Good article about the current state of NIL in WBB

#1

EarlVolFan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
1,045
Likes
4,068
#1
How much has NIL impacted women’s college basketball recruiting?

Editor’s note: Over the past month, The Athletic has spoken with more than 30 women’s college basketball coaches about an array of topics, from tournament expansion to athletic directors to X’s and O’s. These coaches, who hail from power conferences and high mid-majors, were granted anonymity to allow them to speak openly without fear of retribution from their programs or the NCAA. Throughout the week, we’re sharing coaches’ thoughts on the most pressing issues in their sport. Though not every response is included, answers represent all opinions expressed.

When the NCAA approved its first landmark national NIL policy in July 2021, everyone pondered what the college sports landscape would look like after this seismic shift: How much would athletes make? How would it transform sports? Would college sports still be amateur?

Nearly two years later, most of those questions persist.

How much are athletes making? It’s hard to say unless the athlete is open to disclosing financial details, and most are not. Some women’s basketball players have signed major brand partnerships, like Iowa’s Caitlin Clark (Nike, Hy-Vee, Topps), Stanford’s Haley Jones (Nike, The Players Tribune, SoFi), LSU’s Flau’jae Johnson (Puma, Meta), UCLA’s Kiki Rice (Jordan Brand, Dove), UConn’s Paige Bueckers (Gatorade, Crocs, Bose), South Carolina’s Aliyah Boston (Bose, Crocs, Orangetheory), Miami’s Haley and Hanna Cavinder (Under Armour, Victoria’s Secret) and UConn’s Azzi Fudd (NBPA, Nerf). But the majority of women’s college basketball players aren’t raking in those kinds of deals.

Though those top athletes have secured deals worth upwards of six figures, the average women’s basketball player earns significantly less. Per data gathered by INFLCR, during the first year of NIL, the average deal for a women’s basketball guard was $1,441, while the average deals for centers ($503) and forwards ($390) were even less.

Some schools also have collectives — registered groups of donors — that have deals with revenue teams or hope to have deals with those teams. This season, South Carolina’s collective — Garnet Trust — signed women’s basketball players to deals of at least $25,000 and Iowa’s Swarm collective signed players to $15,000 NIL deals. UCLA coach Cori Close has said her goal is to have $50,000 NIL deals in place for each of her women’s basketball players next season.

How has NIL transformed sports? For some athletes and sports, very little. For others, significantly. For the NCAA, entirely.

Is college sports still amateur? This seems to differ from athlete to athlete, even within each sport, and probably depends more on one’s definition of amateur. For sports with less exposure, not a lot has changed. But for high-visibility athletes who are signing agents and inking brand partnerships, it certainly feels a lot more like the professional ranks. For most women’s basketball players, it’s somewhere in between.

But talk long enough with women’s college basketball coaches and NIL always comes up — their questions, frustrations and fears. As coaches search for and break down every advantage available to their competitors, NIL is now a part of the equation.

So for the fourth question of our anonymous coaches’ poll, we asked not how much NIL has impacted their jobs but how much, less than two years into the NIL era, it has impacted recruiting.

How much has NIL changed recruiting?

HOW MUCH? PERCENT
Not at all
9
Somewhat
34
A lot
44
Completely
13
NOT AT ALL

• “It’s been tough because we have not capitalized on it with a collective yet that is really feeding into our program. And I don’t think that our local companies and alumni companies have stepped up for women’s basketball for us. … I think that you need a game plan with a collective for sports like women’s basketball. Schools that don’t have that game plan for a collective where every kid is capitalizing on a collective, it is going to hurt you in the recruiting process.”

• “For us, as of now, it hasn’t changed a lot. It hasn’t been as big a deal. But I don’t think we’ll know where we are for another two or three years when we say, ‘Oh, yeah, we didn’t get that kid because we don’t have as robust an NIL program.’ I don’t think you want to compromise who you are, but we’re not going to beat some of the football schools, so if that’s what a kid wants and it’s their No. 1 priority, we’re probably not the school for them.”

• “Some players will literally come out and say, ‘NIL doesn’t matter to me.’ But it’s becoming such a part of what other schools sell: ‘I know we can offer this or we can help you get this.’ It’s definitely a part of it.”

Considering the ways NIL has been described — a seismic shift, a landmark move, a new era of college sports — it’s wild that some coaches say it hasn’t changed recruiting at all.

