SMU portal exodus story

[southsideguy]

This will make it hard to have depth on a team.  Will the coaches use everyone until the fifth game?  

[zenhuddy]

I honestly don’t give a Rats what a coach makes and think this is amateur sport - take for instance an SMU or TCU recruit  - you get a scholarship that’s worth roughly 250k+ for 4 yrs and gets contacts that can change their lives forever, plus they are treated like kings with nice lodging, massages, tudors, etc. To me this is good old greed and I’m just not a supporter of an 18 or 19yr old getting 500k or more - then to think they could walk away from that school like the kid at LSU and keep the money because of fear if they retaliate it might run some potential players away!  We as a society have forgot how to say NO like we were told ( for reference I’m old schooler born in 59’) as young guns.  The thing I love about college football is the guys there are playing to get the Big Pay Day chance. They Earned that chance through hard work and perseverance- this is more of the new “entitled spirit” we see so prevalent now that makes me wanna throw up.  This is just one guys opinion and I don’t align with all of the banter on this thread but I’m ok with that and don’t have to be right, I’m probably just an old “retired from the corp world” dinosaur 🦖 ha  - I’m done with my old rant - thanks mean green fans. 

[GMG_Dallas]

47 minutes ago, zenhuddy said:

I honestly don’t give a Rats what a coach makes and think this is amateur sport - take for instance an SMU or TCU recruit  - you get a scholarship that’s worth roughly 250k+ for 4 yrs and gets contacts that can change their lives forever, plus they are treated like kings with nice lodging, massages, tudors, etc. To me this is good old greed and I’m just not a supporter of an 18 or 19yr old getting 500k or more - then to think they could walk away from that school like the kid at LSU and keep the money because of fear if they retaliate it might run some potential players away!  We as a society have forgot how to say NO like we were told ( for reference I’m old schooler born in 59’) as young guns.  The thing I love about college football is the guys there are playing to get the Big Pay Day chance. They Earned that chance through hard work and perseverance- this is more of the new “entitled spirit” we see so prevalent now that makes me wanna throw up.  This is just one guys opinion and I don’t align with all of the banter on this thread but I’m ok with that and don’t have to be right, I’m probably just an old “retired from the corp world” dinosaur 🦖 ha  - I’m done with my old rant - thanks mean green fans. 

I agree with the sentiment, however, we created this problem by giving college sports so many eyeballs that the NCAA generated $1.16 billion in revenue in 2021. I understand the players get an education but if we're being honest, some of the big name players are generating way more ad dollars for the NCAA than what their scholarship is worth. An Alabama in-state tuition is currently $26k per year including room and board so roughly $105k for 4 years. How is a star player like Bryce Young being greedy when he's making the NCAA tens of millions in ad dollars for $100k when until recently he wouldn't even be authorized to get a part-time job to cover personal expenses? Sounds like the NCAA is the one that's been greedy.

[NT93]

1 hour ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I agree with the sentiment, however, we created this problem by giving college sports so many eyeballs that the NCAA generated $1.16 billion in revenue in 2021. I understand the players get an education but if we're being honest, some of the big name players are generating way more ad dollars for the NCAA than what their scholarship is worth. An Alabama in-state tuition is currently $26k per year including room and board so roughly $105k for 4 years. How is a star player like Bryce Young being greedy when he's making the NCAA tens of millions in ad dollars for $100k when until recently he wouldn't even be authorized to get a part-time job to cover personal expenses? Sounds like the NCAA is the one that's been greedy.

Starbucks grossed $21.6 million in 2021 and they didn’t provide a stage for their 18-21 year old employees to showcase their talents for a chance to make millions of dollars nor do they provide them coaches to help them improve their chances of making millions after college.  

Sorry, but that’s the way it is in business.  The ones who do the dirty work and are often the face of the organization are often the ones who are working for peanuts. 

It was mentioned that colleges recruit players which is true, but players also try to sell themselves to a university.  Parents pay more than the cost of a scholarship to give their kid a chance to get a scholarship. Why would they do that if the system is so unfair?

