State of Texas Student Athlete NIL bill
- Thread starter bigred24
- Start date
That remains to be seen. Our media department puts together some great videos. If they were smart they would use that to start helping our top players build social media brands to help them build audiences and secure sponsorships. They made Haydels catch into a meme. That's worth a commercial somewhere.
If a player already has a platform, like being a YouTube chef or TikTok creator, co-promotion to add followers would absolutely help the athlete monetize what they already have. But as a competitive recruiting advantage? Nah. Not going to happen.
The bigger the university brand, the more the player stands to profit off their own likeness. This will help the UT’s, the Ohio State’s, the LSU’s, Alabama’s of the world and will also be a big detriment to smaller programs trying to come up and compete against folks like that. I know we’re not in the conversation of recruiting the same people as them, but this may well prevent us from ever being in that conversation now. Think about how Jake & Co. were able to pull recruits who were being recruited by larger schools/better programs and convince them to come to San Marcos instead. That may be a thing of the past now…
We taking bets again? I don't want to bet on txst in this case but something a long the lines of a school with a "small" football brand and good marketing is going to pull in players by convincing them they can make money with them. Ohio St, Alabama, etc have literally never had better classes (literally record breaking). There almost isn't even a possible way for recruiting to become MORE unfair.
I'm not sure what quantifiable metric you're looking to bet against, but the question was about whether TXST would have a recruiting advantage because of NIL.
If you really think that our AD, that has an aversion to technology/social media overall, an incredibly disinterested/disenfranchised fanbase, and an unbelievably shit record when it comes to marketing overall, is going to somehow change overnight and turn something that every single university can do into a specific benefit to us, then god bless you. Given their track record, I can see it going badly for us because we can't even put together a plan to stay even w/ our peers.
The idea that you think this isn't going to make recruiting more unfair is simply naive. This is opening Pandora's Box into paying athletes to come to your school. I don't think that aspect will necessarily affect TXST so much, but you're going to see an open market for paying players via NIL. Schools like UT, tOSU, Bama, Clemson, USC, Michigan, etc are going to widen the gap between them and the Iowa State, Boston College, Oregon State, Vanderbilt, Pittsburgh level schools.
If you really think that our AD, that has an aversion to technology/social media overall, an incredibly disinterested/disenfranchised fanbase, and an unbelievably shit record when it comes to marketing overall, is going to somehow change overnight and turn something that every single university can do into a specific benefit to us, then god bless you. Given their track record, I can see it going badly for us because we can't even put together a plan to stay even w/ our peers.
The idea that you think this isn't going to make recruiting more unfair is simply naive. This is opening Pandora's Box into paying athletes to come to your school. I don't think that aspect will necessarily affect TXST so much, but you're going to see an open market for paying players via NIL. Schools like UT, tOSU, Bama, Clemson, USC, Michigan, etc are going to widen the gap between them and the Iowa State, Boston College, Oregon State, Vanderbilt, Pittsburgh level schools.
Today's SCOTUS decision ripped the top right off that box. We're about to see a seismic shift in how college sports operates, and it will not be good for smaller schools, non-rev sports or those who believe in the current way college athletics operates. My doomsday guess is within 10yrs, the vast majority of college sports look more like current club sports vs varsity, and there is no D2 or D3, with D1 only supporting the current P5-ish level of football and men's basketball.
franslasttwinkie
Active member
We do have slightly deeper pockets than the majority of the SBC (and the majority of the MAC and CUSA for that matter) so I don't see pay for play causing us to lose any more games on the field than we are already doing. Then again if we have deeper pockets than most of the SBC then why don't we have an indoor practice facility? I think that all pretty much points to Teis and Trauth horribly mismanaging a pretty decent budget but is it too little too late for Coryell or whoever it ends up being to get in an indoor facility soon to turn things around?
Our spend as an overall AD is 5th out of 10 football playing schools in the conference.
We're at 29/53 [public] G5 teams; 12/35 if only including SBC/MAC/CUSA.
It's possible that the pecking order is already established and will remain stable, and the haves/have nots will stay right where they are. W/L is not really where I see this all breaking down. I don't see 2 completely different models being able to coexist, and we already see that in the differences between divisions. The more power is concentrated at the top of any ecosystem, the less stable the whole system becomes - you should have learned that in college, and if you have any awareness, you should be seeing that in society today. Ideas like the NCAA being fractured and the P5 splitting off were once far out/no way, are now very possible.
I think it's a fools errand to try and predict what's going to happen but I will say that every university with an FBS team has already made a very expensive important university decision to be playing football. They all spend a lot of money, not to win games but to build their universities brands. Will some restructuring may occur I very much doubt it is the end of college football for the 130ish FBS teams. I've said this before recruiting is already the most unfair it's ever been in all of history with Alabama and Clemson damn near getting half of the top 100 players. For the very top end of college football it literally can't get less competitive.
They combined to sign 23 of the Top 100 last year, 20 the year before. You have a point, but your supporting data needs some tweaking for accuracy.
To be fair I'm just trying to recall stats while I should be working. Thank you for the fact check.
Obviously this tweet is specific to basketball and not football, but still...
Welcome to a New NCAA Era. 'It's Going to Be a Clusterf---.'
College athletes are now allowed to profit off their name, image and likeness, and the landscape may be changed forever.
www.si.com
Some guys cashing in already it appears.