|
Post by mbabeav on Jul 8, 2021 11:11:13 GMT -8
"And in our with a bullet segment, let's take a look at junior Offensive Tackle Madras Teton, who's draft stock shot up when it was announced that he had inked a long-term deal with Snikee. Teton's agent hasn't put out any numbers, but it's likely got the usual clauses, bonuses for where he is drafted, what Team/market does he go to, making the starting squad his rookie season.
There is also a multimedia deal in the works; ESPN PayU network is in talks with Madras about a 30 for 30 episode tentatively titled "Grand Teton"."
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Jul 8, 2021 11:39:48 GMT -8
From the time this came up as a possibility I felt it was very bad news for OSU. I didn't see how we could compete with the endorsement deals that others could offer (e.g. Nike U). I tried to come up with a way that it could be an advantage to us somehow, but have failed. I haven't read the details of the changes to know if/how it may be limited or equalized, but when I let my pessimistic side take over I feel like this is the beginning of the end for parity, OSU being competitive, and even college athletics in general. I agree it's hard to see how it could play out well for OSU, but I'm still not convinced it will be significantly worse. I do see it being a lot more problematic for the 'haves' though, which could indirectly benefit us. Specifically, in the past donors had to either give to things like major projects (hence the facility arms race discrepancy), or had to do under-the-table options ala Reggie Bush, UA basketball, etc. Now that it can all be above board, I expect donors will have much more expectations about getting back value for their money in the form of endorsements or otherwise, where previously they couldn't really demand much. Also, with players expecting money to come in directly, it will compete with money that previously might have been program donations, so it could play out that athletic budgets shrink (at OSU possibly as well). I do think there's a good chance that it plays out as 'mo money, mo problems' for the 'have' programs though. I can also see the value realized by player's families even being diminished. For instance, the scenario where player's parents got jobs at Nike that they might have otherwise had no chance at getting, it's now much cheaper for Nike to throw money directly at a player instead. That is, what was a perpetual +80K annual cost to an employee (that's maybe not even a position providing company value) might now only require a 20K donation over a 5 year max to get the equivalent player on campus. For programs like OSU WBB, I get the sense that a lot of these kids come from families where say an extra say 20K or so doesn't do that much, and the quality of their kids college experience is much higher value to them. That is, their endorsement upside potential is very limited regardless; very few even in the WNBA are making real money via endorsements (from what can find publicly anyway). So I just don't really see smaller sports being significantly impacted (even though some may have delusions that it will). So I can see it play out as no impact and even positive for these OSU programs in that they may still be able to attract the talent they target while the other programs struggle with balancing the problems paying athletes brings (imagine now managing egos when it's not just who gets PT, but who on the team is getting more money - that's a very real problem about to play out, and probably means some money gets pushed back under the table anyway to prevent team dynamics problems). For OSU Football and MBB, I agree it's hard to see it playing out favorably OSU, outside of the headaches maybe being smaller, as they aren't going to win many free-agency bidding wars. However, we weren't doing that previously anyway, and it could even play out well if we're seen as a program just about 'playing ball', if we are able to avoid much for he drama that will play out with big money involved.
|
|
rafer
Sophomore
Posts: 1,535
|
Post by rafer on Jul 8, 2021 12:14:34 GMT -8
From the time this came up as a possibility I felt it was very bad news for OSU. I didn't see how we could compete with the endorsement deals that others could offer (e.g. Nike U). I tried to come up with a way that it could be an advantage to us somehow, but have failed. I haven't read the details of the changes to know if/how it may be limited or equalized, but when I let my pessimistic side take over I feel like this is the beginning of the end for parity, OSU being competitive, and even college athletics in general. Unca Fill$$ has now given well over 1 Bi$$ion to the ucks, does anybody think he won't just go out and buy players?? Of course he will, Nike makes no bones about it. They have cheated since the beginning and now will make no excuses, game over!! We'll be in the WAC, or Mountain West along with Idaho and Wazzua in 5 years unless this is regulated, and it won't be until it destroys collegiate athletics.
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Jul 8, 2021 14:06:18 GMT -8
The problem that no one is talking about is that the schools will now be competing directly with the athletes for $$$. Right now Guaranty RV has a spot in their budget that they spend on direct sponsorship of OSU athletics, plus other promotional costs like radio advertising. That budget is NOT going to increase just because the NIL rules changed.
