Bowl win shine already worn off?

[LawPoke]

I spent $0. I also reduced my contribution to CJC and UW. You know why? No commitment from the University or athletic department to spend it for greatness. They profile a flat return on capital. I expect more. Show me you want to be great and churn my dollar - I’m in. Right now, all I get is a shoulder ride for a .500 football coach and comments from the department about how amazing he was for Wyoming.

Now, back to my question: what is a reasonable expectation for success at UW?

Sorry but if you go to McDonalds because you like the price and convenience but are expecting a perfectly cooked Ribeye Steak you are always bound to be disappointed.

Considering where Wyoming falls in player NIL, 9 wins (with a win over Texas Tech where spending and player payments dwarf ours), is a damn good season.

OK - so your answer to my question is that the reasonable expectation for success at UW is a little over .500 in football and an NCAA run every 10 years. If that is more widely accepted as THE STANDARD at UW, then I'm not investing in the NIL or facilities here. They have all they need to meet that standard right now - in fact, they should rebuild the West Side stands with some new bathrooms and concessions and bag the Loge and Club frills - as those aren't really needed for the caliber program that is a mid program.

[LawPoke]

I spent $0. I also reduced my contribution to CJC and UW. You know why? No commitment from the University or athletic department to spend it for greatness. They profile a flat return on capital. I expect more. Show me you want to be great and churn my dollar - I’m in. Right now, all I get is a shoulder ride for a .500 football coach and comments from the department about how amazing he was for Wyoming.

Now, back to my question: what is a reasonable expectation for success at UW?

That's a bit in the eye of the beholder right?...for me...What CB accomplished seams "reasonable"...I would have liked more but that is not the question right?

Indeed - that is the question.

[OrediggerPoke]

Sorry but if you go to McDonalds because you like the price and convenience but are expecting a perfectly cooked Ribeye Steak you are always bound to be disappointed.

Considering where Wyoming falls in player NIL, 9 wins (with a win over Texas Tech where spending and player payments dwarf ours), is a damn good season.

OK - so your answer to my question is that the reasonable expectation for success at UW is a little over .500 in football and an NCAA run every 10 years. If that is more widely accepted as THE STANDARD at UW, then I'm not investing in the NIL or facilities here. They have all they need to meet that standard right now - in fact, they should rebuild the West Side stands with some new bathrooms and concessions and bag the Loge and Club frills - as those aren't really needed for the caliber program that is a mid program.

Im not sure where you have been but the last time Wyoming had more than 9 wins in football was 1996. Then 1990 before that. In the entire history of modern Wyoming football, there are basically two 2 year periods with a high level of success (1966-1967, 1987-1988). Now the playing field is even more heavily slanted.

You can continue to gripe until you’re no longer able to gripe no more, but the reality is that you should enjoy the ‘moderate’ successes when they come. There’s a strong likelihood we are completely priced out of the game in the near future. Frankly, there probably was never a more on the edge of the seat season of Wyoming football than this one (Texas Tech, App State, Toledo).

[307bball]

That's a bit in the eye of the beholder right?...for me...What CB accomplished seams "reasonable"...I would have liked more but that is not the question right?

Indeed - that is the question.

Well then....asked and answered...what CB accomplished is reasonable. The word reasonable is not helping here...just because something is reasonable doesn't mean it's all we want and we don't want more.

[LawPoke]

Solid post Law, solid post.

Law, you make good points...and the generalities of what you are describing could definitely be at play. Could you clear up some things?

You said "what is missing is the drive, determination, resolve, and willingness to hold our leaders, fans, and players to account for the goal". Who is that missing from?

Only my opinion - I think it is missing from the people of the state. We seem to be content with our lot in life - we are a commodity state that drills, digs, and relies on the grace of others (including the federal government) to ensure that our taxes are low and that we are comfortable. There are some that drive to innovate, but the "crab in a bucket" adage (i.e., any crab that tries to get away and do more is pulled back down to their demise by the other crabs that don't show that ambition) is alive and well.

