with NIL. Eventually, that runs into reality of return on investment.
No college athlete is going to become a national/global representative for a big brand. The athletes will make some money off their social media, and good for them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Other than signing memorabilia for some spending money, I don’t see the average player really getting anything out of NIL. The Fields, Lawrences, and Tuas of college football may make some cash but the others will likely be ignored.
LikeLike
They’ll get more money out of social media than from billboards. Now guys like the kicker from UCF can make money from YouTube as an online DJ or whatever it was the NCAA wouldn’t let him do. No more Jeremy Blooms either.
LikeLike
It will be interesting to see. There are, what, something like 450,000 NCAA athletes across every college in the USA? It’s waaaay to many mouths to feed except for the absolute elite tier of athletes.
LikeLike
I guess it depends on why a business is spending their money. Jimmy Rane won’t be endorsing athletes with the intention of selling more treated lumber. He wants to make Auburn better so he’ll funnel his cash towards bringing in top recruits. Yes a local car dealership wants the known star of the team for their ad but I’d suspect there will be a ton of cash thrown at the recruiting end of the spectrum.
LikeLike
The issue with Yella Wood guy is that under many of the state laws there can be no promise of NLI money in exchange for signing a LOI to attend a particular school. I also don’t think the school can arrange deals for student-athletes. I’m pretty sure the Georgia and Florida laws have made that illegal.
LikeLike
Got a bridge on Brooklyn to sale ya
LikeLike
I guess if these guys are willing to violate state law (and have their companies in violation of state law) to recruit players, you may have a point. I tend to think that self-preservation of themselves and their companies are more important than some 17-18 year old’s signature.
LikeLike
*is
LikeLike
In the world of bagmen we live in now, I guarantee there will be handshake deals made with recruits with promises for endorsements if they sign.
LikeLike
Promises made by bagmen aren’t contracts that can be enforced in a court of law.
LikeLike
That’s why bagmen have “Roccos” around, to help folks find their wallets….
LikeLike
The Knight Commission actually had a big forum with Gonzaga and Washington U the past couple of days where they discussed some of these laws in more depth. And one of the big sticking points is that a lot of states are including language that prohibits students from being allowed to endorse tobacco products, gambling, or adult entertainment enterprises. They’re also providing that compensation has to be offered at a fair market value as a measure of preventing using the guise of NIL as a way of over-paying an athlete for enrollment. They can still offer a recruit future endorsement opportunity (which would now be a violation of state law, not just NCAA rules) but so too could every other booster at every other school and theoretically they would have to cap those inducements at a fair market value, seriously negating the impact of that strategy. Also, of course, boosters would have to deliver on those promises of endorsement as well which would get around pretty quick in recruiting circles those who welch on their illegal assurances.
LikeLike
Interesting on fair market value — I wonder how that will be assessed? Like art, FMV for NIL is whatever people are willing to pay.
My broader reaction is that bag men are prohibited now with little effect. Proving that an NLI endorsement was offered and conditioned on enrollment is going to be extremely difficult.
And what is the incentive for states to prosecute? Elected AGs have a long list of priorities, and these will be difficult, resource intensive cases.
How this leads to anything other than the legalization of bag men, I don’t know. But personally I have no problem with that — why shouldn’t boosters be able to pay recruits? My only concern is that they should be allowed to create mutually binding contracts.
LikeLike
I’d imagine the FMV assessment will come from the schools as all athletes will be required to report their NIL deals to their school’s compliance office, including with whom the deal has been signed and for what amount (nevermind tax filings). This also creates a level of accountability for school wherein I imagine they will be required to flag and report any deal that seems out of place (i.e. former #1 overall HS recruit from out of state suddenly is being paid $500K to endorse a well-known lumber company).
I mean if illegal activity has taken place, that’s supposed to be incentive enough for an AG to bring charges. How much of a priority it is to prosecute those cases quickly is certainly up for debate. But I’d imagine there could be an interesting dynamic between the school-affiliations of an AG and the local boosters who may or may not share that same allegiance.
There’s nothing wrong with the concept of paying someone for their skilled labor (ex. schools giving an athlete a scholarship to compete for the school). The reason “bagmen” is a derisive label is because they allegedly skew the recruiting playing field (which is less a proven occurrence and more a favorite bogeyman for slighted fans after a recruit picks another school).
LikeLike
How about money that flows through something the team/school does? Like an ad that features the team generally? I figure pre NIL maybe the school keeps the money, do they distribute it out amongst the players now?