[GMG_Dallas]

1 minute ago, NT93 said:

Starbucks grossed $21.6 million in 2021 and they didn’t provide a stage for their 18-21 year old employees to showcase their talents for a chance to make millions of dollars nor do they provide them coaches to help them improve their chances of making millions after college.  

Sorry, but that’s the way it is in business.  The ones who do the dirty work and are often the face of the organization are often the ones who are working for peanuts. 

It was mentioned that colleges recruit players which is true, but players also try to sell themselves to a university.  Parents pay more than the cost of a scholarship to give their kid a chance to get a scholarship. Why would they do that if the system is so unfair?

Honestly didn't even read all of this after the Starbucks comparison. You can't compare a barista who operates on basic recipes and defrosting/heating pre-made food items to an athlete with a specific set of skills that's taken a decade or more of work to perform at a high level. I say this as somebody who worked for Starbucks as a barista. They're replaceable in the grand scheme of business operations. In comparison to an athletics team, one player can't be replaced by another random student without the decade plus of training and attain the same result. Terrible comparison. The world of entertainment pays what it does to top performers for a reason. Many of these guys at the FBS level are still amongst top performers.

[NT93]

I used Starbucks because someone mentioned them in a previous post.  I realize it’s not apples to apples, but the truth is that in both scenarios (and in many businesses) the worker who is performing the work that is making all the money, makes the least amount of money.  
You kind of made my point though.  These players have skills that can make them millionaires, but they need a place to showcase those talents.  The NCAA (and specifically it’s schools/alumni) provides that opportunity.

I’m sure if there was a profit to be made in a professional league as an alternative to the NCAA, someone would have started that league.  As it stands, the players who want to go pro need the NCAA more the NCAA needs the players.

[GMG_Dallas]

9 minutes ago, NT93 said:

I used Starbucks because someone mentioned them in a previous post.  I realize it’s not apples to apples, but the truth is that in both scenarios (and in many businesses) the worker who is performing the work that is making all the money, makes the least amount of money.  
You kind of made my point though.  These players have skills that can make them millionaires, but they need a place to showcase those talents.  The NCAA (and specifically it’s schools/alumni) provides that opportunity.

I’m sure if there was a profit to be made in a professional league as an alternative to the NCAA, someone would have started that league.  As it stands, the players who want to go pro need the NCAA more the NCAA needs the players.

All these athletes are individual brands just like singers, actors, comedians, and other entertainers. While yes, they need the NCAA to showcase their talents, it's a mutual relationship. I don't think I need to go into details but to keep it simple, the level of play still needs to be decent for your average fan to tune in. You can't just replace the top 1000 college football players with guys of a much lower skill level and expect the same results.  That said, many of the biggest players earned their money from their high school days or other showcases. Your top high school athletes are getting huge online followings prior to college affiliations and are already earning significant money prior to getting to college no different than any other social media "influencer." The top two female NIL earners are gymnasts and arrived at LSU and Auburn as millionaires. Quinn Ewers was nearly a celebrity at Southlake and has 140,000 Instagram followers. He could market himself to make money with or without UT if he really wanted to, again, no differently than any other social media "influencers."

[NT93]

4 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

All these athletes are individual brands just like singers, actors, comedians, and other entertainers.
 

You can't just replace the top 1000 college football players with guys of a much lower skill level and expect the same results. 

The first part here is the problem.  I always thought football was a team sport, but not anymore.  Me, me, me.

The second part I know is true, but I’m sure we would disagree as to how much of a difference it would make.  I think alumni are going to follow their school regardless, especially if they are winning.  This is what makes the NCAA unique.  The average alumni doesn’t know anything about football, they’re just going to the game to tailgate and have fun.  They’re happy if their team wins, but they wouldn’t notice a drop off in talent.

[GMG_Dallas]

13 minutes ago, NT93 said:

The first part here is the problem.  I always thought football was a team sport, but not anymore.  Me, me, me.

The second part I know is true, but I’m sure we would disagree as to how much of a difference it would make.  I think alumni are going to follow their school regardless, especially if they are winning.  This is what makes the NCAA unique.  The average alumni doesn’t know anything about football, they’re just going to the game to tailgate and have fun.  They’re happy if their team wins, but they wouldn’t notice a drop off in talent.