In terms of UW, here are some random thoughts:

1. Governor and Legislature agree that UW is guaranteed the current block grant amount for 10 years - however, every other year, 20% of the block grant converts from cash to a grant that must be matched with OUTSIDE money. In 10 years, you have functionally doubled the state contribution to UW and diversified the funding source. You have funds for quality programs and incentivize top performers. Those that can't find match...are gone (yes, every major on campus can work to be great and distinguish itself to attract outside investment). Enrollment will increase and even more investment will follow.
2. Reconsider the mix of sports offered at UW. Take away the emotion of who likes what sport and base the mix on whether you can recruit kids to play the sport and how much money they generate. Obviously, Title IX must be adhered to - but if underwater basketweaving can make millions and we can get the best weavers to play for UW, cut women's and men's golf and go. I'd start by looking at adding men's and women's hockey. Cap the total programs offered at UW at whatever number is required for membership in the PAC2/MWC so as not to dilute investment.
3. The President and Trustees lay out clear expectations for the AD that every program must graduate its players and achieve a championship once every 3 years. Any program that drops below .500 in any two-year period has one year of probation to get back above .500 or the AD and the coach are gone. An excellence fund is developed and funded that pays every Olympic sport coach a $100,000 bonus if they reach the championship and $250,000 if they win it. Football, men's and women's basketball, and volleyball pay $250,000 to reach the championship and $750,000 if they win it. Every NY6 appearance or Playoff Appearance is $1.5 million and $5 million respectively. A FB championship is $20 million. Any win in the Sweet 16 is $750k, Elite 8 is $1.5 million, a Final 4 is $3 million and a Championship is $10 million. Anytime a team wins back-to-back championships, those figures double. Enhanced TV and donor funds will more than make up for it. (actual dollar amounts are up in the air, but the key is to signal that even at little ol' Wyo, we think we can win it all). The AD gets a chunk when any of those things happen too - amount TBD.
4. Gut CJC and revision it. With NIL, scholarships are nice for the bulk of non-NIL players. Focus the collective on the top-tier targets and focus CJC on those sports and players where a schollie is the goal. Everything of potential value in the state should be explored to sell, leverage, match, etc. to build the collective.
5. Actively market naming rights to every building, sculpture, barn, stadium, arena, classroom, parking space, etc. you can put on the block. The fact that we still have a bland "Arena Auditorium" and "Classroom Building" at UW is testament to how little people want to invest in UW. Sure, they'll pay for a plaza or a basketball court (for which I am grateful), but if you look at any other campus, everything is named for someone that gave a huge check to get those rights...and those same people are happy to give more to spruce up their building and make it state of the art if it gets long in the tooth as it is seen as a reflection on them.
6. Partner with a P5 heavyweight or (several) that if they send us their 4 or 5 star for a year or two, we will develop them in our whizbang facilities to their specs and then send them to the P5 as sophomores or juniors ready to go. They pay the NIL freight, we develop the kid in the HAPC. We get a year or more with a stud, who can pace and push our 2*, 1* and walkon athletes. We are already a feeder for them, why not live in reality and formalize it.

Above all, we need to live in reality - not lament it. Times have changed. The games have changed. Players and their parents have changed. The model is different now. This is nothing short of dirty, nasty, good ol' fashioned capitalism and a business. IF we really want to play and truly compete, we have to embrace change and fast. If we don't, which is why I asked what level folks want UW to achieve at, then let's be honest and drop to FCS and bump and grind with Montana and a different SDSU. And we have done it before. The CJC was cutting edge when it started. It gave us an advantage for many years. And now, it is SOP to have a booster club. WE can if we try.

[LawPoke]

Indeed - that is the question.

Well then....asked and answered...what CB accomplished is reasonable. The word reasonable is not helping here...just because something is reasonable doesn't mean it's all we want and we don't want more.

This, here, is a fantastic post. I couldn't agree with you more. What CB accomplished was actually pretty good. Winning 9 games with the schedule we had is darned impressive. The question is - do we use this 9 win season to reset the standard and elevate - or do we regress to the mean and say, "boy wasn't that fun"? Every program has ups and downs - what shouldn't change is your expectation. And despite all of CB's and Tom's assertions that competing for a MW championship WAS THE expectation...I'm not sure that their actions and decisions demonstrate that it really was their goal. If it was, I can't believe that we would have tolerated a sub .500 coach for 10 years - to only eclipse the .500 mark in his last game.

All I want is for folks to tell me what measuring stick they want to use - for the state, for the university, for the Pokes - and honestly apply it. Then, we know when we are reaching the goal or not. I can get behind leadership. I can Ride for the Brand. I can ante up and donate to whomever or whatever cause achieves that goal. It is investment-worthy. As Lewis Carroll famously opined, "If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there."