However, perhaps that’s not as surprising as one would think. The haves and have-nots exist historically in college basketball, and the have-nots are accustomed to the disparity. Now collectives and NIL deals are just a part of that reality. Throughout time, some players have opted to go against the grain, choosing a lesser-known school or picking a conference that might not have as much to offer, so it also shouldn’t be surprising that in the NIL era some athletes will choose a school/conference without a robust NIL offering.

SOMEWHAT

• “When I talk to my colleagues in men’s basketball and football, we’re certainly not seeing the level of impact that it has had on the men’s side. I am keeping my eyes open about the future. I suspect it will become more impactful.”

• “We don’t even have a shot with kids who are getting mysterious $300,000 payouts from (a school). Where does that money come from? I don’t know. Is it legal? It’s supposed to be. But I don’t know. And what are the rules, really? So, it’s hard to know. Everyone’s so tight-lipped about it. Every state has different rules. There’s no federal legislation. It feels like the wild, Wild West. So, to me, it can only get worse.”

• “It’s part of the discussion sometimes with some players, but I don’t think it is the most important part of the discussion in the women’s game right now.”

• “It depends on the type of kid you’re recruiting. So it starts there. Some kids are not driven by that, and others are. The school I’m at, we’re not really an NIL-sexy school. We use NIL more for retention of players rather than the recruitment of.”

About one-third of coaches said they felt NIL had impacted recruiting somewhat, with many of them citing how much more impactful it is elsewhere — either at other schools or in other sports at their universities. That level of comparison can be helpful for some coaches. After all, while those top players are signing big brand partnerships, the majority of players aren’t, and the majority of high school recruits understand they’re not going to be signing the same kinds of deals Bueckers and Jones have.

Coaches mentioned it has been more of a player-by-player situation, and like the coaches who said “not at all,” players who are opting to attend a school that’s not “NIL sexy” likely are less driven by the NIL deals than players who might be opting for a program that has an active collective.

A LOT

• “NIL was supposed to be Paige Bueckers being able to market herself, not the school giving you $25,000 to show up someplace three times at some event.”

• “You hear rumors that this person is offering this, this school is offering that, but no one really knows because there’s no transparency. Before, you knew, ‘This is a full scholarship,’ and you knew what that was. But now it’s a full scholarship plus what? And you’re relying on AAU coaches and kids to tell you the truth, which isn’t always realistic.”

• “There’s an expectation during the recruiting process from a lot of players, not all. As much as that, it’s the AAU coaches and the people who are guiding these young kids. They’re telling them that they need to get money.”

• “Now players are expecting money in addition to their scholarships. … If you can’t offer money, then you really can’t be in a conversation with some of these kids.”

• “When you’re talking about top-tier talent, we’re not getting many questions about majors or even facilities. It’s become probably the first topic on the list, in terms of: Are you gonna be in the (NIL) game or are you not gonna be in the (NIL) game?”

Perhaps it’s no surprise that these are the coaches who are going after top recruits or players on top AAU teams who are expecting NIL or collective deals.

That’s clear because if AAU coaches, parents and athletes are asking the coach about NIL deals, that’s collective money. College coaches aren’t supposed to be part of the NIL world, and when it comes to players who sign the largest deals, that’s done by a player and their representation and agent. Where coaches might have a better understanding is when a collective has signed deals with an entire team or when a school’s collective has been especially active in signing deals with the star players in the athletic department.

In the “somewhat” and “a lot” categories, we heard from several coaches who still feel they are in the dark about the rules and regulations around NIL. With the lack of transparency — because the larger deals are usually brokered by agents and the collective deals aren’t supposed to go through coaches — college coaches are left to find out information secondhand through players or their parents.

COMPLETELY

• “The transfer portal and NIL have intersected at a time so that it has legalized tampering.”

• “Every recruit, coach and parent is asking about it in recruiting. It used to be: ‘How will I fit in? What’s my opportunity? What are the academics? What’s the social life?’ Now NIL, for some kids, trumps all.”

• “It’s pay for play. … NIL is certainly a question that every parent is asking: ‘How much will my child make if she comes here?’ Ultimately, the coaches aren’t supposed to have any bearing in terms of what these kids are making. We’re not supposed to help in getting them deals or the relationships (to make deals). We’re not supposed to touch this stuff, and yet, there are places out there that are setting these deals up.”

Several of the quotes that landed in the “a lot” category certainly could fall into this one as well, given any coach’s interpretation.