The average alumni, as we can see in the 7th straight year of declining attendance nationwide, doesn't care in the slightest about sports other than wearing a shirt every now and then. The tv viewership (the money) is the sports fans. Many watch their school and then watch the top 25 games because the level is generally good. People might tune in to watch the Colts - Broncos every now and then but if every game looked like that, people would stop watching which is why the other start-up football leagues can't get any traction. The quality is generally poor.

Back to the original topic and your first response, I guess we can agree to disagree. The college football 4 team playoff generates about $103 million per year. Do you think it would generate as much money if all four playoff teams were sub .500 teams? I don't. And for that reason, I understand the top talents getting to earn money by marketing themselves. Just my opinion.

[NT93]

20 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

The average alumni, as we can see in the 7th straight year of declining attendance nationwide, doesn't care in the slightest about sports other than wearing a shirt every now and then. The tv viewership (the money) is the sports fans. Many watch their school and then watch the top 25 games because the level is generally good. People might tune in to watch the Colts - Broncos every now and then but if every game looked like that, people would stop watching which is why the other start-up football leagues can't get any traction. The quality is generally poor.

Back to the original topic and your first response, I guess we can agree to disagree. The college football 4 team playoff generates about $103 million per year. Do you think it would generate as much money if all four playoff teams were sub .500 teams? I don't. And for that reason, I understand the top talents getting to earn money by marketing themselves. Just my opinion.

Why would the four teams in the playoff have sub .500 records?  If the talent level was down a cross the board, you’d still have the winners and the losers.  So Alabama (for example) would still be 11-0, they’d just be a less talented team playing other less talented teams.

Start up leagues can’t get traction because they don’t have the tradition, not just because of talent.  Most people will tune in to watch a winning Alabama team simply because it’s Alabama.

But yes, agree to disagree. Go Mean Green.

Edited October 8, 2022 by NT93

[GMG_Dallas]

4 minutes ago, NT93 said:

Why would the four teams in the playoff have sub .500 records?  If the talent level was down a cross the board, you’d still have the winners and the losers.  So Alabama (for example) would still be 11-0, they’d just be a less talented team playing other less talented teams.

But yes, agree to disagree. Go Mean Green.

I'm saying the money generated is because the best teams, who generally have the best talents (and some of the biggest names), are playing. If So Alabama and UNT are 12-0 because all the top college players left, there's no more big names playing and people won't be watching. Same reason the start-up football leagues haven't worked out.

[akriesman]

2 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I'm saying the money generated is because the best teams, who generally have the best talents (and some of the biggest names), are playing. If So Alabama and UNT are 12-0 because all the top college players left, there's no more big names playing and people won't be watching. Same reason the start-up football leagues haven't worked out.

Just like the NCAA BB Tournament, there are a whole lot of people that want to see the upstarts beat the perennial powers.  For me and many others, the first 2 days of the NCAA BB tourney are the most exciting.   Outside of the powerhouse teams alumni, I think the rest of the country would like to see someone new take them down.

Frankly, I think most of the nation is tired of the same P5 teams winning every year.  

[GMG_Dallas]

5 hours ago, akriesman said:

Just like the NCAA BB Tournament, there are a whole lot of people that want to see the upstarts beat the perennial powers.  For me and many others, the first 2 days of the NCAA BB tourney are the most exciting.   Outside of the powerhouse teams alumni, I think the rest of the country would like to see someone new take them down.

Frankly, I think most of the nation is tired of the same P5 teams winning every year.  

I agree with you on a personal level, however, there's a reason the NFL and NBA sees consistent growth while the MLB has seen consist ratings decline dating back to before covid. It all comes down to marketing the star players. It's harder to do at the college level because they're only there for 4 yearish years. March Madness has been branded towards the shock factor so you're right in a sense but that's a completely different beast than what football is working with. College football has been marketing its star players for a long time now and those players generate views. Maybe not you but in general it does. If the NCAA can market its star players then they should be able to market themselves. That's what this entire conversation boils down to. Some of y'all are ok with the NCAA generating over a billion dollars off the performance of athletes but not ok with the athletes doing the same. It's hypocritical. I'm not going to keep having this conversation but look at the NBA and NFL and see what they do with their star players and see why those stars get the majority of the money. Marketing dollars. 