[stymeman]

Time will tell like always. But I'm glad we're moving towards the 21st Century offense wise

[ragtimejoe1]

The biggest issue is what our conference and level looks like in the next few years. Until known, all the speculation about our position within conference is irrelevant much like looking at our position prior to the current conference makeup.

As for the rest, I hate what appears to be straight up nepotism and passing over more qualified candidates. The image that portrays is terrible, imo.

Outside of that, it's my alma mater. This year was a good year. Always going to cheer for the POKES but will disagree with nepotism at the expense of more deserving people. I'll disagree with that in any walk of life but especially publically funded positions.

[OrediggerPoke]

The biggest issue is what our conference and level looks like in the next few years. Until known, all the speculation about our position within conference is irrelevant much like looking at our position prior to the current conference makeup.

As for the rest, I hate what appears to be straight up nepotism and passing over more qualified candidates. The image that portrays is terrible, imo.

Outside of that, it's my alma mater. This year was a good year. Always going to cheer for the POKES but will disagree with nepotism at the expense of more deserving people. I'll disagree with that in any walk of life but especially publically funded positions.

Well if you are upset about this nepotism, what do you think about the President of the University and the school of computing?

[ragtimejoe1]

The biggest issue is what our conference and level looks like in the next few years. Until known, all the speculation about our position within conference is irrelevant much like looking at our position prior to the current conference makeup.

As for the rest, I hate what appears to be straight up nepotism and passing over more qualified candidates. The image that portrays is terrible, imo.

Outside of that, it's my alma mater. This year was a good year. Always going to cheer for the POKES but will disagree with nepotism at the expense of more deserving people. I'll disagree with that in any walk of life but especially publically funded positions.

Well if you are upset about this nepotism, what do you think about the President of the University and the school of computing?

I don't know about school of computing. I haven't followed that. Spousal accommodations are less an issue to me but outside of that, I'm very opposed to it.

You don't have to agree with me. I'm just stating my opinion. I get it if it doesn't bother you. To me it's a black eye.

[wwplayer]

Law, you make good points...and the generalities of what you are describing could definitely be at play. Could you clear up some things?

You said "what is missing is the drive, determination, resolve, and willingness to hold our leaders, fans, and players to account for the goal". Who is that missing from?

Only my opinion - I think it is missing from the people of the state. We seem to be content with our lot in life - we are a commodity state that drills, digs, and relies on the grace of others (including the federal government) to ensure that our taxes are low and that we are comfortable. There are some that drive to innovate, but the "crab in a bucket" adage (i.e., any crab that tries to get away and do more is pulled back down to their demise by the other crabs that don't show that ambition) is alive and well.

In terms of UW, here are some random thoughts:

1. Governor and Legislature agree that UW is guaranteed the current block grant amount for 10 years - however, every other year, 20% of the block grant converts from cash to a grant that must be matched with OUTSIDE money. In 10 years, you have functionally doubled the state contribution to UW and diversified the funding source. You have funds for quality programs and incentivize top performers. Those that can't find match...are gone (yes, every major on campus can work to be great and distinguish itself to attract outside investment). Enrollment will increase and even more investment will follow.
2. Reconsider the mix of sports offered at UW. Take away the emotion of who likes what sport and base the mix on whether you can recruit kids to play the sport and how much money they generate. Obviously, Title IX must be adhered to - but if underwater basketweaving can make millions and we can get the best weavers to play for UW, cut women's and men's golf and go. I'd start by looking at adding men's and women's hockey. Cap the total programs offered at UW at whatever number is required for membership in the PAC2/MWC so as not to dilute investment.
3. The President and Trustees lay out clear expectations for the AD that every program must graduate its players and achieve a championship once every 3 years. Any program that drops below .500 in any two-year period has one year of probation to get back above .500 or the AD and the coach are gone. An excellence fund is developed and funded that pays every Olympic sport coach a $100,000 bonus if they reach the championship and $250,000 if they win it. Football, men's and women's basketball, and volleyball pay $250,000 to reach the championship and $750,000 if they win it. Every NY6 appearance or Playoff Appearance is $1.5 million and $5 million respectively. A FB championship is $20 million. Any win in the Sweet 16 is $750k, Elite 8 is $1.5 million, a Final 4 is $3 million and a Championship is $10 million. Anytime a team wins back-to-back championships, those figures double. Enhanced TV and donor funds will more than make up for it. (actual dollar amounts are up in the air, but the key is to signal that even at little ol' Wyo, we think we can win it all). The AD gets a chunk when any of those things happen too - amount TBD.
4. Gut CJC and revision it. With NIL, scholarships are nice for the bulk of non-NIL players. Focus the collective on the top-tier targets and focus CJC on those sports and players where a schollie is the goal. Everything of potential value in the state should be explored to sell, leverage, match, etc. to build the collective.
5. Actively market naming rights to every building, sculpture, barn, stadium, arena, classroom, parking space, etc. you can put on the block. The fact that we still have a bland "Arena Auditorium" and "Classroom Building" at UW is testament to how little people want to invest in UW. Sure, they'll pay for a plaza or a basketball court (for which I am grateful), but if you look at any other campus, everything is named for someone that gave a huge check to get those rights...and those same people are happy to give more to spruce up their building and make it state of the art if it gets long in the tooth as it is seen as a reflection on them.
6. Partner with a P5 heavyweight or (several) that if they send us their 4 or 5 star for a year or two, we will develop them in our whizbang facilities to their specs and then send them to the P5 as sophomores or juniors ready to go. They pay the NIL freight, we develop the kid in the HAPC. We get a year or more with a stud, who can pace and push our 2*, 1* and walkon athletes. We are already a feeder for them, why not live in reality and formalize it.

