DGL n NIL

[SCBoiler1]

Name on the front vs. back is what separates college sports from pro sports. Remember back in 1996 when they had the scab MLB players nobody watched or cared that year? Because people come out to watch the best in the world play ball. In college you could ship off the top talent off to a minor league and the fans would still fill up the stadiums and arenas. These student athletes have market value only because of the schools they play for.

The reality is that college basketball isn't as popular as us Purdue fans would like to think. In certain areas of the B1G college basketball is very popular but its not nearly as popular as other sports across the US including college football. Here are the results of an old poll asking American's their favorite sport. Its from 2014 and mentions a couple of years previous results but I don't things have changed much since then.

College basketball sliding in Harris Poll of sport popularity

The Harris Poll conducted its annual survey of the most popular sport in the country. NFL still rules, but college hoops dropped.

www.cbssports.com

I get the whole name on the front of the jersey thing but I for one, will lose interest if there aren't talented guys out there. I already struggle watching when teams have 20 points on the board at halftime.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

that point flew over your head completely. didn't it. i was just pointing out the absurdity of free-market for coaches, and amateurism for student athletes. I was in particular attacking the idea of we need to keep the underpayment of revenue sports athletes going, in order to keep overvaluing non-revenue sports athletes. My point was that if people deemed non-revenue sports so important, why is everyone not taking a haircut to subsidize them. why is that revenue student-athletes are they only ones being asked to take lower than their market rates. Why not make the same request to coaches and see how it flies. That's what was inherently wrong about the exisiting amateurism rules.


not anymore really. NIL is a legal but indirect backdoor that will accomplish the exact same thing, with the added inefficiencies (e.g. agent fees on both sides, cost of creating and maintaining NIL infrastructure etc) since it's a not a direct way to pay. But its overall effect would be the same as if it is the institution cutting the checks.



perhaps. some would even argue, very likely. I have never addressed this argument. But even if true, I still disagree that its a good enough reason to continue an exploitative system.

You said:
“Why not the athletic department or the coaches of revenue sports or have JPC members directly funding those.”

Totally absurd.

 

[boilerble]

I’m not worried about Colvin as much. The family has money and deep ties to Purdue.

No offense to DGL, but I think he isn’t going to get the interest for big money. He wasn’t getting the offers he wanted. I think for a huge NIL offer you’d need to be in the top 50 and have some unique qualities. I don’t see DGL Getting more than a 100k offer. He’s not a proven guy. He really has upside but he also has an injury history and has moved around a lot. If he does decommit, I wouldn’t be stunned. I’m just saying if you’re moving you’re entire family across the country you don’t normally do that for peanuts. I thought his whole family was moving back to WL area.

Unfortunately, I can name about 10 families off the top of my head with ties & money that didn't have their kids wind up at Purdue. Kids want to play for a winner on a competitive team. These kids are employees now more than ever. If Amazon offers you $15K/yr (not guaranteed, just an estimate) & Facebook (sorry, Meta) offers you $400K, where are you taking your talents?

 

[Indy_Rider]

You said:
“Why not the athletic department or the coaches of revenue sports or have JPC members directly funding those.”

Totally absurd.

I feel that way about most of their posts. They are obviously firmly in the "these poor athletes with their free education and incredibly plush college experience are taken advantage of" camp.

 

[atmafola]

I feel that way about most of their posts. They are obviously firmly in the "these poor athletes with their free education and incredibly plush college experience are taken advantage of" camp.

these poor athletes who are under-compensated for their efforts, and maybe some of them get an education too (which often they are getting shortchanged on, when the demands of your revenue sports makes it incredibly difficult to enroll in a degree that you might wish to and better fits your educational aspirations). But don't look over here at others who are being fairly compensated for their efforts, even though both of you are responsible for the product being sold.

 

[Indy_Rider]

these poor athletes who are under-compensated for their efforts, and maybe some of them get an education too (which often they are getting shortchanged on, when the demands of your revenue sports makes it incredibly difficult to enroll in a degree that you might wish to and better fits your educational aspirations). But don't look over here at others who are being fairly compensated for their efforts, even though both of you are responsible for the product being sold.

As a former athlete I can say, no. We get access to tutors others don't, we get plenty of support. If they were not able to pursue the degree they wanted to because of athletics, I doubt they would've been able accomplish it anyways.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I feel that way about most of their posts. They are obviously firmly in the "these poor athletes with their free education and incredibly plush college experience are taken advantage of" camp.