Instead, it's entirely likely that a big chunk of that money will be diverted to NIL deals with OSU athletes. Not all of it, but enough to hurt.
I'm much more worried about this aspect than I am about the general competitiveness angle. We're no worse off than Utah, UW, Colorado, or ASU. Sure, all the 5-stars will be heading to USC and Alabama, and maybe Nike buys a few for Eugene, but we have never recruited at that level. We'll continue to be in the bottom half of the Pac in the recruiting rankings, and somewhere in the lower-middle of the pack nationally. It's not as though Utah State is suddenly going to start poaching our recruits.
But if donors start diverting their donations directly to the athletes, and corporate sponsors do the same, then we're going to have a hell of a time paying for the new stadium upgrades. Every school is going to have the same problem and this trend is going to be exacerbated by the long-term decline in live sports. The coming decades are going to be very rough on athletic directors across the country. (Probably not bad enough for any of them to take a pay cut, though. Let's not get hyperbolic here.)
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jul 8, 2021 14:23:16 GMT -8
The problem that no one is talking about is that the schools will now be competing directly with the athletes for $$$. Right now Guaranty RV has a spot in their budget that they spend on direct sponsorship of OSU athletics, plus other promotional costs like radio advertising. That budget is NOT going to increase just because the NIL rules changed. Instead, it's entirely likely that a big chunk of that money will be diverted to NIL deals with OSU athletes. Not all of it, but enough to hurt. I'm much more worried about this aspect than I am about the general competitiveness angle. We're no worse off than Utah, UW, Colorado, or ASU. Sure, all the 5-stars will be heading to USC and Alabama, and maybe Nike buys a few for Eugene, but we have never recruited at that level. We'll continue to be in the bottom half of the Pac in the recruiting rankings, and somewhere in the lower-middle of the pack nationally. It's not as though Utah State is suddenly going to start poaching our recruits. But if donors start diverting their donations directly to the athletes, and corporate sponsors do the same, then we're going to have a hell of a time paying for the new stadium upgrades. Every school is going to have the same problem and this trend is going to be exacerbated by the long-term decline in live sports. The coming decades are going to be very rough on athletic directors across the country. (Probably not bad enough for any of them to take a pay cut, though. Let's not get hyperbolic here.) Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? Washington has a bigger athletic budget than Oregon and Arizona State's athletic budget is comparable to Oregon's. Arizona State's athletic budget is closer to Oregon's athletic budget than Oregon State's athletic budget is to Colorado or Utah. Oregon State and Washington State have the smallest athletic budgets among the Power Five. Oregon State's athletic budget is closer to an upper second-tier team like Houston than it is to any of the four bolded programs mentioned above.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jul 8, 2021 15:33:30 GMT -8
I don't see this as being the end of college athletics, but I can certainly conference and even division realignment. How are OSU and WSU supposed to compete with the metropolitan areas of LA or Seattle and even Salt Lake and Phoenix? Then there are other parts of the country where football, the flagship of college athletics, is far, far more important to people than it is on the west coast. No way we can compete with that.
End of college athletics? I don't see that happening although it would not surprise me. Schools are still going to want to field teams to play and athletes are still going to want scholarships to play. So the Oregon States of the world will not get the greatest running backs but they will get the backs who don't have the firepower to sign for 7 figures to play for other colleges. We'll still get to sign people like Artavis Pierce and be able to field pretty competitive teams.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Jul 8, 2021 19:37:45 GMT -8
I don't see this as being the end of college athletics, but I can certainly conference and even division realignment. How are OSU and WSU supposed to compete with the metropolitan areas of LA or Seattle and even Salt Lake and Phoenix? Then there are other parts of the country where football, the flagship of college athletics, is far, far more important to people than it is on the west coast. No way we can compete with that.
End of college athletics? I don't see that happening although it would not surprise me. Schools are still going to want to field teams to play and athletes are still going to want scholarships to play. So the Oregon States of the world will not get the greatest running backs but they will get the backs who don't have the firepower to sign for 7 figures to play for other colleges. We'll still get to sign people like Artavis Pierce and be able to field pretty competitive teams. I don’t think anyone knows how this is going to go down at this point. Right now, the players getting the biggest deals are the ones with massive social media followings. It doesn’t seem to matter where they play. The kid with the biggest deal that I’ve seen so far is Master P’s son. He plays hoops for Tennessee State. Not exactly a powerhouse program, but some company is willing to pay him $2 million.
|
|