However, the coaches who chose the “completely” category used some key words that separated them from coaches in the other categories: “tampering” and “pay to play.” NIL proponents often said because deals were meant to be player-driven, it would never lead to those things. But some coaches now will push back by saying it wouldn’t be like this if guardrails were in place, but that hasn’t really happened because so much of the NCAA’s NIL legislation has been reactionary.

Coaches in this group also said every parent and every player was asking about NIL. That likely speaks to the caliber of player they’re recruiting and the expectations that exist for top players, as well as the understanding that most top athletic departments have collectives setting up team deals.

A consistent thought among coaches who landed in all four categories, even for those who said NIL was impacting recruiting “not at all” or “somewhat,” was that NIL is going to become more of a factor as time goes on. Though it’s often thought that changes in college sports happen slowly, two years into the NIL era, it’s fair to say this was a shift that came in suddenly, has an impact and is only going to become more prominent.
 
#3
#3
The article confirms that when our board makes a list of "next-years" recruits and how they are rated per ESPN, etc a new category is How Much NIL is expected?

and while you may smile at my suggestion, it is a realistic request. If the UCLA coach wants $50k for each athletic, they are not the only school.
 
#5
#5
NIL is a joke---a disaster. It's turning players--and their parents, family hangers-on--into money-grubbers. It is ruining what college is supposed
to be about, and has taken the level of corruption that has always existed in major-college football and basketball to another unfortunate level. There are no rules, no transparency--as a couple of coaches noted. It shouldn't be part of recruiting at all because it's just a form of bribery--who has the most
money with which to bribe top prospects. Sleazy. That's what we want college sports to be about? More of the give-us-things nonsense that's been perpetrated by activists.

In the men's game it's particularly stupid: What, you're going to set up NIL deals for top prospects (top 50 players) who are just going to turn
pro after a year of college anyway? NIL might weirdly impact the women's college game more precisely because there is so little money in the
WNBA.
 
#6
#6
So the question is; Are you here for the education and team or yourself and the money?
Why can't it be all three? If the athlete can balance it all (and we're about to find that out around here) and are willing to work for it (the requirement here) what's wrong with providing the opportunity and connections to do it right?

Absolutely agree it should not be tied to recruiting. Also agree it's wild west bc they stupidly threw it out there with very murky rules. But it's not going away.
 
#7
#7
LV coach: At Tennessee we have a family atmosphere, really care about one another…
Recruit: What's the average NIL deal worth?

LV coach: Our Tennessee Tradition is built on the accomplishments of Pat Summitt…
Recruit: Are the NIL payments guaranteed for all four years?
 
#8
#8
Why can't it be all three? If the athlete can balance it all (and we're about to find that out around here) and are willing to work for it (the requirement here) what's wrong with providing the opportunity and connections to do it right?

Absolutely agree it should not be tied to recruiting. Also agree it's wild west bc they stupidly threw it out there with very murky rules. But it's not going away.
How many highly ranked kids select the school based on majors? Most believe their major is getting to play professionally in some capacity. Best teams at this point have more opportunity for NIL and playing beyond. It’s nice to plug school and the academic red carpet that all schools have.
 
#9
#9
LV coach: At Tennessee we have a family atmosphere, really care about one another…
Recruit: What's the average NIL deal worth?

LV coach: Our Tennessee Tradition is built on the accomplishments of Pat Summitt…
Recruit: Are the NIL payments guaranteed for all four years?

Ugh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#11
#11
How many highly ranked kids select the school based on majors? Most believe their major is getting to play professionally in some capacity. Best teams at this point have more opportunity for NIL and playing beyond. It’s nice to plug school and the academic red carpet that all schools have.


Again, not mutually exclusive alternatives. The $ in the women's is not that great so I think the majority of women's players do care about the degree. At the UG level, when you are talking D1 schools, there honestly not all that much difference in programs. A degree in business, or nursing, or communications is pretty much the same at UT or Virginia or even Stanford. So, there is no pressing reason for a recruit to make their intended major, the #1 priority in making their decision.
 
#12
#12
LV coach: At Tennessee we have a family atmosphere, really care about one another…
Recruit: What's the average NIL deal worth?

LV coach: Our Tennessee Tradition is built on the accomplishments of Pat Summitt…
Recruit: Are the NIL payments guaranteed for all four years?

Really a bad take. NIL are the NCAA's compromise for making $$$$ money of college athletes and then punishing these crucial cogs in the business model if they did anything to earn some income from their fame, like selling autographed items. A lot of these do come from impoverished backgrounds and need some resources.

