Ericvol2096
Quiz'N'Vol
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2007
- Messages
- 17,434
- Likes
- 27,085
So many nice salty quotes in that Athletic article btw from the NIL Laggers.
“We lost a kid (on signing day) over that. That hurt,” a Power 5 head coach told The Athletic. “Two hours before, the mom is telling me he’s coming here. And then she said, ‘Coach, how can we turn down $300,000?’ You can’t. Take it, I get it.”
On April 8, offensive lineman Josh Conerly Jr., from Seattle, the last remaining unsigned five-star in the class of 2022, spurned presumed favorite USC, which does not have a collective, in favor of Oregon, which does. It’s called Division Street, and Ducks mega-booster Phil Knight is heavily involved.
“(Recruiting) doesn’t even resemble what we used to do before NIL,” USC coach Lincoln Riley told reporters the day after losing Conerly. “In every sense of the word, it’s different. The reality is, it’s made what’s gone on at certain places for a long time … it’s going to put it out in the open. So maybe (there are) some positives there.”
But not everybody’s jumping on board the collective movement. Many prominent football schools have explicitly warned their donors against getting involved in recruiting — which is still technically against the rules. USC does not have a collective. A Notre Dame version launched Monday but is being marketed as a charity endeavor. The co-founder of a Michigan NIL partner said of paying recruits: “Michigan’s not doing that.”
“I think there are some places that have weaponized NIL and are using it in recruiting,” said UCLA coach Chip Kelly. “That’s not going to happen here, so we don’t even discuss it.
Heitner fears some of the more brazen deals being made for recruits may lead to future repercussions for the players. “The athlete is the one with the risk,” he said. “Don’t put it past the NCAA to render an athlete ineligible after the fact.”
Caspino, the attorney that helped author dozens of these recruit-collective contracts, disagrees that they violate NCAA rules.
“What blows everybody away by my contracts is there is no mention of the school and there is no commitment that he has to go there and play football,” he said. “I welcome the NCAA looking at my contracts.”
Beyond the legality, there’s also the question of whether throwing seven-figure deals at unproven high school players or inexperienced portal transfers is a sensible investment. Saban called it an “unsustainable model.” Riley predicted an eventual “market correction.”
“You’re really guessing that this 18-year-old guy who has proven zero is worth a million dollars from somebody, somehow, however that money is getting there,” said the Power 5 head coach. “Like … what the **** are we talking about? Why even want to be associated with this? We’re ruining kids.”
The 2023 class could turn out to be a fascinating case study. Will the players who cashed in be less likely to transfer because they risk blowing up their deal — or perhaps more likely because they picked a school solely for financial reasons? If a lot of the top recruits become busts, will donors be less likely to pitch in going forward? Or will 2024 kids get even richer as more schools’ collectives become better funded?
“A lot of people tell me hey, don’t worry, this isn’t here to stay, these numbers you’re seeing out there, people can’t keep that up. I disagree,” said Kiffin. “(Schools) always find a way to keep up. They find money.”
“We lost a kid (on signing day) over that. That hurt,” a Power 5 head coach told The Athletic. “Two hours before, the mom is telling me he’s coming here. And then she said, ‘Coach, how can we turn down $300,000?’ You can’t. Take it, I get it.”
On April 8, offensive lineman Josh Conerly Jr., from Seattle, the last remaining unsigned five-star in the class of 2022, spurned presumed favorite USC, which does not have a collective, in favor of Oregon, which does. It’s called Division Street, and Ducks mega-booster Phil Knight is heavily involved.
“(Recruiting) doesn’t even resemble what we used to do before NIL,” USC coach Lincoln Riley told reporters the day after losing Conerly. “In every sense of the word, it’s different. The reality is, it’s made what’s gone on at certain places for a long time … it’s going to put it out in the open. So maybe (there are) some positives there.”
But not everybody’s jumping on board the collective movement. Many prominent football schools have explicitly warned their donors against getting involved in recruiting — which is still technically against the rules. USC does not have a collective. A Notre Dame version launched Monday but is being marketed as a charity endeavor. The co-founder of a Michigan NIL partner said of paying recruits: “Michigan’s not doing that.”
“I think there are some places that have weaponized NIL and are using it in recruiting,” said UCLA coach Chip Kelly. “That’s not going to happen here, so we don’t even discuss it.
Heitner fears some of the more brazen deals being made for recruits may lead to future repercussions for the players. “The athlete is the one with the risk,” he said. “Don’t put it past the NCAA to render an athlete ineligible after the fact.”
Caspino, the attorney that helped author dozens of these recruit-collective contracts, disagrees that they violate NCAA rules.
“What blows everybody away by my contracts is there is no mention of the school and there is no commitment that he has to go there and play football,” he said. “I welcome the NCAA looking at my contracts.”
Beyond the legality, there’s also the question of whether throwing seven-figure deals at unproven high school players or inexperienced portal transfers is a sensible investment. Saban called it an “unsustainable model.” Riley predicted an eventual “market correction.”
“You’re really guessing that this 18-year-old guy who has proven zero is worth a million dollars from somebody, somehow, however that money is getting there,” said the Power 5 head coach. “Like … what the **** are we talking about? Why even want to be associated with this? We’re ruining kids.”
The 2023 class could turn out to be a fascinating case study. Will the players who cashed in be less likely to transfer because they risk blowing up their deal — or perhaps more likely because they picked a school solely for financial reasons? If a lot of the top recruits become busts, will donors be less likely to pitch in going forward? Or will 2024 kids get even richer as more schools’ collectives become better funded?
“A lot of people tell me hey, don’t worry, this isn’t here to stay, these numbers you’re seeing out there, people can’t keep that up. I disagree,” said Kiffin. “(Schools) always find a way to keep up. They find money.”
new season baby!…don’t mind Freddie’s home run though 