He’s right about one thing: the current model is socialist. The 2 revenue sports pay for all the non revenue sports. But Purdue can do nothing about that.

 

[SCBoiler1]

Unfortunately, I can name about 10 families off the top of my head with ties & money that didn't have their kids wind up at Purdue. Kids want to play for a winner on a competitive team. These kids are employees now more than ever. If Amazon offers you $15K/yr (not guaranteed, just an estimate) & Facebook (sorry, Meta) offers you $400K, where are you taking your talents?

Its actually sad when kids choose a school because of loyalty sports teams or because their parents went there. I'm not even talking about just athlete's, I'm talking about fans.

I went to Purdue due to my family ties and my die hard love for the Boilers. I had no intention of pursuing something in the sciences. My interest was in business and ultimately received a Purdue degree and a degree from an IU extension, My 4 years at Purdue were fun but a waste of time academically. Still love the Boilers and hate IU but I recognize that my IU degree is what led to my career success (CPA).

Lesson learned but with my kids, I recommended they determine what their career interest were before deciding on a school. Neither wanted to be engineers so Purdue was never part of the conversation.

With athletes there is no differential when it comes to in/out of state tuition. The chance the Purdue is the best fit athletically and academically for many of these students probably is not very high.

 

[atmafola]

I feel that way about most of their posts. They are obviously firmly in the "these poor athletes with their free education and incredibly plush college experience are taken advantage of" camp.

what sport, what year

 

[BoilerBiker]

(which often they are getting shortchanged on, when the demands of your revenue sports makes it incredibly difficult to enroll in a degree that you might wish to and better fits your educational aspirations).

guys like carsen edwards come to mind.
he liked and planned on engineering during recruiting, but ultimately went with OL later.
just not as many of those type majors among the revenue sports.
eligibility is a concern too.

the last engr/basketball starter i can think of was kiefer.

 

[Indy_Rider]

what sport, what year

Minor sports, do commit as much time as your major sports. Still have all the trouble, organized practice time is all set the same per the NCAA, then most work out on their own too. Then there is injury and rehab time, I know that really ate up a bulk of my free time as that was never ending. Luckily I took an easy major like EE where I didn't have to study.

The time commitment doesn't really change based on the sport, which is what you seem to be trying to get at.

But just for curiosity, since you seem to know it all, what sport did you compete in?

 

[BoilerAndy]

how are people upvoting this silly argument how many of those people have rare and marketable skills

Umm, I know people with medical degrees who are paying off student loans. Not everyone who took out student loans graduated with an unmarketable degree, if that was your point.

 

[atmafola]

Minor sports, do commit as much time as your major sports. Still have all the trouble, organized practice time is all set the same per the NCAA, then most work out on their own too. Then there is injury and rehab time, I know that really ate up a bulk of my free time as that was never ending. Luckily I took an easy major like EE where I didn't have to study.

The time commitment doesn't really change based on the sport, which is what you seem to be trying to get at.

But just for curiosity, since you seem to know it all, what sport did you compete in?

says no more. basically, you were were one of the beneficiaries of the current exploitative system. Explains your position and giant-sized conflict of interest you have. You mooched off the marketability of the talents of other folks.

You played a sport that nobody was interested in seeing (i.e. not marketable). So yeah for you, a scholarship was a heckuva deal. And it is understandable why you will choose to defend the current system. You were grossly overpaid!!! your economic value as a student athlete was far far less than the benefits you got.

How much time you put it makes no difference. The market cares if you have a marketable skill or not, not how hard you worked. I put a lot of time into honing my minesweeper skills. last I checked, nobody is paying to watch me play minesweeper. i deserve no compensation. You didn't either. Say your thanks to those who subsidized your education (student athletes in revenue sports, JPC members, other students who paid tuition and sports fees) and move on. Hopefully, you are giving back, so that student athletes in non-marketable sports in the future can enjoy the same privileges you did.

 

[Indy_Rider]

says no more. basically, you were were one of the beneficiaries of the current exploitative system. Explains your position and giant-sized conflict of interest you have. You mooched off the marketability of the talents of other folks.

You played a sport that nobody was interested in seeing (i.e. not marketable). So yeah for you, a scholarship was a heckuva deal. And it is understandable why you will choose to defend the current system. You were grossly overpaid!!! your economic value as a student athlete was far far less than the benefits you got.

