|
N.I.L
Aug 5, 2022 19:34:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by motorcitysam on Aug 5, 2022 19:34:53 GMT -5
10 Indiana men's basketball players and 1 women's player will make almost a combined $500K this coming season in NIL deals.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Aug 8, 2022 16:01:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by motorcitysam on Aug 8, 2022 16:01:18 GMT -5
You can buy a t-shirt with the name and likeness of an Arizona basketball player. Proceeds go to the player.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Sept 3, 2022 18:33:53 GMT -5
I was having coffee this morning with a trio of friends, and Ohio State football never came up. As we were parting, I asked if they were planning to watch the game tonight (#2 Ohio State v. #5 Notre Dame). These guys aren't huge spectator sports fans, but if there's any game to rouse fans here in Ohio after the UM game, this would have to be it. Answer: no, no, no. One added, "All the money has ruined it for me." And it's clear he meant NIL money, because he immediately starting talking about what OSU players were getting. We chewed on this for about 20 more minutes before heading home, but it was clear that for all three all these NIL contracts were sort of the final straw that broke any romance or link to college football. They could handle "no show" jobs that gave guys some spending money and the best players nice cars; they could turn away from the academic fraud as isolated instances, etc. But the combination of open transfer and NIL was just too much for the illusion that these are students playing for old alma mater. I mentioned that essentially college sports were now just minor league professional sports--why watch that instead of the NBA or NFL? All agreed.
It's just 3 guys, but these are men from an older generation that has been more interested in sports than Gen Y and Gen Z. It may take some time, and of course you can argue that the trend began long ago, but I think NIL marks beginning of the end the of big-time college sports. The appeal, however tenuous now it has been for decades, is that these are students playing ball while attending college, not pros.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 10:42:29 GMT -5
Post by fan on Sept 4, 2022 10:42:29 GMT -5
I watched the Pitt/WVU game, and the MSU/W Mich game, the Colorado State/Michigan game, and the ND/OSU game, and there wasn't an empty seat in the house for these games. The NIL and transfer rules may spoiled the enthusiasm for some fans, and college football at the OSU and other at that level may be turning into a minor pro league, but it's a great spectacle.
I think that pro football is at the point where the quality of the game can't get much better, it's that good, and that college football is closing the gap, especially at QB, receivers, and certain line play. For some reason the linebacking in college seems to have not reached the point to be near pro quality, perhaps it takes time to become a great linebacker.
But if one can separate the current "stink" out of big-time college sports, it's a great show, BTW I'm old, really old.
I don't think the appeal for college football is tenuous at all, to me a college fan say Ole Miss, Nebraska or most big time or even smaller schools is the shirt, not the player in the shirt.
One last note, this weekend Toledo hosted LIU, that's Long Island University in Brooklyn in football, it seems LIU has taken their D3 or D2 football program at their Post College and jumped into "a mid minor" football program. LIU in NY or Brooklyn certainly has a less impact on their communities than UDM, why not football at UDM?
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 14:55:00 GMT -5
Post by Commissioner on Sept 4, 2022 14:55:00 GMT -5
I watched the Pitt/WVU game, and the MSU/W Mich game, the Colorado State/Michigan game, and the ND/OSU game, and there wasn't an empty seat in the house for these games. The NIL and transfer rules may spoiled the enthusiasm for some fans, and college football at the OSU and other at that level may be turning into a minor pro league, but it's a great spectacle. I think that pro football is at the point where the quality of the game can't get much better, it's that good, and that college football is closing the gap, especially at QB, receivers, and certain line play. For some reason the linebacking in college seems to have not reached the point to be near pro quality, perhaps it takes time to become a great linebacker. But if one can separate the current "stink" out of big-time college sports, it's a great show, BTW I'm old, really old. I don't think the appeal for college football is tenuous at all, to me a college fan say Ole Miss, Nebraska or most big time or even smaller schools is the shirt, not the player in the shirt. One last note, this weekend Toledo hosted LIU, that's Long Island University in Brooklyn in football, it seems LIU has taken their D3 or D2 football program at their