Above all, we need to live in reality - not lament it. Times have changed. The games have changed. Players and their parents have changed. The model is different now. This is nothing short of dirty, nasty, good ol' fashioned capitalism and a business. IF we really want to play and truly compete, we have to embrace change and fast. If we don't, which is why I asked what level folks want UW to achieve at, then let's be honest and drop to FCS and bump and grind with Montana and a different SDSU. And we have done it before. The CJC was cutting edge when it started. It gave us an advantage for many years. And now, it is SOP to have a booster club. WE can if we try.

Bravo! This is a very interesting, thought provoking post. You've obviously really thought all of this out and for that I really commend you. Of your "numbered thoughts", there is so much there that could be the basis for really moving forward into the future (whatever that might be).

#1 - Would the the state, board, governor actually get behind something like that? Or would they just revert to the thinking of the past?
#2 - Well worth considering
#3 - Like the idea, but think the $$ amounts are maybe a bit unrealistic. This is Wyoming, after all.
#4 - Bingo
#5 - ditto! Naming stuff for donations is a big deal everywhere.
#6 - Absolutely! This is maybe the first step in the whole process.

Change is inevitable. Wyoming (both the university and the state in general) needs to embrace it and, indeed, use it to move into this brave new world we find ourselves in.

[307bball]

Well if you are upset about this nepotism, what do you think about the President of the University and the school of computing?

I don't know about school of computing. I haven't followed that. Spousal accommodations are less an issue to me but outside of that, I'm very opposed to it.

You don't have to agree with me. I'm just stating my opinion. I get it if it doesn't bother you. To me it's a black eye.

Is your claim that people who don't have a problem with the hiring of Sawvell are unbothered my nepotism?

[307bball]

Law, you make good points...and the generalities of what you are describing could definitely be at play. Could you clear up some things?

You said "what is missing is the drive, determination, resolve, and willingness to hold our leaders, fans, and players to account for the goal". Who is that missing from?

Only my opinion - I think it is missing from the people of the state. We seem to be content with our lot in life - we are a commodity state that drills, digs, and relies on the grace of others (including the federal government) to ensure that our taxes are low and that we are comfortable. There are some that drive to innovate, but the "crab in a bucket" adage (i.e., any crab that tries to get away and do more is pulled back down to their demise by the other crabs that don't show that ambition) is alive and well.

In terms of UW, here are some random thoughts:

1. Governor and Legislature agree that UW is guaranteed the current block grant amount for 10 years - however, every other year, 20% of the block grant converts from cash to a grant that must be matched with OUTSIDE money. In 10 years, you have functionally doubled the state contribution to UW and diversified the funding source. You have funds for quality programs and incentivize top performers. Those that can't find match...are gone (yes, every major on campus can work to be great and distinguish itself to attract outside investment). Enrollment will increase and even more investment will follow.
2. Reconsider the mix of sports offered at UW. Take away the emotion of who likes what sport and base the mix on whether you can recruit kids to play the sport and how much money they generate. Obviously, Title IX must be adhered to - but if underwater basketweaving can make millions and we can get the best weavers to play for UW, cut women's and men's golf and go. I'd start by looking at adding men's and women's hockey. Cap the total programs offered at UW at whatever number is required for membership in the PAC2/MWC so as not to dilute investment.
3. The President and Trustees lay out clear expectations for the AD that every program must graduate its players and achieve a championship once every 3 years. Any program that drops below .500 in any two-year period has one year of probation to get back above .500 or the AD and the coach are gone. An excellence fund is developed and funded that pays every Olympic sport coach a $100,000 bonus if they reach the championship and $250,000 if they win it. Football, men's and women's basketball, and volleyball pay $250,000 to reach the championship and $750,000 if they win it. Every NY6 appearance or Playoff Appearance is $1.5 million and $5 million respectively. A FB championship is $20 million. Any win in the Sweet 16 is $750k, Elite 8 is $1.5 million, a Final 4 is $3 million and a Championship is $10 million. Anytime a team wins back-to-back championships, those figures double. Enhanced TV and donor funds will more than make up for it. (actual dollar amounts are up in the air, but the key is to signal that even at little ol' Wyo, we think we can win it all). The AD gets a chunk when any of those things happen too - amount TBD.
4. Gut CJC and revision it. With NIL, scholarships are nice for the bulk of non-NIL players. Focus the collective on the top-tier targets and focus CJC on those sports and players where a schollie is the goal. Everything of potential value in the state should be explored to sell, leverage, match, etc. to build the collective.
5. Actively market naming rights to every building, sculpture, barn, stadium, arena, classroom, parking space, etc. you can put on the block. The fact that we still have a bland "Arena Auditorium" and "Classroom Building" at UW is testament to how little people want to invest in UW. Sure, they'll pay for a plaza or a basketball court (for which I am grateful), but if you look at any other campus, everything is named for someone that gave a huge check to get those rights...and those same people are happy to give more to spruce up their building and make it state of the art if it gets long in the tooth as it is seen as a reflection on them.
6. Partner with a P5 heavyweight or (several) that if they send us their 4 or 5 star for a year or two, we will develop them in our whizbang facilities to their specs and then send them to the P5 as sophomores or juniors ready to go. They pay the NIL freight, we develop the kid in the HAPC. We get a year or more with a stud, who can pace and push our 2*, 1* and walkon athletes. We are already a feeder for them, why not live in reality and formalize it.

Above all, we need to live in reality - not lament it. Times have changed. The games have changed. Players and their parents have changed. The model is different now. This is nothing short of dirty, nasty, good ol' fashioned capitalism and a business. IF we really want to play and truly compete, we have to embrace change and fast. If we don't, which is why I asked what level folks want UW to achieve at, then let's be honest and drop to FCS and bump and grind with Montana and a different SDSU. And we have done it before. The CJC was cutting edge when it started. It gave us an advantage for many years. And now, it is SOP to have a booster club. WE can if we try.

I'm impressed at how much you have obviously though about this. An approach like this would probably 10x the amount of resources spent on athletics at Wyoming from all sources.... Would be extremely risky and would not bear fruit right away. I just can't imagine the people within any public institution advocate for that kind of risk. I think you said it best when you said the problem was the people of Wyoming....I don't think they are up for it and without that... None of these novel ideas will happen.

[ragtimejoe1]

I don't know about school of computing. I haven't followed that. Spousal accommodations are less an issue to me but outside of that, I'm very opposed to it.

You don't have to agree with me. I'm just stating my opinion. I get it if it doesn't bother you. To me it's a black eye.

Is your claim that people who don't have a problem with the hiring of Sawvell are unbothered my nepotism?

Or don't view nepotism as the main driver behind the hires. If not nepotism, I'm not sure why Oscar would be passed over for Bohl? All speculation, and I personally won't believe it's anything other than nepotism unless Oscar says something different. I guess unless it's something worse.I don't think it is-- at least intentionally.

[LawPoke]

The biggest issue is what our conference and level looks like in the next few years. Until known, all the speculation about our position within conference is irrelevant much like looking at our position prior to the current conference makeup.

As for the rest, I hate what appears to be straight up nepotism and passing over more qualified candidates. The image that portrays is terrible, imo.

Outside of that, it's my alma mater. This year was a good year. Always going to cheer for the POKES but will disagree with nepotism at the expense of more deserving people. I'll disagree with that in any walk of life but especially publically funded positions.