How much time you put it makes no difference. The market cares if you have a marketable skill or not, not how hard you worked. I put a lot of time into honing my minesweeper skills. last I checked, nobody is paying to watch me play minesweeper. i deserve no compensation. You didn't either. Say your thanks to those who subsidized your education (student athletes in revenue sports, JPC members, other students who paid tuition and sports fees) and move on. Hopefully, you are giving back, so that student athletes in non-marketable sports in the future can enjoy the same privileges you did.

So you didn't play any sport, got it.

So your value is absolute zero then, much like your opinion.

And if these athletes were so marketable, they wouldn't be in college at all where they do have to attend class and such, they would be professional athletes, getting paid and 100% focused on their sport, but they only have value because of the name on front of the jersey, not on the back.

 

[Poprudy]

So you didn't play any sport, got it.

So your value is absolute zero then, much like your opinion.

And if these athletes were so marketable, they wouldn't be in college at all where they do have to attend class and such, they would be professional athletes, getting paid and 100% focused on their sport, but they only have value because of the name on front of the jersey, not on the back.

Very true. You take Pack a way from KS and he's just another recruit and probably a minimal NIL deal, if any. The college game has created most of these transfers value. That is undebatable for most recruits out of high school.

 

[atmafola]

And if these athletes were so marketable, they wouldn't be in college at all where they do have to attend class and such, they would be professional athletes, getting paid and 100% focused on their sport,

why do you make such dense arguments. You are a trained engineer. your value sitting down and doing nothing is zero. You start or join a company making things that get sold for money, and your economic value is the value of what you are compensated at. Another industry, your economic value is different. same with athletes. as student-athletes in a revenue sports their economic value is higher than their current compensation. Yours wasn't. you are lucky anyone even paid you in scholarship to do anything. i am still waiting for my thank you note as a JPC contributor. lol

 

[atmafola]

Very true. You take Pack a way from KS and he's just another recruit and probably a minimal NIL deal, if any. The college game has created most of these transfers value. That is undebatable for most recruits out of high school.

just to follow up on these. your economic value has little do with how much you create, or how hard you worked. it's basically what someone is willing to pay you in a market to do what you do. It's not about who is creating what value, that's just the way we intuit it.

Edit: some people just need to go take Econ 101 to have some basic understanding of pricing

 

[BoilerAndy]

these poor athletes who are under-compensated for their efforts, and maybe some of them get an education too (which often they are getting shortchanged on, when the demands of your revenue sports makes it incredibly difficult to enroll in a degree that you might wish to and better fits your educational aspirations). But don't look over here at others who are being fairly compensated for their efforts, even though both of you are responsible for the product being sold.

NIL hasn't changed that. 95% of college athletes are going to still believe they are "under-compensated for their efforts." Whatever that means.

You seem to think that NIL will correct the wrongs that you believe have been heaped on athletes by these naughty universities and coaches, who are making money. The schools and coaches will continue to make the money -- unless people lose interest and stop paying. Their money can't be used to "level the field." It will come from another source.

 

[Poprudy]

why do you make such dense arguments. You are a trained engineer. your value sitting down and doing nothing is zero. You start or join a company making things that get sold for money, and your economic value is the value of what you are compensated at. Another industry, your economic value is different. same with athletes. as student-athletes in a revenue sports their economic value is higher than their current compensation. Yours wasn't. you are lucky anyone even paid you in scholarship to do anything. i am still waiting for my thank you note as a JPC contributor. lol

So, I'm assuming you feel the school should benefit off the athlete's NIL revenue just as the athlete off the schools. If this happens then both sides should have leverage over the other to balance it out. The schools have been marketing these athlete's to create their NIL value. So the school should benefit...right??

 

[atmafola]

NIL hasn't changed that. 95% of college athletes are going to still believe they are "under-compensated for their efforts." Whatever that means.

You seem to think that NIL will correct the wrongs that you believe have been heaped on athletes by these naughty universities and coaches, who are making money. The schools and coaches will continue to make the money -- unless people lose interest and stop paying. Their money can't be used to "level the field." It will come from another source.

Unless new rules come into place. NIL + free transfer rules has basically created a legal but indirect way to remove the artificial wage cap that the rules of amateurism put in place for decades.