Post College and jumped into "a mid minor" football program. LIU in NY or Brooklyn certainly has a less impact on their communities than UDM, why not football at UDM? You make a lot of good points, and college football (and hoops) can still put on a spectacle that packs 'em in. But... Last year college football D1 average home attendance was the lowest since 1981. It has declined every year but one since 2010 (and not counting the 2020 covid year). Last year, 7 of the 10 D-1 conferences had lower attendance, including 4 of the P5 (the exception was the B10, where attendance rose .003 percent. SEC attendance was the lowest since 1999. Altogether it's down about 15% from the 2008 peak. Colleges are saying that student attendance, and attendance among 25-44 year olds, is in even more trouble. TV ratings are down. Last year's D-1 semi-finals were the lowest rated since the FCS began in 2014. The title game ratings were up slightly from 2020, which were the lowest since the BCS started in 1997. Basketball is in worse shape. Obviously, all of these numbers are pre-NIL, and there are many contributing factors, including more schools in D-1 (with the newbies drawing less), the availability of 70" home televisions, lingering Covid concerns, and of course the other issues we've discussed (academic scandals, easy transfers, etc.). But big time college athletics--i.e. D-1 football and hoops--are not healthy. For now, I'm going to stick with my prediction that NIL marks the beginning of the final phase (which may be pretty long, or may snowball quickly). There's not much reason for most people to want to watch professional minor-league sports, even if the teams do come with school names on the jerseys, when you can watch the NFL and NBA.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 15:30:34 GMT -5
Post by ptctitan on Sept 4, 2022 15:30:34 GMT -5
NIL could be a countervailing force to the new transfer rules. Especially at the mid-major level. A player's NIL value would increase the longer he stays at one university than if he transfers repeatedly. I believe there is a post somewhere showing that most players do not transfer up to big NIL programs where collectives can pool large sums of money into large NIL benefits. This reminds me of the years in MLB shortly after free agency became the rule. The loss of a team's player control was going to be make baseball a worse product. If your chances of transferring up to a power school with lots of NIL are less than 50%, then from your business brand purposes, you would be best to remain at your current school and build brand identity.
Done properly, NIL is no different than an old work-study job. It's going to be a learning curve for players and schools.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 16:39:13 GMT -5
Post by bigchuck on Sept 4, 2022 16:39:13 GMT -5
For now, I'm going to stick with my prediction that NIL marks the beginning of the final phase (which may be pretty long, or may snowball quickly). There's not much reason for most people to want to watch professional minor-league sports, even if the teams do come with school names on the jerseys, when you can watch the NFL and NBA. Commish, you make a good point that it may take a while. I agree with that premise. I also believe the end will come sooner in MBB than football. The reason for that guess is we identify more with the individual players in BB. They are physically much closer to the fans. You can recognize them on the street because they do not wear helmets pads etc. There are 5 starters and 3-5 rotation players in BB vs many times that number in Football. The casual fans are the ones that will disappear. They will leave basketball for a variety of reasons, including those above. Attendance in February for many areas along with the increased turnover of players and the perception they are semi-pro will cut attendance faster than Football. In football you really are rooting for the uniform, the 95 football players who have helmets and pads making them more impersonal to the average fan. College sports will never disappear but that light at the end of the tunnel is the freight train headed toward the tradition we have known. It started years ago. Nothing has changed that will slow it down.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 17:41:21 GMT -5
Post by Big DWSU on Sept 4, 2022 17:41:21 GMT -5