Well if you are upset about this nepotism, what do you think about the President of the University and the school of computing?

I think it is disgusting and wrong. Sure, give her a position at UW as part of the President’s package…but to elevate her to that spot is awful and has tarnished the President within and outside UW. Nepotism is ugly and bad. Exhibit A: Brian Ferentz

[307bball]

Is your claim that people who don't have a problem with the hiring of Sawvell are unbothered my nepotism?

Or don't view nepotism as the main driver behind the hires. If not nepotism, I'm not sure why Oscar would be passed over for Bohl? All speculation, and I personally won't believe it's anything other than nepotism unless Oscar says something different. I guess unless it's something worse.I don't think it is-- at least intentionally.

What about the hiring of Sawvell? I'm not some insider at all so I don't have that knowledge, But where is the nepotism in that hiring? I don't think it's a splashy hire but I don't see him as some handpicked guy that has been elevated beyond his ability.

[ragtimejoe1]

Or don't view nepotism as the main driver behind the hires. If not nepotism, I'm not sure why Oscar would be passed over for Bohl? All speculation, and I personally won't believe it's anything other than nepotism unless Oscar says something different. I guess unless it's something worse.I don't think it is-- at least intentionally.

What about the hiring of Sawvell? I'm not some insider at all so I don't have that knowledge, But where is the nepotism in that hiring? I don't think it's a splashy hire but I don't see him as some handpicked guy that has been elevated beyond his ability.

Pure speculation but it feels to me like it was planned to free up the DC spot which is why neither associate head coach had a shot at the head coach position. If Oscar were DC, he'd be our HC right now, in my opinion.

I get that this is all speculation but that's what it feels like to me.

[Itsux2beaewe]

I bet there is an amount that would have kept her.... What you and I consider "realistic" is irrelevant. I'm consistently stunned at the bags being thrown at these athletes.

You and me both...with no end in site.

Steinbrenner paid $8.8 million for the Yankees in 1973. and people lost their mind. Current value is $7.1 billion (with a B).

I see college football following a similar path - going out of control fast...in fact, it is likely already on it's way.

Steinbrenner bought the Yankees, a business. He realized a return on his investment.

If I’m a NIL investor, what do I get in return? Where/what is my return on investment?

[307bball]

You and me both...with no end in site.

Steinbrenner paid $8.8 million for the Yankees in 1973. and people lost their mind. Current value is $7.1 billion (with a B).

I see college football following a similar path - going out of control fast...in fact, it is likely already on it's way.

Steinbrenner bought the Yankees, a business. He realized a return on his investment.

If I’m a NIL investor, what do I get in return? Where/what is my return on investment?

The *real* NIL money is not an investment...they are trying to buy wins.

Some excerpts from an investigative reporter looking into NIL:

"Particularly, they were saying we’re going to pay every offensive lineman on the University of Texas team $50,000 a year. And all you have to do to get the money is to be on the team — to be academically eligible to play."

"Charities don’t pay offensive linemen. And I was struggling to figure out how they’re squaring their mission of helping the public good with their apparent goal of helping the University of Texas win football games."

"So I started looking into this. And what I found was that this University of Texas group was one of more than 100 groups that were doing similar things at schools all around the country — using cash from donors to pay athletes and to attract athletes to their school to keep them when they were already there. And what I also found was that those payments were kind of in a way that may be not be obvious to the average fan and definitely not obvious to the casual fan were reshaping the power dynamics, the rules, the very sort of essence of big-time college football."

Talking about how it used to be and what has changed:

"Hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars, flowing into these schools collectively from TV deals, from ticket sales, and it finds all these other channels. Coaches get paid tens of millions of dollars a year. And the money would get filtered to players in a way in that they would get scholarships. And they would get a nice dorm to live in, very nice athletic facilities, but the players did not get paid. And that was both the rule and also sort of the moral heart of college sports for so long was this is an amateur game. But then in 2021 — That system changed drastically."

"Most importantly, there was a rule that said nothing about the payments anybody makes to players can be conditioned on them playing at all or on them playing well. And the second thing was you can’t use these payments, these NIL payments, to recruit players, either to recruit high schoolers or to recruit people from other schools to your school. Those were the guidelines the NCAA set, but almost immediately after these rules come into effect, wealthy boosters, rich folks who support these teams, see a loophole. They see an opening for themselves."