In all practicality, it will essentially be a legal, indirect and slightly inefficient (due to additional friction from agent cost, NIL infrastructure cost, transfer cost etc) way to pay student athletes for services rendered or to be rendered. To think anything else is to be grossly naive.

PS: i said "under-compensated relative to market value" not "under-compensated to effort". Big difference. you can work as hard as possible, if whatever you are producing has no buyers, your market value is zero.

 

[atmafola]

So, I'm assuming you feel the school should benefit off the athlete's NIL revenue just as the athlete off the schools. If this happens then both sides should have leverage over the other to balance it out.

except the school is already getting paid market value for their piece. when they put Indiana kids on noticeobard and slap the Purdue next to it, all the way in I-65. The revenue is going to the school via the Athletic Department. Look no-one is arguing that the product is not a joint effort of the school, the coaching staff, and the athlete. It is. Just as it is any other industry. the final product is the effort of all who made it possible for the product to be in the market space.
The question is how does each person involved get compensated. The standard economic answer is leave it to the market to decide, instead of trying to untangle how much of the value did A create vs B. What are you able to command in a market that doesn't restrict your entry or level or doesn't set a wage cap for you, or is not colluding with other employers to underpay you (which in economics terms is what NCAA was doing)

 

[Poprudy]

except the school is already getting paid market value for their piece. when they put Indiana kids on noticeobard and slap the Purdue next to it, all the way in I-65. The revenue is going to the school via the Athletic Department. Look no-one is arguing that the product is not a joint effort of the school, the coaching staff, and the athlete. It is. Just as it is any other industry. the final product is the effort of all who made it possible for the product to be in the market space.
The question is how does each person involved get compensated. The standard economic answer is leave it to the market to decide, instead of trying to untangle how much of the value did A create vs B. What are you able to command in a market that doesn't restrict your entry or level or doesn't set a wage cap for you, or is not colluding with other employers to underpay you (which in economics terms is what NCAA was doing)

I get what you are saying, but take the school out of the equation and you have a high school athlete. The school will move on and will benefit off academic value as it was intended to do and the student will benefit off the academic value of that particular school.

I think this will force schools to create a conference on their own. Kind of like the high schools that are wagering on the athletic department to keep these private schools afloat, but I think it will hurt the majority of these recruits not recruited by these private schools.

 

[Indy_Rider]

why do you make such dense arguments. You are a trained engineer. your value sitting down and doing nothing is zero. You start or join a company making things that get sold for money, and your economic value is the value of what you are compensated at. Another industry, your economic value is different. same with athletes. as student-athletes in a revenue sports their economic value is higher than their current compensation. Yours wasn't. you are lucky anyone even paid you in scholarship to do anything. i am still waiting for my thank you note as a JPC contributor. lol

You will not get one, you didn't pay me a dime. Competed for another university and transferred to Purdue after injuries ended things for me.

Still waiting for you to tell me what sport you competed in since you are such an expert on all this. So far, it seems your only ability is the ability to write a check. So that's probably why you are so into this NIL, it makes you think you actually matter and have some value.

 

[atmafola]

I get what you are saying, but take the school out of the equation and you have a high school athlete. The school will move on and will benefit off academic value as it was intended to do and the student will benefit off the academic value of that particular school.

I think this will force schools to create a conference on their own. Kind of like the high schools that are wagering on the athletic department to keep these private schools afloat, but I think it will hurt the majority of these recruits not recruited by these private schools.

I see your points and I see the points of those who are concerned that going down the road reduces the marketability of the product and ultimately end up hurting those this move is intended to help. It certainly won't help those in non-revenue sports for which their overall cost of attendance + perks exceed their market value.

I don't know how this all ends up. I honestly wished the NCAA would have taken the lead in fashioning out a solution that may have involved a lot of careful delicate tap-dancing, probably won't entirely be legal, but would have addressed the exploitative farce called amateurism while preserving much of what people love about college sports. I wish fans, many are still arguing the topic, would have just seen the farce for what it is and pushed the NCAA along that journey in a more orderly fashion. Instead they are still on here making silly arguments and upvoting those silly arguments while reality passes them by. So we end up with this free-for-all approach thats veering on a full-fledged unregulated free market. Even the professional sports are usually not this unregulated.

 

[atmafola]

You will not get one, you didn't pay me a dime. Competed for another university and transferred to Purdue after injuries ended things for me.