I watched the Pitt/WVU game, and the MSU/W Mich game, the Colorado State/Michigan game, and the ND/OSU game, and there wasn't an empty seat in the house for these games. The NIL and transfer rules may spoiled the enthusiasm for some fans, and college football at the OSU and other at that level may be turning into a minor pro league, but it's a great spectacle. I think that pro football is at the point where the quality of the game can't get much better, it's that good, and that college football is closing the gap, especially at QB, receivers, and certain line play. For some reason the linebacking in college seems to have not reached the point to be near pro quality, perhaps it takes time to become a great linebacker. But if one can separate the current "stink" out of big-time college sports, it's a great show, BTW I'm old, really old. I don't think the appeal for college football is tenuous at all, to me a college fan say Ole Miss, Nebraska or most big time or even smaller schools is the shirt, not the player in the shirt. One last note, this weekend Toledo hosted LIU, that's Long Island University in Brooklyn in football, it seems LIU has taken their D3 or D2 football program at their Post College and jumped into "a mid minor" football program. LIU in NY or Brooklyn certainly has a less impact on their communities than UDM, why not football at UDM? You make a lot of good points, and college football (and hoops) can still put on a spectacle that packs 'em in. But... Last year college football D1 average home attendance was the lowest since 1981. It has declined every year but one since 2010 (and not counting the 2020 covid year). Last year, 7 of the 10 D-1 conferences had lower attendance, including 4 of the P5 (the exception was the B10, where attendance rose .003 percent. SEC attendance was the lowest since 1999. Altogether it's down about 15% from the 2008 peak. Colleges are saying that student attendance, and attendance among 25-44 year olds, is in even more trouble. TV ratings are down. Last year's D-1 semi-finals were the lowest rated since the FCS began in 2014. The title game ratings were up slightly from 2020, which were the lowest since the BCS started in 1997. Basketball is in worse shape. Obviously, all of these numbers are pre-NIL, and there are many contributing factors, including more schools in D-1 (with the newbies drawing less), the availability of 70" home televisions, lingering Covid concerns, and of course the other issues we've discussed (academic scandals, easy transfers, etc.). But big time college athletics--i.e. D-1 football and hoops--are not healthy. For now, I'm going to stick with my prediction that NIL marks the beginning of the final phase (which may be pretty long, or may snowball quickly). There's not much reason for most people to want to watch professional minor-league sports, even if the teams do come with school names on the jerseys, when you can watch the NFL and NBA. You are really ignoring some major factors when you are trying to make your argument that college sports are on the decline. 1. There are more teams competing now than there was in 1981. In 1981, there were only 306 D1 basketball teams. The NCAA tournament consisted of 48 teams. In 2022, there were 358 D1 basketball teams and I believe 2-3 other teams in the process of transitioning to D1. The NCAA tournament consisted of 68 teams last year. Attendance should be less for each team now than it was in 1981 simply based on the larger number of teams that compete now vs 1981. If you have X number of potential fans, you only have X number of potential fans. the difference is that X number of fans is being divided into 360ish fanbases now vs the 306 fanbases that existed in 1981. 2. There are hundreds of ways to watch sporting events now vs in 1981. In 1981, the main way to see a game was live in person. There were only 3 major networks that carried games: NBC, CBS, ABC. ESPN (ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN3) was only 2 years old in 1981 and was still a regional sports channel. Fox didn't exist until 1985. CBS sports, Fox sports (FS1, FS2), the BTN, ACC network, SEC network, PAC 10 network, and all the other online options didn't exist in 1981 because the internet didn't exist yet. Sports fans had to attend games live or listened on the radio if they wanted to follow their team in 1981. That is the biggest reason TV ratings are down. In 1981, you could have watched 2-3 college basketball games on TV on a Saturday if you were lucky. Now, there are between 10-20 games at every time slot to choose from on one platform or another. I don't think less people are watching. They are just being divided into hundreds of options that were not available in 1981.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 18:13:56 GMT -5
Post by fan on Sept 4, 2022 18:13:56 GMT -5
Since this is a basketball board we should talk about basketball, as a person who really likes basketball, grew up a solid Knick fan, and really could care less about college basketball. These days I care less about Pro Basketball, I'd rather not watch 10 overpaid guys dog it for 3 and a half quarters, to me it's not my fathers' basketball. College basketball to me gives one a chance to live and died with "their school or team", and then in March jump on the hot team or the little guy paying over their head.
True there are so many ways to watch sports these days, which should mean more people than ever could be watching a game, this NIL thing and transfer policy will cause teams to adjust. I think the kids who jump to the portal may end up being disappointed.