LikeLike
From what I understand, that depends on who the contract is with. If it’s a school enterprise, the school gets the money and the appearance of the athletes comes as a condition of their participating with the team. This is another big topic of discussion as what can/does a coach or AD do when a student refuses to participate in a team activity because they’re not being compensated? Can they bench that player or suspend him? And to what end can a student use promotional material created by the school that might feature that individual in their own social media posts? Is that considered the school providing benefit to an individual athlete?
Lot of nuance that will have to be unpacked!
LikeLike
I doubt vandergriff on a billboard is slinging Chevy trailblazer for Rowe Chevrolet store is the reason of all this??? It’s a way to sleeve money to players to get them to sign at UGA? Gonna be shitshow from what I can tell
LikeLike
Players will have monies before college. Monetizing social media and the AAU/7-0n-7 cabals will be on the mother ASAP. Shoe deals for twelve year-olds!! I suspect what Saban tries (so you know Kirby will) is to streamline the process so players don’t get distracted. Figure on an army of content creators and quasi-agents all over the place because if you think control freak coaches are gonna let dudes tool around at autograph shows and not watch film, good luck. The interesting thing (to me) is where the social media money goes for non-football players. One weird observation: I have some friends (believe it or not) that are track geeks and went from rooting against UGA just for fun to antagonize me (up until the Rose Bowl) that immediately are rocking UGA gear because they LOVE Matt Boling and have been all in on SEC track this year watching YouTube clips of races but not SEC Network broadcasts. Texting me if I ever see him around town and stuff. If a few people with a low-level connection to UGA are following a sprinter, it adds up. Lots of female athletes in niche sports do all sorts of Instagram posts and shout out to the clothing companies and stuff. The UCLA gymnast’s viral video comes to mind, so I’m not sure the media hacks reporting (positively or negatively) on this really know anything more than we do.
As far as donations not going to schools? Rest assured the Georgia Way is on the mother; figure squeezing more money out of big donors for access that keeps the cheap seat fans with a less of an experience (way of the world, sadly).
LikeLike
NIL does not change the dark money market by much. If Mr. Yellowwood does a NIL deal for a recruit, he can’t put the quid pro quo of signing with Auburn in writing. If he’s dumb enough to guarantee any of the NIL money upfront, Kirby tells the kid to take the YW money and come play for the Dawgs. Nothing YW can do about it, So YW and the bagmen live on in the shadows so they can enforce their own deals.
Nike is not likely to throw money around other than to the biggest proven stars and maybe a little seed money on social media for prospective future social influencers. A drop in the bucket compared to what they get and pay for team endorsements.
Athens BMW can sponsor a signing day with a few players. Would bring hundreds of fans to the showroom, players earn some autograph money and a modest appearance fee. Not much there.
It will be up to the SA’s, with professional guidance, to find revenue generating platforms on the webernets. If UGA and Bama do that, but Vandy doesn’t, then Vandy just adds another recruiting disadvantage to the mix.
There will be some strange outlier deals initially, but the laws of economics should ultimately prevail. NIL is not about TV or gate receipts or merchandising revenue sharing. It’s just about side money that was being cut-off. Kids win, bagmen survive.
LikeLike
The old SWC boosters certainly weren’t interested in “investing” in unproven players. And why would they?
Auburn obviously didn’t lead the universe in this particular area of (former) crime by taking chances on mere recruits. Cam was only offered 180k IF he came and played well or something.
The 200k Alabama paid for Albert Means was merely conditional based upon his subsequent attraction in the market place.
Sometimes it seems to me that no one remembers that yesterday happened and perhaps that prior experience might enlighten our expectations for tomorrow.
What’s most laughable is the idea that the money “invested” is about “advertising.” The fraction of these guys that could move a unit of ANYTHING over other available options is infinitesimal.
But sure, the example of paying Means 200k (in 1996-ish dollars) and did not do jack shit in college is no bellwether for an irrational market place when it comes to college football recruiting.
LikeLike
None of those folks used NIL to offer money, so why would they need NIL now?
LikeLike
They don’t. They just needed cover before. Now they don’t need any cover.
Auburn was simply a pioneer. Not the outlaws they’ve been unfairly branded as.
Pat Dye is Auburn’s Harriet Tubman. Yesterday’s scofflaw since vindicated by history.
LikeLike
The acts you describe would violate every NIL law I’ve seen, so they would all still need cover.
LikeLike
I’m more bullish on their creativity than you are.