Still waiting for you to tell me what sport you competed in since you are such an expert on all this. So far, it seems your only ability is the ability to write a check. So that's probably why you are so into this NIL, it makes you think you actually matter and have some value.

don't play a lick of sport. like none. got academic scholarships all through. that and paid for some. I sure appreciate those that provided funds so I could receive an excellent education, that's taken me far and wide.

 

[Indy_Rider]

don't play a lick of sport. like none. got academic scholarships all through. that and paid for some. I sure appreciate those that provided funds so I could receive an excellent education, that's taken me far and wide.

So you don't know anything about being a college athletics other than what you've read as you have zero experience on the matter. And now it all makes sense, you are one of those guys that wasn't athletic and able to do sports so you push your kids really hard in it to try and live the glory you missed. Or write a check to buy the experience.

 

[atmafola]

So you don't know anything about being a college athletics other than what you've read as you have zero experience on the matter. And now it all makes sense, you are one of those guys that wasn't athletic and able to do sports so you push your kids really hard in it to try and live the glory you missed. Or write a check to buy the experience.

Nope I'm athletic, still pretty athletic. But never played organized sports. Just not my thing. And I sure don't push my kids too either. But i like watching people who have really worked at their craft get to display it, in just about any field, not just athletics. I love watching and appreciating excellence. I like the way sports bring so many people of diverse backgrounds together to cheer for a common cause. I give more to the academic side than the athletic side. And I'm passionate about equity and injustice, and advocating for a more just world.

 

[SCBoiler1]

So you don't know anything about being a college athletics other than what you've read as you have zero experience on the matter. And now it all makes sense, you are one of those guys that wasn't athletic and able to do sports so you push your kids really hard in it to try and live the glory you missed. Or write a check to buy the experience.

I guess I don't understand the significance of your argument. It's pretty simple. It's basic supply and demand. It doesn't matter what the cost of the inputs are, your selling price is what a buyer is willing to pay. You don't need to know anything about what it takes to be a college athlete to understand why certain basketball and football players are going to command more money than their peers.

Your argument isn't against Pack, Miami or even the NCAA, your argument is against free markets and a society that puts such a high value on sports and entertainment in general. Brohm and Painter make significantly more than the President of the University. Why? Because if we didn't pay them the market rate for a college coach they'd go coach somewhere else. Remember Painter and Missouri and Brohm and Louisville? I just don't see why it should be any different for the players.

I find it odd that many claim to love free markets and capitalism until it might negatively impact their college basketball team.

 

[Poprudy]

I guess I don't understand the significance of your argument. It's pretty simple. It's basic supply and demand. It doesn't matter what the cost of the inputs are, your selling price is what a buyer is willing to pay. You don't need to know anything about what it takes to be a college athlete to understand why certain basketball and football players are going to command more money than their peers.

Your argument isn't against Pack, Miami or even the NCAA, your argument is against free markets and a society that puts such a high value on sports and entertainment in general. Brohm and Painter make significantly more than the President of the University. Why? Because if we didn't pay them the market rate for a college coach they'd go coach somewhere else. Remember Painter and Missouri and Brohm and Louisville? I just don't see why it should be any different for the players.

I find it odd that many claim to love free markets and capitalism until it might negatively impact their college basketball team.

I agree 100%, it's what the free market demands. The issue is when you flood the market it will delute your value. There is way more players than coaches and that value will shrink for the majority of these players. I'm going to guess the majority won't sniff a great value in the NIL. Now, if you don't think this will cause animosity between young men... you're just kidding yourself.

Now, I do agree that playing sports let's you know the function of sports. I think this is why most coaches at the highest level are former players. They also will understand the value of what players are worth. I think both arguments are valid, but his argument will be for the masses and my guess is yours is for the minority. Just as scholarship athletes to non scholarship athletes playing at the high school level.

 

[SCBoiler1]

I agree 100%, it's what the free market demands. The issue is when you flood the market it will delute your value. There is way more players than coaches and that value will shrink for the majority of these players. I'm going to guess the majority won't sniff a great value in the NIL. Now, if you don't think this will cause animosity between young men... you're just kidding yourself.

Now, I do agree that playing sports let's you know the function of sports. I think this is why most coaches at the highest level are former players. They also will understand the value of what players are worth. I think both arguments are valid, but his argument will be for the masses and my guess is yours is for the minority. Just as scholarship athletes to non scholarship athletes playing at the high school level.