"They start these things called collectives, which are groups that are not legally affiliated with the schools they support, but they exist to support a specific school’s athletic programs. And what they do is pool money from rich donors, and it can be millions of dollars. And they pay athletes for the rights to their name, in some cases for the athletes to do charity work, make an appearance at the Boys and Girls Club, to appear at another charity’s gala, to post about charity on social media, but often these charities pay way more than an actual charity would pay for this."

"I talked to somebody who was at Michigan State. And he paid somebody $750,000 a year a football player. And the charity work that person did in return was to make one social media post a month."

"They’re paying athletes, often, who don’t have much of an endorsement value. People who are really valuable to their own team, like an offensive lineman or a fullback, they’re paying that person according to their value to the team, not according to their endorsement value. So this is not a person you would ever buy Gatorade from. You’ve never heard this person’s name, but the team needs them."

This puts an axe to the root of the story that NIL money is at all interested in a return....the goal of the collectives is to win games by luring high quality players to their chosen program and then keeping them.

[OrediggerPoke]

Steinbrenner bought the Yankees, a business. He realized a return on his investment.

If I’m a NIL investor, what do I get in return? Where/what is my return on investment?

The *real* NIL money is not an investment...they are trying to buy wins.

Some excerpts from an investigative reporter looking into NIL:

"Particularly, they were saying we’re going to pay every offensive lineman on the University of Texas team $50,000 a year. And all you have to do to get the money is to be on the team — to be academically eligible to play."

"Charities don’t pay offensive linemen. And I was struggling to figure out how they’re squaring their mission of helping the public good with their apparent goal of helping the University of Texas win football games."

"So I started looking into this. And what I found was that this University of Texas group was one of more than 100 groups that were doing similar things at schools all around the country — using cash from donors to pay athletes and to attract athletes to their school to keep them when they were already there. And what I also found was that those payments were kind of in a way that may be not be obvious to the average fan and definitely not obvious to the casual fan were reshaping the power dynamics, the rules, the very sort of essence of big-time college football."

Talking about how it used to be and what has changed:

"Hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars, flowing into these schools collectively from TV deals, from ticket sales, and it finds all these other channels. Coaches get paid tens of millions of dollars a year. And the money would get filtered to players in a way in that they would get scholarships. And they would get a nice dorm to live in, very nice athletic facilities, but the players did not get paid. And that was both the rule and also sort of the moral heart of college sports for so long was this is an amateur game. But then in 2021 — That system changed drastically."

"Most importantly, there was a rule that said nothing about the payments anybody makes to players can be conditioned on them playing at all or on them playing well. And the second thing was you can’t use these payments, these NIL payments, to recruit players, either to recruit high schoolers or to recruit people from other schools to your school. Those were the guidelines the NCAA set, but almost immediately after these rules come into effect, wealthy boosters, rich folks who support these teams, see a loophole. They see an opening for themselves."

"They start these things called collectives, which are groups that are not legally affiliated with the schools they support, but they exist to support a specific school’s athletic programs. And what they do is pool money from rich donors, and it can be millions of dollars. And they pay athletes for the rights to their name, in some cases for the athletes to do charity work, make an appearance at the Boys and Girls Club, to appear at another charity’s gala, to post about charity on social media, but often these charities pay way more than an actual charity would pay for this."

"I talked to somebody who was at Michigan State. And he paid somebody $750,000 a year a football player. And the charity work that person did in return was to make one social media post a month."

"They’re paying athletes, often, who don’t have much of an endorsement value. People who are really valuable to their own team, like an offensive lineman or a fullback, they’re paying that person according to their value to the team, not according to their endorsement value. So this is not a person you would ever buy Gatorade from. You’ve never heard this person’s name, but the team needs them."

This puts an axe to the root of the story that NIL money is at all interested in a return....the goal of the collectives is to win games by luring high quality players to their chosen program and then keeping them.

The worst part is that many of these ‘collectives’ run this money through real charities (who might get a pittance) and then they advertise to their donors that the entire NIL donation is a charitable deduction because the vast majority of the donated money is for ‘charity marketing purposes.’ (Ie the player makes a social media post to fulfill his 6 figure charitable marketing NIL contract). I wish the IRS would crack down ASAP. This money in no way should qualify for charitable deductions and I’m disgusted that certain charities have got into this game. I see little distinction between this practice and money laundering. It’s clear that it isn’t a charitable purpose and the purpose is to buy football players to help their team win.