[zenhuddy]

Awesome debate on the thread - Sadly Pandora’s box is open as the NIL is alive and the lid will not be put back on. Parity in the league is assured to not transpire, and maybe I’m a fool to think it could happen anyway, but a team like Cincy showed there was a chance that a G5 just might rise and bop off a P5 team.  Looking at an App State, Costal Carolina, or the Hay-day’s of Boise State showed glimpses of the chance of parity - which was done through superior recruiting coupled with winning 10 games a year and performing well in bowl opportunities, NOT how much I pay a kid to show up! Don’t get me wrong top 100 kids were getting money regardless and will continue too. 
One side note observation - I’ll use the local yo-yos in Dallas - the slipper slope of buying kids and them bailing might get ugly because those kids really don’t care about that school, they just went for the $$ i.e. there is no loyalty in bought players 🤔

I vote for if you transfer to another program and move the next year you lose a year of eligibility and have to surrender your NIL deal. Bonus -If you make it a rule than it will enforce the right outcome without the college having to worry if they retaliate they will potentially lose opportunities in the future, which happens now. This would put accountability to the student player which is void right now!  

Lastly if only NCAA would fight through the courts and come up with a NIL ceiling - because otherwise a Boise or Cincy will never out buy $ a Bama or Texas / I fear we will have a split that’s much bigger than we even see today. JMO  

 

[NT93]

4 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

Some of y'all are ok with the NCAA generating over a billion dollars off the performance of athletes but not ok with the athletes doing the same. It's hypocritical. 

And most people are ok with the Walton family making billions while the front line workers make minimum wage.  And these companies aren’t investing in their workers and striving to give them better opportunities in life like universities are doing with their athletes.  The people who provide the opportunity make the most money.  
 

While we don’t agree on the subject, I appreciate and enjoy the civil discussion.  

[GrandGreen]

A bunch of questionable analogies, that ignore one basic concept.

We are discussing a sport not a job, the very vast majority of athletes would be playing just like they have for a 100 years without NIL.  

Those using the theory that schools make millions of dollars off of athletics, are just not aware of most team's finances or don't think sports exist outside of maybe 50% of the P5 schools that actually generate revenue without student fees. 

NIL is in theory a great concept that favors the players.  The problem with that it just further separates the have and have-nots in college sports.   Meaning there is even less fairness in competition.  

I think a logical conclusion, is that at some point; there is going to be an uprising among students who pay athletic fees to support players that are now in effect, businesses.  Once that happens. over half of the current D! division will ether have to move their sports down to a lower classification or just close them down. 

[Mike Jackson]

On 10/7/2022 at 8:57 AM, zenhuddy said:

That is one heck of an article and if it’s even 50% right we are in for a totally new ride in college sports - as I think we are seeing the Tail wag the Dog ?  These issues are no different then many of the political issues we now see all around us. We have to begin being “the bad guy” saying thinks like I heard as a kid - like NO and Thats not right, and you aren’t entitled to Jack - you get what you earn through hard work and dedication. Nothing is for Free !  We have lost our spine as a country and it’s showing up everywhere!   Sorry for the rant folks but I’m sick of this s.  

Oh, settle down.  The only thing that was free in this country was student athlete labor.    A scholarship wasn’t a bad deal for student athletes especially football with it short season and games almost always on the weekends.  It has always been a bad deal for basketball players.  Most these students have such demanding schedules that STEM degrees are virtually impossible to keep up in.  Anytime coaches can get lucky and set for life by getting one big contract, I can’t fault a student athletes being free agents. 

[rcade]

9 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

We are discussing a sport not a job, the very vast majority of athletes would be playing just like they have for a 100 years without NIL.