I totally agree with your first paragraph. It will be interesting to see how the money is spread around. Will it be just a few getting the big bucks with little for everyone else or will the entire roster get some kind of pay day, Probably somewhere in between,

What I think is hard for people to get their heads around is the coordination necessary between the coaches and the individuals/companies paying the players. Painter has to communicates to someone that he really wants a certain guy and then convince the "donor" to pay enough to get him. I don't think there is going to be a pool of money that Painter gets to allocate? I'm not sure. I could see a donor saying I'll give a million bucks this year and get Painter's input on how he should allocate it. I'm just trying to think it through.

 

[Poprudy]

I totally agree with your first paragraph. It will be interesting to see how the money is spread around. Will it be just a few getting the big bucks with little for everyone else or will the entire roster get some kind of pay day, Probably somewhere in between,

What I think is hard for people to get their heads around is the coordination necessary between the coaches and the individuals/companies paying the players. Painter has to communicates to someone that he really wants a certain guy and then convince the "donor" to pay enough to get him. I don't think there is going to be a pool of money that Painter gets to allocate? I'm not sure. I could see a donor saying I'll give a million bucks this year and get Painter's input on how he should allocate it. I'm just trying to think it through.

Bottom line. Purdue is starting to get in the game. Now, we need to push to adjust to the trajectory of NIL.

 

[atmafola]

What I think is hard for people to get their heads around is the coordination necessary between the coaches and the individuals/companies paying the players. Painter has to communicates to someone that he really wants a certain guy and then convince the "donor" to pay enough to get him. I don't think there is going to be a pool of money that Painter gets to allocate? I'm not sure. I could see a donor saying I'll give a million bucks this year and get Painter's input on how he should allocate it. I'm just trying to think it through.

These are some of the economic inefficiencies I was talking about. Direct compensation would be slightly more efficient. But doing so will finally blow the lid off the farce of amateurism. NIL effectively does the same thing (i.e. compensation if student athletes at near market rates), albeit indirectly and with some added inefficiencies, and let's us keep the pretense of amateurism up

 

[Dryfly88]

So you don't know anything about being a college athletics other than what you've read as you have zero experience on the matter. And now it all makes sense, you are one of those guys that wasn't athletic and able to do sports so you push your kids really hard in it to try and live the glory you missed. Or write a check to buy the experience.

And you're the guy that played a sport nobody cared about except for the Mommy and Daddies coming to watch. See, it's easy to be snarky....

The guy makes some very good points on the economics of college sports and how the current NIL landscape plays into it. Why don't you argue those points instead of being a jerk? You playing a minor sport in college has nothing to do with the discussion here.

 

[BoilerAndy]

PS: i said "under-compensated relative to market value" not "under-compensated to effort". Big difference. you can work as hard as possible, if whatever you are producing has no buyers, your market value is zero.

"under-compensated relative to market value"

That is such a meaningless phrase at this stage of NIL. You keep using it, and then belittle people who you think do not understand it. But you clearly do not understand it.

And you DID write "these poor athletes who are under-compensated for their efforts". You stated it twice "for their efforts" in the same post. I did not misrepresent you words.

 

[atmafola]

"under-compensated relative to market value"

That is such a meaningless phrase at this stage of NIL. You keep using it, and then belittle people who you think do not understand it. But you clearly do not understand it.

And you DID write "these poor athletes who are under-compensated for their efforts". You stated it twice "for their efforts" in the same post. I did not misrepresent you words.

i did explain, if you are under-compensated relative your your market value, you are indeed and necessarily under-compensated for your efforts. But the market, not your effort, still determines your compensation.

"At this stage of NIL" we already see some student athletes commanding 100s of thousands. hmmm. As for revenue athletes being under-compensated relative to their market value. That much is not really debatable. Their compensation was artificially constrained by NCAA amateurism rules. There are other things that are indeed debatable about college sports. (e.g maybe they shouldn't be compensated at all, they are trainees, the product value drops if they get paid, not all of them are underpaid) But arguing that they are underpaid relative to market value is not one. The existence of under the table payments. The rise in price for student athletes once a quasi-legal pathways was opened are all proofs.

Name me any other sport market anywhere in the world where this such disparity between coaching pay and athlete pay other than NCAA revenue sports. just one. That's not proof by itself, it's just another corroborating point.aa

 

[Poprudy]

i did explain, if you are under-compensated relative your your market value, you are indeed and necessarily under-compensated for your efforts. But the market, not your effort, still determines your compensation.