The NCAA realized that they were on poor legal ground and so instead of going to some kind of revenue sharing model, they opted to loosen constraints on athletes.

In no other sphere of American society are people prohibited from capitalizing on their success and public fame. More power to these athletes.

And last but not least, NILs have democratized the recruiting process. In those good ole days you are romanticizing, deep pocket donors would play star players under the table. So, now everybody gets to play that game (Trust me, Saban's complaints about the NIL are not because sacred ideals of amateurism have been breached but because he just lost a key recruiting edge).

Much of this debate is most relevant to Football and Men's b-ball but women basketball players (many of whom are highly marketable) also get the benefit as well.
 
Last edited:
#13
#13
This is what all the "pay the players" people wanted. This is their world. No loyalties, no traditions, no nothing. Just pay for play. They wanted to drag it down into the same filthy muck that professionak athletics rolls around in, well, congratualtions. You've just about done it.

The real comedy now is seeing the same people who whined about paying players and the evil colleges now complain about needing limits or regulations on NIL. You can't have it both ways. You either think they should be able to make money, or you don't. The moment you think you should be able to limit the players, is the moment you begin to make the same arguments the NCAA was making all along. And you can't very well do that now, can you? Like I said, comedy.

And underpinning all of this mess is the real fulcrum of the fight - the people who've wanted the players to be treated as employees rather than players. We're going to get there at this rate, but I think once we do, it will irrevocably damage college sports as a brand and a concept. I've said it a million times, but supporting professional players is nothing like supporting student-athletes, conceptually and in practice. Pros don't get - or deserve - much sympathy. Oh well though. It was fun for a while.
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
Since colleges (at least in womens basketball), are now competing not just with each other, but with the WNBA, then, if there is to be any level of fairness, or a level playing field, they need to model after pro sports.

That would include caps, rookie salary amounts, etc. P5 schools, or maybe just the SEC schools, could band together, use a certain percentage of “tv money” to pay all the athletes. The players would probably have their own union. Taxpayer funded scholarships would be extra. If a player wanted extra money from corporations to represent their products, that’s for them and their agent to come up with, no more school “collectives.”

Eventually, this looks like where it’s all headed. Right now, it’s ridiculous.
 
#15
#15
Again, not mutually exclusive alternatives. The $ in the women's is not that great so I think the majority of women's players do care about the degree. At the UG level, when you are talking D1 schools, there honestly not all that much difference in programs. A degree in business, or nursing, or communications is pretty much the same at UT or Virginia or even Stanford. So, there is no pressing reason for a recruit to make their intended major, the #1 priority in making their decision.
Looks as though we said the same thing. NIL/established winner or established winner/NIL and then degree. I only stated highly regarded players, those getting the opportunities for the big deals and projected professionally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voluble2 and Raebo
#16
#16
In no other sphere of American society are people prohibited from capitalizing on their success and public fame. More power to these athletes.
Isn’t the capitalizing on their success and public fame in the sport (basketball, football) allowing them/families 100% college education paid for ?
 
#17
#17
#18
#18
Actually, another thing that is being ignored is that for most if not all players, playing in college is what has enabled them to even have a “brand”, an NIL income. So, college is providing the free degree, free medical, free housing and food, free Coaching, free exposure, free fame, and fans to provide NIL income, as well as the opportunities to showcase the players’ talent for a future in pro sports.
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
Actually, another thing that is being ignored is that for most if not all players, playing in college is what has enabled them to even have a “brand”, an NIL income. So, college is providing the free degree, free medical, free housing and food, free Coaching, free exposure, free fame, and fans to provide NIL income for the future, as well as the opportunities to showcase the players’ talent for a future in pro sports.


From the players standpoint, without marquee players no one cares that much about a specific program. Did you care about Iowa before Caitlin Clark? Is Rickea jackson next year going to bring more attention to the LVs? These athletes put in a lot of work for all the "free" stuff you listed and the very well-paid coaches who provided the "free coaching" also owe their fame and pay checks to the star athletes that deliver on the court.

For the most part, NIL deals are not going to 12th player, bench warmer. They are mostly going to the game changers. Amateurism in college sports is a sham. The freakin Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA was treating their athletes like chattel. NILs are just a way for the NCAA to continue their existing business model, without having to face more lawsuits or other legal challenges.

Every day these star players step on the court, they run the risk of a career ending injury. That is why a lot first round picks opted to not play in bowl games.

Rickea coming back next is ultimately a business decision that involves a risk-reward calculation.