When billions of dollars are being generated it doesn't matter whether you call it a sport or a job. Either way It fits the definition of a task performed to produce revenue.

Most of the last 100 years wasn't like today, where the amount of money in the sport is staggering.

Playing for nothing but a scholarship was more fair back when Archie took Veronica to the games in his jalopy. The number of games played and the burdens of the sport were lower too.

[NT93]

Can anyone name another industry where even though the “workers” are exploited and taken advantage of, thousands each year are begging for the chance to be one of those “workers.”  Some who are less talented even offer to be allowed to volunteer (walk-on) to be a part of this unfair system.

Edited October 9, 2022 by NT93

[GrandGreen]

4 hours ago, Mike Jackson said:

Oh, settle down.  The only thing that was free in this country was student athlete labor.    A scholarship wasn’t a bad deal for student athletes especially football with it short season and games almost always on the weekends.  It has always been a bad deal for basketball players.  Most these students have such demanding schedules that STEM degrees are virtually impossible to keep up in.  Anytime coaches can get lucky and set for life by getting one big contract, I can’t fault a student athletes being free agents. 

To assume that student athlete labor was free, not counting room, board, medical, and an education is obviously wrong.  Football is only played on the weekends, what point are you trying to make. Almost every sport is a year long job these days, with most schools mandating summer school. 

NIL can be great for the players, but it also drains money from the school as super-fans are donating directly to the players rather than to the school.  

I don't see anyone blaming the players for the NIL situation.   Going where the payoff is the greatest is just good economic sense. 

[rcade]

2 hours ago, NT93 said:

Can anyone name another industry where even though the “workers” are exploited and taken advantage of, thousands each year are begging for the chance to be one of those “workers.”

Videogame development.

Moviemaking.

Acting.

Lots of professions that entertain millions exploit workers because they know so many people are dying to make it big. College football isn't unique in that regard.

[GrandGreen]

4 hours ago, rcade said:

When billions of dollars are being generated it doesn't matter whether you call it a sport or a job. Either way It fits the definition of a task performed to produce revenue.

Most of the last 100 years wasn't like today, where the amount of money in the sport is staggering.

Playing for nothing but a scholarship was more fair back when Archie took Veronica to the games in his jalopy. The number of games played and the burdens of the sport were lower too.

A couple of disputed points: I can assure you from my experience playing college football over 50 years ago; that your contention that football in the (Archie comic days)was easier on players is laughable.   

I doubt the amount of revenue in terms of real dollars (adjusted for inflation) has significantly increased, now versus 50 years ago.  Expenses on the other hand have with the current athletic arms race.  Coaches, support staff and administration employee numbers and salaries are all soaring. 

Building bigger and better is a huge part of sports competition these days.  

Do you think that all high school and junior high football players should be paid?  

Do you really think that NT makes any money at all on college athletics?  The answer is"no", NT athletics would not exist in the current form without funding from the school (students).

Edited October 9, 2022 by GrandGreen

[rcade]

8 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

Do you really think that NT makes any money at all on college athletics?  The answer is"no", athletics would not exist in the current form without funding from the school (students).

I think this discussion isn't about UNT. We're in a conference with a chump-change TV deal and our NIL is still walking on Bambi legs. The tsunami of money transforming college football hasn't gone far enough inland to reach us.

[NT93]

18 hours ago, rcade said:

Videogame development.

Moviemaking.

Acting.

Lots of professions that entertain millions exploit workers because they know so many people are dying to make it big. College football isn't unique in that regard.

So it's not a unique situation and the precedent has been set?  

If I understand correctly, if you have the desire to be a part of one of these professions, you have to pay your dues until you get your big break?  

Though I think an important difference if that the "workers" that we're talking about are given a free education to fall back on in case the "dream" job doesn't work out (and provided free tutoring to give them every opportunity to complete their degree).  They are provided meals and housing.  They are provided with the best coaching/training to help them achieve their dream.  They are provided a stage on which to demonstrate their talents to prospective employers of their dream job. 

I can't speak to video game development, but actors and musicians certainly aren't given near the support system to succeed as athletes.

Edited October 10, 2022 by NT93