Recruiting Football Talk VII

So, honest question... Would that work?

Since the SCOTUS (and many state laws) say that you can't artificially limit a player's NIL capabilities, you can't cap their marketing income. So... You're right back where we are now. Everybody gets the same salary (whether $0/yr or $100,000/yr), but richer, more productive markets will draw the better athletes based on NIL potential.

I don't know. Maybe you could get a player's association to bargain that right away. But especially with the SEC/BIG announcement yesterday, it seems much more likely that the richer/stronger conferences will say what seems plain... "We're not going to be dragged down to try to keep a competitive balance with the lower half of the league that will never compete with us anyway. We're going over there to do this our way."
IF players actually make their market value, then NiL will become nearly moot, similar to NFL.

Yes, a few bigger markets (Austin) will have an advantage, but not that much and there's no way to control it anyway. And those markets aren't measly Athens or Tuscaloosa...

First we need to see if rosters actually earn 20-30x their HC as in a free market.
 
What that shows is the others players were terribly inefficient - not a lack of opportunities.

DK shot 11-24...

The rest combined were 10-34. 29% shooting is terrible.

Would we have done better giving the 29% shooting group more shots vs the guy shooting 46%?


Also, DK and the rest have to hit their FTs. That's on all.
 
Eric Musselman:
quagmire-joe.gif
 

VN Store



Back
Top