I also think there is every reason to expect a lot of shrugs and so whats to technical violations.
Its like legalizing weed smoked in pipes but banning weed smoked with rolling papers. I don’t think doobies are getting a lot of attention once the getting high part has been deemed acceptable.
In short, once they can make the money, no one will much care about the when and how.
Whatever attempts have been made to make this appear legitimate and above board will devolve quickly because:
LikeLike
I’ll give you credit for one thing: you are the GTP king of strained analogies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh sure, I have a crown and a scepter and a throne and a castle and a moat. Really?
Calling me, a king? Seriously?!?! So many distinctions that I couldn’t possibly focus on the point which is probably that I stand accused of doing something more frequently than others. But I’d rather demean the attempt at a non-literal comparison by focusing on its weakness in a literal sense.
Am I doing similes, analogies and metaphors right now?
Shakespeare reimagined:
“Who is that in the window? It is Juliet, and Juliet is Juliet.”
FIFY
LikeLike
Senator, given that I have not followed the minutiae of how NIL laws are evolving, I’m interested in your analysis of (a) how exactly they will prohibit bag men from a compliance perspective (e.g. how will they distinguish between an offer and a promise or mere inference, and how much that distinction will matter in practice), and (b) how you see enforcement playing out in practice (both in terms of burden of proof as well as the political incentives). Probably fodder for its own post if you’re willing to take the time to write one.
I always appreciate your insights — can’t believe this site is free.
LikeLike
You and me both. 🍿
LikeLike
I intend to write a post about this, but I’m waiting until after the POTUS rules in Alston and July 1st passes, because it’ll be easier to see where things are going.
The one thing I don’t get is all the gnashing of teeth about bag men. They’re already passing money under the table, so what difference does an NIL law make? (If we’re talking about boosters going to town, well, maybe, although I’m not convinced yet.)
LikeLike
Some think the bag men and the schools they represent should be penalized for it.
It was amazing what putting SMU down did for at least for awhile.
Carlin said it best:
You execute a few football and basketball programs and see how clean the sport gets.
LikeLike
You are missing my point. I don’t have a problem punishing bag men.
I’m just saying it’s illogical to expect they’re going to come out in the open because of NIL legislation. Why would they want the attention?
LikeLike
The bag men will still have a purpose. They may be a bit repurposed to get to the same end.
LikeLike
Yep, the other thing that gets me is everyone around here is so sure we’re always going to be on top, with BS like the “Kirby’s on the mother”, “he’s ahead of the game”, and similarly totally unfounded predictions about the future. They probably would have said the same thing in ’85, but look at hos the ’90s turned out for us. It’s easy to imagine a scenario in which the Haslams quadruple-down on Tennessee football, we flip spots, and its the ’90s all over again…. When the bottom line on everything is about the money, I think you’ll see much sharper and more immediate swings in fortunes for the schools that are super-committed.
LikeLike
(oops that was supposed to be a reply to Derek, maybe one day I’ll figure this out!)
LikeLike
Not that it determines my position on these issues, but isn’t that hard to imagine that our moneyed boosters see themselves as more rational and dignified than some of our counterparts.
Who is our Jimmy Rane or Bobby Lowder or Logan Young?
LikeLike
LOL. They’ve had two decades to make that happen!
LikeLike
The direct payment option has just arrived.
Kids are cheaper to buy than facilities and you don’t have to wonder whether they’ll leave impressed. Now they can just make an offer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As Derek alluded to, recruiting is going to be reduced to a pure, base financial transaction. The exchange of immediate (or imminent) sums of money is a lot different than looking at the shiny buildings, academics, potential “soft” benefits, potential to get ready for The League, etc. – all of the latter of those things are subjective and somewhat speculative. Straight cash is pretty objective…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the overlay with the transfer portal is another key to understanding the impact. It will be hard enough to prove that an NIL contract was offered prior to and conditioned on enrollment, but any player who is not getting the NIL payments they think they deserve is going to hit up the transfer portal and start sounding out their opportunities in other markets. The credibility of NIL offers, promises, or allusions, formal or informal, prior to enrollment will be tied to the actual payments to current players. Current bag men will appreciate the legitimacy and decreased risk of paying via an NIL agreement, and a large number of new payors will enter the market who previously stayed out due to the risk, moral concerns, or simply a lack of awareness about how to go about doing it.
Again (following my previous comment), not that I have any problem with any of that. It’s a win-win for everyone involved (except the schools/markets that can’t compete financially, but that’s the world we live in already).
LikeLike