As for college basketball, they might be wise to open up March Madness to all 350+ D1 teams, it would add another round, but give college basketball fans an extra week to hope for a lotta type win,
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 19:22:42 GMT -5
Post by Commissioner on Sept 4, 2022 19:22:42 GMT -5
You are really ignoring some major factors when you are trying to make your argument that college sports are on the decline. 1. There are more teams competing now than there was in 1981. In 1981, there were only 306 D1 basketball teams. The NCAA tournament consisted of 48 teams. In 2022, there were 358 D1 basketball teams and I believe 2-3 other teams in the process of transitioning to D1. The NCAA tournament consisted of 68 teams last year. Attendance should be less for each team now than it was in 1981 simply based on the larger number of teams that compete now vs 1981. If you have X number of potential fans, you only have X number of potential fans. the difference is that X number of fans is being divided into 360ish fanbases now vs the 306 fanbases that existed in 1981. The population of the United States of viewing/attendance age is about 63% larger today than in 1981. The number of D1 basketball teams has increased by less than 20%.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 19:32:23 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by motorcitysam on Sept 4, 2022 19:32:23 GMT -5
You make a lot of good points, and college football (and hoops) can still put on a spectacle that packs 'em in. But... Last year college football D1 average home attendance was the lowest since 1981. It has declined every year but one since 2010 (and not counting the 2020 covid year). Last year, 7 of the 10 D-1 conferences had lower attendance, including 4 of the P5 (the exception was the B10, where attendance rose .003 percent. SEC attendance was the lowest since 1999. Altogether it's down about 15% from the 2008 peak. Colleges are saying that student attendance, and attendance among 25-44 year olds, is in even more trouble. TV ratings are down. Last year's D-1 semi-finals were the lowest rated since the FCS began in 2014. The title game ratings were up slightly from 2020, which were the lowest since the BCS started in 1997. Basketball is in worse shape. Obviously, all of these numbers are pre-NIL, and there are many contributing factors, including more schools in D-1 (with the newbies drawing less), the availability of 70" home televisions, lingering Covid concerns, and of course the other issues we've discussed (academic scandals, easy transfers, etc.). But big time college athletics--i.e. D-1 football and hoops--are not healthy. For now, I'm going to stick with my prediction that NIL marks the beginning of the final phase (which may be pretty long, or may snowball quickly). There's not much reason for most people to want to watch professional minor-league sports, even if the teams do come with school names on the jerseys, when you can watch the NFL and NBA. You are really ignoring some major factors when you are trying to make your argument that college sports are on the decline. 1. There are more teams competing now than there was in 1981. In 1981, there were only 306 D1 basketball teams. The NCAA tournament consisted of 48 teams. In 2022, there were 358 D1 basketball teams and I believe 2-3 other teams in the process of transitioning to D1. The NCAA tournament consisted of 68 teams last year. Attendance should be less for each team now than it was in 1981 simply based on the larger number of teams that compete now vs 1981. If you have X number of potential fans, you only have X number of potential fans. the difference is that X number of fans is being divided into 360ish fanbases now vs the 306 fanbases that existed in 1981. 2. There are hundreds of ways to watch sporting events now vs in 1981. In 1981, the main way to see a game was live in person. There were only 3 major networks that carried games: NBC, CBS, ABC. ESPN (ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN3) was only 2 years old in 1981 and was still a regional sports channel. Fox didn't exist until 1985. CBS sports, Fox sports (FS1, FS2), the BTN, ACC network, SEC network, PAC 10 network, and all the other online options didn't exist in 1981 because the internet didn't exist yet. Sports fans had to attend games live or listened on the radio if they wanted to follow their team in 1981. That is the biggest reason TV ratings are down. In 1981, you could have watched 2-3 college basketball games on TV on a Saturday if you were lucky. Now, there are between 10-20 games at every time slot to choose from on one platform or another. I don't think less people are watching. They are just being divided into hundreds of options that were not available in 1981. Good points, and I tend to be on your side of the argument. It is worth noting that there are about 100 million more people in the US population now than there were in 1980, however. I don't know what the future holds for college basketball. I think younger fans have less of an issue with things like NIL and transfers, but I also think that younger people have less of a connection with live sports than generations past. One thing for sure, with these crazy television rights deals it certainly seems that the networks are confident that college football and basketball will remain popular.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 4, 2022 21:01:19 GMT -5
Post by fan on Sept 4, 2022 21:01:19 GMT -5
College sports, especially the attraction for fans of football and basketball seem to be constant, maybe certain things are different. For example, at one time a full ride for a player was a thing of great value. To value for a player in college maybe to use the college team to get into the league. One thing seems sure, the money somehow flowed to the best players, NIL is better than gamblers' money.
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 22, 2022 16:23:02 GMT -5
Post by motorcitysam on Sept 22, 2022 16:23:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by fan on Sept 23, 2022 8:58:32 GMT -5
Maybe the NIL is not so bright for Bates
|
|
|
N.I.L
Sept 24, 2022 13:50:16 GMT -5
Post by motorcitysam on Sept 24, 2022 13:50:16 GMT -5
Maybe the NIL is not so bright for Bates Definitely true.
|
|