Upstream/Downstream: The New World of NIL

We’ve got another one this week where Ed and I discuss more than debate. It all started when Ed sent me a text regarding something the University of Tennessee is rolling out in regards to NIL fundraising, which he dives into deeper in the article. With Rutgers on the hunt for a new AD to replace Pat Hobbs—who was notoriously hesitant to engage at all with local NIL groups—it seemed like a good time to not only take stock our our own thoughts on the matter, but see where everyone else in the OTB community falls. Genuinely curious to read the comments on this one.

Ed: For the longest time, I witnessed the NCAA make millions off of its student athletes while those same athletes were heavily punished for trying to make a fraction of that amount. A simple Google search for “Reggie Bush” will bring up numerous articles detailing the collegiate rise and fall of that great running back. In recent times, the NCAA has tried to do right by reinstating his Heisman trophy. That hasn’t stopped Bush from seeking retribution as he has a lawsuit against USC, the PAC-12 and the NCAA. Unfortunately, Bush didn’t have the luxury of going to college after 2021, when NIL turn the college sports world upside down. Now, college athletes are making more than doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Some people say these athletes shouldn’t make this much money, but I’m all for it. Kids are working hard to become good at their craft, and if hard work pays off monetarily, then let it happen. These days the fans gain practically unlimited access to their favorite athletes. Games are seen live, on major networks, and are even streamed online. In addition, kids are promoting their own brand through social media without the assistance of their schools or major sponsors. NIL is so good these days that I see kids applying for their 6th and 7th year of eligibility. The majority of NCAA athletes won’t be playing professional sports once this small window of time passes. If an opportunity arises, I say let them take it.

Gregg: It’s ridiculous that it took this long for college athletes to profit off their own image and likeness, and equally ridiculous—albeit completely predictable—that the NCAA has botched the regulation of it so badly. You have to look no further than the frustration around how Rutgers has handled NIL to see how murky the NCAA has made things. Plenty of people—fans, coaches, alumni—were beyond frustrated that Pat Hobbs refused to throw any support behind NIL fundraising for Rutgers. So much so, that there are more than a few theories that the will of prominent boosters had as much to do with his resignation as whatever he may or may not have been doing with the gymnastics coach. But if you take emotion out of it, you can also see where he’s coming from. The NCAA—the worst-run organization in all of sports—has provided very little guidance to schools on how to support NIL funding, other than a vague directive that, “Schools can’t be involved.” Why? Now that NIL is as much a part of college athletics as coaches’ salaries and new facilities, why can’t schools lend their weight into raising money for those funds?

Ed: I think some schools are getting involved, however this is new territory for everyone. ”NIL-America” is an undiscovered country and much like the Wild West of old there doesn’t seem to be much in the way of the law regulating it. The University of Tennessee recently announced it will be adding a “Talent Fee” for athletic tickets to go towards paying players through NIL. As I previously stated, I’m all about college athletes making money through NIL. What I don’t endorse is Colleges and Universities forcing us to pay for it. Do concession prices increase? Do tuition prices increase even more? Do teachers and professor salaries decrease? Where does the line get drawn? If I’m sending my kid for an education, do I have to pay more per year so that Steve Lattimer, Alvin Mack and Darnell Jefferson don’t go to another Program offering more? Lately it seems too easy for kids to enter the transfer portal to chase NIL money, leaving their old programs high and dry. This is where the NCAA needs to step up and set clear rules and regulations and not their usual “up to interpretation” rules.

Gregg: I’m all for tacking NIL fees onto ticket prices or hot dogs, but agree it shouldn’t trickle into tuition or affect faculty salaries (although I’m also not naïve enough to think it won’t). I do, however, love the idea of the Players First Tournament, of which the men’s basketball team will be a participant this fall, that rewards winning teams with money for their NIL funds. That’s the kind of creative thinking we need. Oklahoma State tried to think outside the box with QR codes on player helmets, which would link to a general NIL fund. Sure, once you give it a half-second’s thought, it’s ridiculous to think that people at home would pause their TV’s to scan a QR code in the middle of a game, but the NCAA banning them as “commercial logos” is the kind of outdated nonsense that needs to stop. If we’re going to allow businesses to pay these players, then why can’t we slap their logo on their uniforms? MLB and NHL players already wear corporate sponsorships on their jerseys, and no one is fleeing those sports in droves, clutching their pearls. If these kids are being paid to rep a brand, then let them rep the brand. We’re well past the illusion that these are still “amateur athletes.”

Ed: I know if we want to stay competitive with other Universities, then we as fans need to also help add to the pot as well. What I need from the Universities and the NCAA is guidance. I recently received an email asking me to join a “newsletter about Rutgers Athletics.” Seemed like a good idea at the time and I signed up. I got my first email from them and they have a link to the site. This then brings me to a webpage asking me to become a member and donate money. They had all these tiers of “membership,” which have no real difference aside from the amount you donate. I was taken by surprise so I decided to look into it more. I click the “ABOUT” tab and the page refreshes to a whole bunch of photos of people who are on the “Advisory Board” and on the “Executive Board.” Aside from the names these photos provide, there is no description of who these people are or if they are even associated with Rutgers University (yeah, I could Google but that’s not the point). The rest of the page describes different ways to donate, limitations of donations, and more info on donations. The one line in the FAQ which I keyed on states “they are not associated with Rutgers University.” Being the natural skeptic that I am, I was in no way giving to this site. In a world where I receive no less than ten spam phone calls per day, people are constantly trying to steal your money. How do I know this isn’t some scam people trying to take advantage of potential donors? NCAA and the Scarlet Knights need to provide more guidance. There needs to be some sort of credentialing system to make sure your money is going to a legit place. I feel NIL in theory is a great thing, but the overall product is still a mess that needs to be sorted out.

Gregg: Rutgers has lagged woefully behind other major universities when it comes to athletic donations, whether those funds are designated for NIL or some other project. It’s a disgrace considering the sheer size of our alumni base and the number of potentially large donors who stubbornly keep their wallets closed despite watching their professional peers from other universities routinely write big checks, which translate to the kind of success on the field that we all say we want. But just like with Hobbs and his hesitancy to associate with NIl groups…I get it. Even today, with Rutgers drawing innumerable academic benefits from the Big Ten, we still read news stories and hear complaints from large chunks of the faculty about how the University is wasting its money on athletics, despite the actual money going to that department being merely a drop in the overall budget. (This is a discussion topic for another day). For now, it’s easy to see one major reason why no one seems to want to pony up: We suck at marketing. To your point, what is out there—however noble their intentions—seems to be messy and confusing. The two major teams—men’s basketball and football—are both enjoying a modicum of success, but not nearly enough to counteract decades of irrelevance. What Rutgers needs is a coordinated marketing effort to not only explain how NIL works and how average fans can help, but also to show—in clear terms—what those donations will lead to on the field. My hope is that our new AD, whoever it may be, leads that charge. We’re never going to be Michigan or Ohio State, but we sure as hell can be better than we are right now.

This one was kind of all over the place, but like I said at the start, that’s just how NIL is right now. Everyone is kind of feeling their way through the dark, some with far more success than others. What are your thoughts on how Rutgers can compete in this new college sports reality?