"At this stage of NIL" we already see some student athletes commanding 100s of thousands. hmmm. As for revenue athletes being under-compensated relative to their market value. That much is not really debatable. Their compensation was artificially constrained by NCAA amateurism rules. There are other things that are indeed debatable about college sports. (e.g maybe they shouldn't be compensated at all, they are trainees, the product value drops if they get paid, not all of them are underpaid) But arguing that they are underpaid relative to market value is not one. The existence of under the table payments. The rise in price for student athletes once a quasi-legal pathways was opened are all proofs.

Name me any other sport market anywhere in the world where this such disparity between coaching pay and athlete pay other than NCAA revenue sports. just one. That's not proof by itself, it's just another corroborating point.aa

Most professional sports the disparity between coaching staff and players have a huge gap. Most assistant coaches in major professional sports make a fraction of what players are making.

Also, you can't really determine that market per individual player until you see spike in ticket sales, Jersey sales etc. Do these players have value sure, but determining each athlete as they're the elite 1% that make up the professional level is nonsense. People go watch professional sports because they love the superiority of athleticism. Obviously, the other 99% aren't. So, that value is based on someone's checkbook and that part of your statement is 100% true, but also it is debatable.

 

[Smokestack91]

Unless new rules come into place. NIL + free transfer rules has basically created a legal but indirect way to remove the artificial wage cap that the rules of amateurism put in place for decades.

In all practicality, it will essentially be a legal, indirect and slightly inefficient (due to additional friction from agent cost, NIL infrastructure cost, transfer cost etc) way to pay student athletes for services rendered or to be rendered. To think anything else is to be grossly naive.

And to think the same demand for college basketball will be there when the NIL dust settles would also be grossly naive.

 

[destewart]

The way this weekend shook out id be shocked if Gibbs-Lawhorn ever puts on a Purdue uniform.

Hate the be pessimistic but he looks like someone that wants to get paid. I could easily see him backing out and going to wherever offers him the most $$$

Do you have any doubts Purdue will be active in NIL when he is coming out?

 

[BoilerAndy]

Name me any other sport market anywhere in the world where this such disparity between coaching pay and athlete pay other than NCAA revenue sports. just one. That's not proof by itself, it's just another corroborating point.aa

All high school and college athletics -- every sport -- fits that definition. It's because the coach is hired full time to train kids who are there for 4 years. In college, 5 years, if a player takes a redshirt. But no other sport market applies rules to the number of years a player can compete. It's a full-time job for professional athletes for as long as they make the team. It's a full-time job for college coaches, 365 days a year, as long as they win. For high school and college players it's part-time, and college players get EVERYTHING paid for and can't be cut from the team, without cause, once they are enrolled. It isn't as straightforward as you want to make it.

 

[Wolegib]

my thoughts are just pay the athletes a lump sum as if they were entertainers wit h multiple appearances. Entertainment is what they've become. if they want to be paid, let them negotiate a contract, and have them pay purdue for every single service and facility purdue provides to them.. if they want to get an education, and attend classes, they pay for it out of their lump sum. if they want food or housing, they pay for it. if they want books, internet access, laptops, etc, they pay for them. if they want to use Purdue's training facility, they pay for it or get a GOLDs GYM or family fitness membership. . if they need a tutor, they pay for it. if they want a personal trainer, they pay for it. if they want a car, they pay for it. they pay for their uniforms. they pay for their health insurance and care. if they want the school to market them or have a pro day for them, or use any school facilities like the library, corec, golf course, they pay for it. For away games, let them PAY for their own transportation. it can be flying first class or a greyhound bus or they drive themselves. if they become injured, let them pay their own medical and hospital expenses. if they want Gatorade at practices and games, let them pay for it. and when they run out of money, maybe they can sell their services to somebody else. or become like everyone else who had money and lost it. athletes don't realize the cost of being an athlete is a lot more than just tuition and room and board. Private healthcare and training facility memberships are not cheap and neither is transportation.

Purdue has a concert series. that series has a bunch of concerts and a budget. Purdue pays the entertainer, and provides the venue. it's up to the entertainer to provide everything else and to put on the show. let athletes be the same way. here's your money. spend it anyway you want, and put on a show for us. Give them a percentage of the gate receipts. if attendance is low, they receive less. Mr. painter - here's $20 mil for 30 performances. now put on a show - entertain us.