Imagine a student on an academic scholarship say in some tech field and on his/her own time, develops a very marketable app. Would you deny that student the right to make $ on the app even though some of the knowledge used may have come from the degree program?

Why should it be so radically different for college athletes when they want to capitalize on their unique marketable resources?
 
#20
#20
That argument has been stale for quite some time. For low income students, scholarships are way insufficient. Google on athletes hungry on scholarships. Here is one example:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...-athletes-make-play-for-collective-bargaining

Except there’s missing context. Low income athletes qualify for Pell grant which helps blunt those issues such as hunger other needs etc. Inky Johnson wrote in his book Robert Ayers was always hungry and Inky would use the Pell Grant money to buy food for both, while Robert used his money on Jordan’s. So to say it’s stale isn’t accurate when there was other options before NIL. The hungry angle gets peoples attention more than spending Pell Grant on entertainment, expensive clothes, etc.
 
#21
#21
Except there’s missing context. Low income athletes qualify for Pell grant which helps blunt those issues such as hunger other needs etc. Inky Johnson wrote in his book Robert Ayers was always hungry and Inky would use the Pell Grant money to buy food for both, while Robert used his money on Jordan’s. So to say it’s stale isn’t accurate when there was other options before NIL. The hungry angle gets peoples attention more than spending Pell Grant on entertainment, expensive clothes, etc.


Hmm, you just went from a story about one athlete using his pell grant to buy food for a hungry teammate (what a great system!!!) to the idea that low-income athletes are squandering their resources on expensive clothes.

When I am going to learn that interacting with you is a futile endeavor because you are basically a spin machine.

Dude, spin it how ever you want. The NIL cat is out of the bag so this whole discussion is moot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glv98 and Majors
#22
#22
LV coach: At Tennessee we have a family atmosphere, really care about one another…
Recruit: What's the average NIL deal worth?

LV coach: Our Tennessee Tradition is built on the accomplishments of Pat Summitt…
Recruit: Are the NIL payments guaranteed for all four years?

LV coach: Our Tennessee Tradition is built on the accomplishments of Pat Summitt…

Who's she? An agent?
How much does she pay?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
#23
#23
Hmm, you just went from a story about one athlete using his pell grant to buy food for a hungry teammate (what a great system!!!) to the idea that low-income athletes are squandering their resources on expensive clothes.

When I am going to learn that interacting with you is a futile endeavor because you are basically a spin machine.

Dude, spin it how ever you want. The NIL cat is out of the bag so this whole discussion is moot.
Just stating money was given to low income players to offset your article. To spend as they pleased with no restrictions. It’s not a spin if Pell grant was given to players. I just gave you two examples of how it was used. Dude
 
#24
#24
Not arguing with you, but I was a Tennessee fan before Rickea Jackson, and I will be after she is gone. It’s the school I follow, no matter the players. Of course, I want my teams to win and that requires the best teams and Coaches, but it should not be ignored that if these players were not playing for Tennessee, or in any well known college, I would not know their name.

They have been getting paid, and they are now being paid. We’re past that. With cash comes a lot of other considerations, such as: taxes, lawyers, agents, responsibilities, possible contracts, rules, salary amounts for performance? Pro sports have rules to try to even out the teams, such as drafts, salary caps, etc.

Buying high school talent is what we have now, so Coaches are not just recruiting, they’re buying, and if they say something the NCAA has said they cannot, they’re penalized. At some point, there must be guidelines. I do not see how it can go on this way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo and Majors
#25
#25
Not arguing with you, but I was a Tennessee fan before Rickea Jackson, and I will be after she is gone. It’s the school I follow, no matter the players. Of course, I want my teams to win and that requires the best teams and Coaches, but it should not be ignored that if these players were not playing for Tennessee, or in any well known college, I would not know their name.

They have been getting paid, and they are now being paid. We’re past that. With cash comes a lot of other considerations, such as: taxes, lawyers, agents, responsibilities, possible contracts, rules, salary amounts for performance? Pro sports have rules to try to even out the teams, such as drafts, salary caps, etc.

Buying high school talent is what we have now, so Coaches are not just recruiting, they’re buying, and if they say something the NCAA has said they cannot, they’re penalized. At some point, there must be guidelines. I do not see how it can go on this way.
Buying HS talent, buying portal, buying influence. Endorsements right now and we’ve seen it in football/basketball of travel coaches/high school coaches parlaying kids into coaching positions.
 

VN Store



Back
Top